‘Gay Garnethill’: Who Am I To Judge?

The parish bulletin of St Aloysius, Garnethill, dated 1 May, 2016,  carries an advertisement,  headlined “Who Am I To Judge”: “an evening for friends and relatives of people who are gay or lesbian and who have questions about how to be supportive while remaining faithful to the Christian Faith” (Ed: yeah, right…)

Below is an expanded version of the bulletin advertisement, from the Ignatian Spirituality Centre website:

For Parents and Friends of LGBT People    
9th May at 7.30pm

When a relative or a friend comes out gay, lesbian or other non-heterosexual identity it can be a challenge both to our Christian upbringing and the way we feel about them.

This evening led by family of a gay man and the ISC Team who has worked on retreats for gay people for more than 20 years, looks at these challenges to see how we can live our faith with integrity and best love our LGBT friends and relations.

Open to all of whatever Christian denomination.

It also offers the opportunity to meet with others who have similar concerns. Source

Comment:

Nobody who remembers our front page report ‘Glasgow Jesuit: Body Massage, Anyone?’ by Patricia Phillips in our February, 2015 edition, will be too surprised at the above advertised “evening for friends blah blah.”  You can read the original report by  downloading Issue No. 86, the February Newsletter, 2015 on our website, Newsletter page here  –  just click on the downward arrow at the archive section and select Issue No. 86. For ease of reference, we publish the text of that front page below:

‘Glasgow Jesuit: Body Massage, Anyone?’
by Patricia Phillips

On June 6, 2013, Pope Francis lamented the existence of what he called “the gay lobby” in the Vatican.  Pope Francis’ statement, especially following other revelations on the same subject around the time of Pope Benedict’s departure, drew much needed attention. But the Holy Father need look no further than his own order of priests, the Society of Jesus, for direct confirmation of what he called the “stream of corruption.”1

In 2003, The Catholic Herald newspaper exposed a Jesuit-run website which contained things contrary to Church teaching on homosexuality, including links to “gay” pornographic websites.  This scandalous website was suppressed by the Jesuit provincial, Fr David Smolira, but before it was suppressed, copies of the relevant web pages, were sent to then Cardinal Ratzinger at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

The site was run by Fr David Birchall SJ, parish priest at St Wilfrid’s Church, Preston, in Lancashire (Diocese of Lancaster).  His personal web page gave more details about him including the worrying fact that he was Vocations Director for the Jesuits in Britain for four years, and his unbelievably inappropriate offer for anyone to contact him “for a talk, meet, massage, drink, chat . . .

In another section titled “Sexuality and Christianity”, headed by pictures of two young boys kissing and two girls cuddling, visitors were invited to click on buttons to get “thoughts” on various topics, covering Love and Self Acceptance, Same-sex relationships and Bible and Church Teaching.  At the end of these “thoughts” was a little speech entitled “Don’t Be Isolated”.  A link on the right hand side of this asked: “Who am I? – See”. This link invited one to see who has given all these “thoughts”.  When one clicked on the “See” button, it returns to Fr David Birchall’s home page.  A list of Fr Birchall’s “thoughts” from this section were submitted to the CDF.  They were not remotely in line with Catholic teaching on homosexuality.

The site also contained a list of links to other organisations for “Lesbian, Gay & Bisexual Christians”.  Some of these organisations are good Catholic organisations which help homosexual people to live chaste lives (such as EnCourage) some claim to be Catholic, but openly dissent from Catholic teaching on homosexuality (such as Quest) and some are not Catholic at all and totally reject Catholic teaching on homosexuality – even to advocating “gay” marriage (such as Metropolitan Community Churches).  This is very confusing and dangerous for homosexual people genuinely seeking help and advice about their situation.

Another part of this site advertised a weekend retreat for “Lesbian, Gay & Bisexual Christians”, led by Fr Rob Marsh SJ, Helen O’Donnell and Fr David Birchall SJ, at the Jesuit-run Loyola Hall Spirituality Centre in Liverpool, England (Archdiocese of Liverpool).  At the top of this page were two links to “gay” sites, which included direct access to “gay” pornography, called “gay-to-z.com events guide” and “pink links”.   Even though some of these documents contained very offensive images, it was thought vital that the CDF see what kind of material Fr Birchall  was encouraging people to visit.

Although the Jesuit provincial, Fr David Smolira, did suppress parts of this disgraceful website – if only because it was exposed by The Catholic Herald – it was pointed out that there are still many other concerns about this whole issue, not least that there is a possibility that some of this material may eventually be put back on the internet in the future.  There is also the issue of Fr David Birchall SJ himself. The Cardinal was asked if it is right for someone to be working as a parish priest who:

  • clearly holds unorthodox views on homosexuality;
  • offers a “massage” to any stranger who cares to contact him via the internet;
  • encourages homosexual people to visit internet sites which contain “gay” pornography

It was also queried whether it was right for the Jesuit-run Loyola Hall to be hosting Fr Birchall’s  weekend for “Lesbian & Gay Christians”. 

Unfortunately, despite the file of documentary evidence sent to the Vatican, Fr Birchall is still in a position of immense influence, holding the post of Director of the well known Ignatian Spirituality Centre in Glasgow. He is still immersed in the “gay” retreat scene, as revealed in the January 2015 Newsletter for the LGBT Pastoral Council in the Archdiocese of Westminster where the Wounded Healers Retreat in Calpe, Costa Blanca is advertised: Full details of the retreat are on the net at http://calpe.co.nf   [Ed: this link is no longer working, but Patricia Phillips’s claims are corroborated across the internet, including here]. The retreat is open to men of whatever Christian denomination or on the borders, and whatever sexual orientation. A leaflet can be downloaded from the website. Further details: David Birchall SJ, Ignatian Spirituality Centre, Scott Street, Glasgow, G3 6PE – Tel: 0141 332 3659 Mob: 0793 0866679″

Calpe is a place in Spain where Fr Birchall has done these ‘retreats’ in the past, usually for ‘gay men’, and they have offered things like ‘massage’.  Is this really the sort of thing with which the Director of the Ignatian Spirituality Centre in Glasgow should be involved?

The original Catholic Herald article and the website to which it refers are no longer available online, but may be cached online somewhere. 

I know I said if someone is gay and he searches for the Lord who am I to judge. But who's going to find the Lord through a retreat organised by a Jesuit in Glasgow? Gimme a break! That's hilarious!

I know I said if someone is gay and he searches for the Lord who am I to judge. But who’s going to find the Lord through a retreat organised by a Jesuit in Glasgow? Gimme a break! That’s hilarious!

Comment continued…

The idea that this LGBT event – scheduled to take place tomorrow evening in Garnethill – is designed to help the relatives and friends of LGBT people to support them and yet  “live [their] faith with integrity”, is laughable.  In the extreme.  At one time I’d have felt duty bound to go along to this event myself, in order to be able to report it honestly and with integrity, keen not to misrepresent the organisers and participants. No longer. It’s very clear that the teaching of the Church on homosexuality will be mocked – Fr David Birchall SJ is listed at the top of the St Aloysius’ bulletin among the clergy, identified as the ISC Director (Ignatian Spiritual Centre, Director). He’ll be running this show. It’ll be about as faithful to authentic Catholic teaching on homosexuality as any other event in that House of Heresy is faithful to Catholic teaching on just about any doctrine you care to name. I’ve attended enough of them to know that if it’s faithful Catholic teaching you’re looking for, if it’s an event to help you live your Catholic faith with integrity, forget about body massages and give St Aloysius, Garnethill, a huge body swerve.

Or maybe you disagree?  Let’s hear it…    

82 responses

  1. The Catholic churches teaching is entirely clear .They these empty vessels are trying to graft perversity onto Catholic church. Let them approach the confessional box , and the sacraments there after once they have been absolved .

    • Edward,

      Yes, the Church’s teaching is clear. Unfortunately Papa Francis took care of that with his daft “Who am I to judge”. I wish I’d be there. I’d have told him who….

      The Vicar of Christ on earth. That’s who. Gerragrip!

      • Daft ? – it was marvellous way of preventing the liberal / homosexual artillery barrage that was about to be unleashed against the Church.

        It has also led many previously hostile to the Church to look more kindly upon it, hopefully as a first step towards their conversion.

        Catholics – and the Church itself – often appear to outsiders as cruel Pharisees. Denouncing homosexuals makes that worse – particularly as we never denounce Respectable Sinners – like arms traders, bankers, tycoons, advertisers etc etc who are no less hostile to the Catholic Faith than even the worst in the Gay Lobby.

        • Tony,

          Not true. None of what you have written at 6.51pm is true.

          To lie in order to gain approval from anyone, is never a good idea especially when the lie involves denying the truths revealed by God. Now, within and without the Church, this stupid phrase “Who am I to judge” is quoted at every turn and will be used this evening in the Garnethill meeting to indicate a shift in the “Church’s teaching” which is, of course, no such thing; it’s God’s natural, moral law and cannot be changed. So when the truth dawns on those who have withheld what you call their “liberal/homosexual barrage against the Church” that “barrage” will be twice as ferocious. Nobody likes to be fooled, and that is what you are admitting has happened. The Pope has played with words in order to fool the world into thinking the the Church is OK with homosexual activity. It’s not. Homosexual activity remains, objectively, a mortal sin. Conversions are only likely to occur in those who have had the truth presented to them clearly and without apology. Worked for generations. Why should this generation be different? Lying to encourage conversions? Point me to the Gospel verse that justifies such dishonesty.

          And please…. that old chestnut… Pharisees? Listen, the only reason Christ condemned the Pharisees – who were very important and knowledgeable Jews in his day – was because of their hypocrisy, not because they preached the law. Defending and promoting God’s moral law is not Pharisaical.

          And what makes you think that the Church has never denounced other sins such as those you list? Rubbish. Creating false dichotomies, like lying, doesn’t serve the truth. It’s a modernist trick. Patent nonsense.

          • Homosexuals – who are correct in saying they face massive hostility from the heterosexual sinners of society at large – need first to be convinced that Catholics are not merely another throng of sinners eager to throw stones.

            Pope Francis’ statement was theologically correct (no one has a right to judge individual homosexuals) and may convince homosexuals that the Church isn’t hostile to them as people. The only homosexuals who’ll be misled by the statement are those who wish to be.

            Please don’t commit the grave sin of calumny by accusing the Supreme Pontiff of lying “to gain approval.”

            • Errrr…. it was YOU who suggested the Pope was lying to gain approval. To quote you:

              “It [saying “who am I to judge”] was marvellous way of preventing the liberal / homosexual artillery barrage that was about to be unleashed against the Church.

              It has also led many previously hostile to the Church to look more kindly upon it, hopefully as a first step towards their conversion. “

              I merely commented on the dishonesty which YOU surmised was the reason for the pontiff’s appalling choice of words, and failure to distinguish the action from the person. That was intensely dishonest and remains so since he has never EVER put the record straight (excuse the pun).

              You have also given yourself away in your first sentence. As I keep saying – now let me choose my words carefully here… Nobody who does not suffer same-sex attraction/indulge in homosexual activity would dream of defending it and accusing critics of being “hostile” to the individuals concerned. What they DO is evil. I have a right (and a duty) to say that, in true charity, to both the homosexuals themselves and to those who may need to be taught the truth about something that is now portrayed as a right and a good in itself. That doesn’t make me “hostile” on a personal basis to any of them as human beings. I’m not.

              What about you, Tony. Do you denounce their activity, while always remembering that it is wrong to victimize or insult them in any way?

              • Pope Francis’s remark was a deflection, not a deception; he was obviously speaking in his personal capacity rather than clad with the authority of Peter.

                As he clearly believed what he said, how could it be dishonest ?

                Theologically mistaken ? – no, because it’s about personal judgement, not doctrine.

                He also stated that the remark applied to a homosexual “who is sincerely seeking God.” This caveat was of course ignored by the secular media.

  2. What ” his holiness should have done was quote St Paul’s letter to the romans

      • Editor

        I think Edward Fullerton is referring to this passage from the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans:

        “…For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature. And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error…” (Romans Chapter 1: 26-27)

        • Athanasius,

          I was being facetious but thank you anyway. And it is worth considering in general terms that some – perhaps many – of us wouldn’t immediately think of a specific passage; how many people would know, off the cuff, that Romans 1 is where that particular Pauline warning on homosexuality is to be found… Thus, when referring to particular chapters/letters/Gospel passages, it is a good idea for us to take a minute to quote the verse(s) to which we refer.

          In this regard, I’ve tried – and failed – to find an hilarious clip on YouTube from an old Simpson’s film where Homer refuses to attend church and his wife invites the vicar to dinner in the hope of bringing him back into the fold. The vicar cites scripture asking Homer if he knows a specific verse and then quotes the words of the verse, and then Homer replies, “And have YOU heard of …” and cites a verse from one of the Gospels which has nothing to do with the topic of church-going – something like, say, Matthew 13:1 to which the vicar replies: “yes – ‘And Jesus going out of the house, sat by the seaside.” Hilarious. I just can’t find it but it does bring a smile!

          Anyway, Edward is correct to suggest that quoting Romans 1 would have been infinitely preferable to the scandalous “who am I to judge”. Infinitely.

            • Tony,

              I take it you’ve had a telephone call from the Pope, then, because he’s yet to tell that to the world. The impression has been given that homosexual sins are not sins at all. See the advertisement for the meeting in St Aloysius this very evening, now, indeed, underway. Do you think for a moment that the Jesuit(s) participating in that little show will be saying that homosexual activity is sinful? If so, I could give you a good price on the Forth Road Bridge…

      • Editor , Are you a Catholic ? . I have only basic education and I have read St Paul, but , As you don’t know ! , Chapter 1 , the entire chapter .

        • Edward,

          Yes, I am a Catholic. Not a great one, but I keep trying. In fact, my family and close friends tell me that I am VERY trying… 😀

          Unlike your good self, I do have more than a basic education – in fact I taught A Level Scripture, Old and New Testament for a number of years in England, so I am fairly well acquainted with Romans, as well as with the other letters of St Paul. In fact, my favourite Pauline passage of all time is there in Romans: “For neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor might, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus, our Lord. (Romans 8) Contrast that beautiful passage with his stern ticking off to those stupid Galatians, and you can guess why I thoroughly enjoyed teaching St Paul – whether to pupils in first year or A Level students in sixth form!

          I’m also a qualified English teacher, however, so I ought to have explained my meaning when I told Athanasius that I was being “facetious” – i.e. “flippant” (making a bit of fun, a joke, you might say) when I asked you for a “clue”. That was careless of me.

          Sorry to have misled you, when I simply wanted to make the point, for the sake of those (and I’ve had conversations with quite a few), who are less well acquainted with all the letters of St Paul or other biblical passages, that it is always a good idea, helpful to readers, to allow for the possible ignorance of some by quoting the biblical reference to which we refer. I say “we” since I’m sure I’ve been guilty of doing the same thing myself, although I try, consciously, not to do so – partly because I remember a theology lecturer saying to me a few years back that it is the mark of a truly educated person to write in such a way that everyone can understand fully what they are meaning, without having to go off and do their own research; and that means everyone, whether possessed of only a basic education or half a dozen Degrees.

          Anyway, no harm done, I hope. Forgive me for not making clear my facetiousness in the first place.

    • Therese,

      Nail on head, there. Nail on head. They are not only Jesuits in good standing, but they are Jesuits who run THE prestigious St Aloysius private school – people would kill to get a place for their children there. Possibly not, of course, if they’d heard the foul-mouthed talk of a group of the boys, pupils, on a bus out to the (you guessed) west end, some time ago when I was heading out that way on public transport. Can’t remember why I didn’t have my car but I eventually turned round and said, sarcastically, “So this is the results of the wonderful Catholic education system we keep hearing about…” Silence, I have to admit, fell, and hopefully shame-facedly so. If for no other reason than the fear that I’d go in and ask to speak to the Head and identify them in a line-up. You have to laugh.

      And you REALLY have to laugh when you think that if anyone – parishioner or pupil – asked these same Jesuits about the rights and wrongs of attending the SSPX chapel round the corner, they’d say, darkly, that it really is not advisable, an aura of schism about the place, blah blah. You really couldn’t make this stuff up. Not in a million years.

      • Editor,

        I’m glad I never rode on the bus with you when I was in school! I used to like to shoot spitballs at my fellow student passengers…esp. the girls…oh well, public school varmint and all that….

  3. Well if it was closer I myself would MAYBE go along,but the meeting surely if it’s in accordance with Our Faith should only last at the most 5 minutes . To tell Homosexuals who attend that their doing nothing wrong if they practice the Catholic Faith and abstain from Homosexual Behavior,anything else is a LIE. I am no saint but if I went to a Catholic Heterosexual meeting and they said that Fornication was now no longer a sin and that I believed that LIE I would be a Hypocrite . Better to Die a bad Catholic than see them change The Law.

  4. I despair. How come these (Jesuit) heretics get away with it? Are Catholics so religiously illiterate that they cannot see the heresy? Obviously not. 50 years or so of no catechism has done the trick. Where, oh where do we even begin to readdress this situation?

    • No Catechism ?

      It’s available in all good bookshops – even Catholic ones ! – and contains the traditional teachings of the Church.

      • Tony,

        Tell that to the Modernists running the Catholic schools. As Head of Religious Education in a Catholic college, I ordered copies of the Catechism of the Catholic Church when it was first published, one for each member of staff teaching RE – and I ended up looking for another post.

  5. Crofterlady

    The problem now is that the better clergy are generally cowardly and a majority of the so-called faithful are completely indifferent. Add to that the terror of being labelled a homophobe and it all adds up to evil abounding “because good men do nothing”. These heretic Jesuits are playing on the loss of faith of the people, not to mention, from the “massage” offer cited in the intro, preying on the weak!! The very idea of offering a meeting where those of various sexual proclivities can get together is tantamount to inviting an occasion of mortal sin. What a judgment these fallen Jesuits have in front of them if they don’t repent of this wickedness.

    • Athanasius

      I think theres a general consensus of not wanting to “rock the boat” and draw attention to oneself. I think this is partly out of human respect and partly out of fear.

      It has to be said, that ignorance and indifference are both rife in the ranks of the laity and the clergy. Add that to Pope Francis’ vague statements about “mercy” and it’s not surprising we have these scandalous events.

      • Petrus,

        Your post made me think of times when I have given the Church’s teaching on something and people have looked aghast, and then when I say that this pope is taking the Church astray, they look at me as if I’m wearing horns. There is a lot of ignorance about and also indifference as you say. If they cared enough, these people would check it out. I think the bulk of the laity are quite happy with a bad pope, as it makes life easier for them.

        • Preaching the Divine Mercy was a keynote of St John Paul’s pontificate as it is of Francis’s. Mercy isn’t vague at all; it is taking refuge – and encouraging others to do the same – as the ONLY recourse any of us have in the face of God’s just anger.

          Which is upon all adult humanity, “Good” Catholics included.

          The comments seem to be calling Francis a “bad pope,” particularly in the light of homosexual militants in the Church, who seek to “re-define” Church teaching.

          They’re activities are appalling, yes – but long pre-date the election of Pope Francis.

          • Tony,

            Make no mistake about it – we ARE calling Pope Francis a bad pope and not only because of his shocking failure to uphold the natural moral law in relation to homosexual activity.

            Who is he to judge? The Vicar of Christ, for goodness sake. What’s going on in his mind? His perpetual talk of mercy without the corresponding requirement for repentance, is shocking in the extreme.

            As St Alphonsus Liguouri warned, those who rely on God’s mercy without repenting of their sins, will be damned. End of.

            • I don’t for a moment believe that Pope Francis is preaching the sin of presumption, with regard to homosexual behaviour or anything else.

              Everybody already knows the Church’s teachings are austere, indeed severe, not least with regards to sexual sins.

              They need to be convinced that the Church is merciful also. Francis seeks to do this.

  6. Yes, Crofter Lady, I fear they are so religiously illiterate because over 50 years ago many of the shepherds ‘married the spirit of the age’ leaving them weaponless against a rising tide of irreligion and filth which, with TV and Internet, is now a tsunami. As ‘he who marries the spirit of the age is widowed in the next generation’ so we have priests like these Jesuits, capable only of leading souls to hell.

    As Preston was on my ‘Mass circuit’ some years ago, and a good old Jesuit used to celebrate the old Mass in the church where David Birchall also served, I was horrifid when the news broke about his sodomitical web-site. It was all utterly and diabolically sinful and disgusting, but the bit that most stays in my mind is that he said something like “Put out your gaydars when you come to Mass’, so presumably that contacts with other heinous sinners might be made there. I never entered that church again.

    • Yes Christina, religiously illiterate but also largely indifferent I think. Today we are all brainwashed to be politically correct, tolerant, non homophobic etc that it takes a brave person to stand up and question what is going on, even or perhaps especially at parish level. Indifferentism is in my opinion the greatest threat to the Church today. And is in part at least a result of the “who am I to judge” mindset, and the message in Amoris Laetitiae that there are no absolute rules anymore. What I used to call the Claire Rayner mentality (an old agony aunt in the 80’s I think.) in other words : if it feels right, do it.

  7. This should come as no surprise! There are many Jesuit priests in the USA who define themselves by their homosexuality. The deconstruction Of personhood and the meaning of humanity in this culture of death has been deprived of an authentic anthropology which has catapulted the homosexual agenda not only throughout the priesthood but with catastrophic pandemic results in the so called catholic culture.

    It is of worthy consideration that the response here in the States is to homeschool our children. This will be the Catholic Trojan horse that Will on small ways at first transform the Catholic culture from the inside

    • John Paul Kaiser,

      The homosexual influence is now becoming more and more blatant here as well. “Homophobia” is a nonsensical term, routinely used here, in secular society and now even within the Church by complicit clergy and ignorant laity, to indicate that there are still [bad] people who do not accept homosexuality as right and normal. It will be thrown around the meeting in Garnethill tonight, no question about it. Thus will the “victim” mentality be nurtured. Tea and sympathy all around. I do wish I could be there!

      We are labelled “homophobic” and “bigots”. Goodness, they wanted to give me an award for it once when I was among the nominees for Bigot of the Year – an award given by the major “gay” rights group, Stonewall. Unfortunately, I didn’t win. I’d have been honoured to be considered “homophobic” and “bigoted”, interpreted as refusing to accept the normalisation of what has always been considered evil activity and has, for thousands of years, been named as one of the four sins that cry to Heaven for vengeance. Talk about changed times!

      Only a minority of parents here are able to home-school, but I agree with you that it is a key way to “transform the Catholic culture from the inside.”

  8. It’s no coincidence that the notorious ‘Soho Masses’ in London moved to a Jesuit church (Farm Street) after the Ordinariate took over their Warwick Street stronghold. Some of the priests who used to offer the Soho Masses were Jesuits. Although the ‘Soho Masses’ are now re-named ‘LGBT Catholics Westminster’ http://www.lgbtcatholicswestminster.org it’s still the same old dissent and sacrilege going on. The Jesuits are truly appalling. Instead of helping people out of sin and darkness, they merely serve to confirm them in it. Unless the Jesuits reform and return to their original splendour, the sooner the Order collapses, the better. Surely it can’t still be getting vocations?

    • Westminster Fly,

      I took a look at that website and it is shameless. It is clear that the Archbishop of Westminster, and probably all the Bishops of England and Wales are supportive of active homosexuality. That is really scandalous.

  9. Margaret Mary,
    I’m sure all of the bishops of England and Wales aren’t actually supportive of homosexual acts – but a lot of them are certainly afraid to speak against the ‘gay Catholic mafia’ for whatever reason. Cardinal Nichols is a different issue. He actively supported and defended the Soho Masses and continues to support the Farm St Masses even after having been shown hard evidence of all the dissent promoted by this group in London.
    In fact, I would go further than that and say that he was very disingenuous in the way he handled complaints about the Masses, and I saw hard evidence of this. If someone ever wrote a general letter of complaint about the Masses and gave no evidence of dissent, he wrote a courteous reply telling them they had been misinformed as to the nature of the Masses, that all was well, etc, etc. But if he was sent incontrovertible evidence of the dissent being promoted at and through the Masses – which he was – he never used to respond at all. Nothing. Because he couldn’t. The evidence was too great.
    And some of it was appalling. I remember one of the Soho Mass leaflets handed out at the Masses encouraged the congregation to go and visit a display of ‘AIDS quilts’ – sort of banners made by people commemorating those who had died of AIDS, that sort of thing. One of the listed venues to see these quilts turned out to be a ‘gay’ sex shop, selling pornography etc. You couldn’t make it up.

  10. This is an old trick, actually. Back in the early 2000’s, here in the Archdiocese of Cincinnati, USA, our former Archbishop (a protege of Cardinal Bernardin, need I say more…) established a “support” group for “gay” or “questioning” (questioning everything except the cause of their own sins, that is) high school students called CRYSM: “Catholics Respecting Youth in Sexual Minorities.” This was allegedly formed to review Catholic teaching on homosexuality, but of course Catholic teaching was either rationalized away or outright dismissed in favor of “compassion” or “sympathy,” etc. The group was eventually closed down because of parent protests.

    But while we’re on the subject, Editor, I believe the NWO has unwittingly found an (unwanted) cure for homosexuality, that allegedly genetic condition! Yes, the cure is none other than – drum roll please – gender replacement surgery! You see, when homosexuals and lesbians are confused about their sexuality, all they have to do is find a surgeon to make them a member of the opposite sex, and Voila! Problem solved! 🙂

    So I now call upon all militant homosexual groups to organize world-wide protests against the World Bank and all central banks, the United Nations, the EU, the Council on Foreign Relations and the Royal Institute of International Affairs, the Bilderbergs, the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations, and all their fellow satanic travelers – to demonstrate against this shameful, brazen and bigoted undermining of their right to have sex with members of their own sex!

  11. It’s understandable that – after the hurricane of Decadent Insanity that has blown through (and largely demolished) Western society since, say, 1965 – traditional Catholics are in the grip of Culture Shock; and thus a Great Fear.

    This seems to manifest itself most in the fear that the Catholic Church will be manipulated, “re-defined” – by powerful enemies in its own ranks, as well as in the world outside. Notably the Gay Mafia. And in the light of powerful prophecies made by St Anne Catherine Emmerich and other saints of the past, there is no doubt that this fear is well-founded.

    But Jesus says: “Courage, do not be afraid.” Be wary, yes, but unafraid. And direct any hostility one may feel against the REAL culprits – who, as St Paul reminds us, are not fellow human beings (however sinful), but satan and his angels.

    And there are two good practical reasons for hope

    – No Catholic doctrine can be cancelled or wafted away, even by a pope and a general council combined. Catholic doctrines, however unwelcome, are as immutable as The Ten Commandments.
    – Liberal, gay etc “Catholicism” is self-defeating and self-destructive; and outside the West, is unknown; the future is traditionalist.

    • Tony,

      We frequently remind ourselves that Christ is in charge of His Church and that the evil being perpetrated by Modernist churchmen will not win the day.

      However, you can’t blame Satan. If I give in to the temptation to bash someone (say you – don’t take it personally) on the head with a baseball bat and then shoot your brains out, I’m the person found guilty and sent off to prison, not Satan. He needs my help, and in the fictitious (you’ll be relieved to hear) scenario I’ve just outlined, he got it.

      Ditto Kasper & Co. They are doing the work of the Devil all right but that’s not an excuse – that’s a reason to pray for their conversion without which they will undoubtedly end up in Hell.

      • In any sin, any crime, Satan is always the prime culprit, the sinner – however guilty – a mere accomplice.

        You have every right to judge Kasper’s theology, nor am I defending it.

        But no right to judge Kasper’s soul – even if you could read his heart and mind, which obviously you cannot.

  12. Chesterton and other Catholics have in the past made the point that – when a type of evil is rampant in the world at large – some of it seeps, inevitably, into the Church.

    Thus between 1920 and 1945, the Catholic Church was riddled with fascism; some Catholic fascists looking forward to a fascist pope and the re-definition of Catholicism in a fascist direction.

    In 1945, it became apparent to that keen social observer, the Devil, that fascism was kaput and he would have to try another tack. The one he chose was to attack the individual mind, especially in the realm of sexuality; encouraging fornication, adultery and every kind of sexual sin, but with militant homosexuality as the vanguard.

    Thus the Sexual Revolution began – not with the marketing of the Pill in 1960 – but in 1948, with the “Report” into male sexuality by the militant homosexual (and criminal, and anti-Catholic zealot) Dr Alfred Kinsey, who was funded by the Rockefeller Foundation.

    The resultant horror, scandal, chaos and degradation caused in the Church by the Sexual Revolution are plain to see, like the ravages caused in the Church by fascism a generation earlier.

    But where are those fascist clergy and laypeople ? – Vanished; dead and gone to God’s Judgement. And the Church is cleansed of them.

    So will it be with all the liberal and gay mafias within the Church – they will vanish, leaving not a trace behind.

    And the Church will keep marching on, as before.

    • Tony,

      I just love your thought processes, none of which include any mention of the souls being lost due to the devastation, the havoc being wreaked within the Church due to the false teaching of the hierarchy, including this terrible pontiff, and the baseless optimism of the neo-Catholics whose cheery “och it’ll be all right in the end” bears no resemblance to true Christian hope and faith that God is, indeed, in charge of His Church.

      That same God has warned us of Judgment Day when those who have caused and perpetuated this dreadful crisis – hierarchy, clergy, weak, lazy, indifferent and ignorant laity – will be brought to account.

      There’s already a “trace left behind” when the troublemakers have vanished, as you put it. Lost souls, confused souls, people who will never trust the Church again. Scandals, Our Lord warned, there will always be, but WOE to those who cause them. Our Lord did not belittle the damage done to souls through these dreadful churchmen and lazy laity – why should any of us?

        • Tony,

          Are you really not aware of the shocking things Pope Francis has said, e.g. about Our Lady doubting God? Check it out here – I believe this site has kept a record, a kind of “Bergogio file” while the rest of us just remain open-mouthed. Note: you can compare Pope Francis’s heresy about Our Lady with the authentic teaching of the Church, if you scroll down to read the… er… authentic teaching of the Church…

          Nobody here has EVER spoken about the “sins” of the pontiff or anyone else for that matter. Your tactics are utterly dishonest – between creating false dichotomies and pretending we’ve said things that we’ve not, you should be running for some Parliament somewhere; Westminster, Holyrood, Cardiff, whatever, although I’d prefer you to give Holyrood a miss – we’ve enough charlatan politicians without encouraging any more!

          • I have read the passage you quoted about Our Lady.

            Francis is simply saying that Mary experienced doubt and temptation.

            As did Our Lord.

            They weren’t plaster saints, but human, and in extreme agony.

    • But where are those fascist clergy and laypeople?

      Just wanted to point out, TonyBuck, that fascism is nothing more than the logical conclusion of liberalism, and in fact is the essence of liberalism – so no, the fascists are not all vanished, dead and gone. In fact, far from it: they are in control of the Vatican at the moment, and proceeding at an unheard-of pace to immolate the Church.

      Also, please elaborate on what you mean by “…between 1920 and 1945, the Catholic Church was riddled with fascism…”

      • In some countries, many Catholic clergy and lay people were sympathetic to fascism, or worse.

        For example, most of Padre Pio’s fellow-monks.

        • Thus between 1920 and 1945, the Catholic Church was riddled with fascism.

          In some countries, many Catholic clergy and lay people were sympathetic to fascism, or worse.

          After the hyperbole, examples please.

          • Hyperbole ? The reverse, if anything.

            Italian bishops blessed Mussolini’s tanks, senior Church figures in Germany soft-soaped Hitler (a cardinal granting him a requiem mass in 1945, contrary to canon law).

            General Franco was not a fascist (though many of his troops were), and arm-in-arm with the fascist dictatorships, who armed and financed him. Franco defeated Communism in Spain by methods as blood-stained as their own, in the process appalling even Himmler by his vindictiveness.

            Monsignor Tiso of Slovakia ran a quasi-fascist, criminal dictatorship, whilst in Bosnia, a Franciscan ran a (very murderous) concentration camp, abetted by equally devout (and murderous) fellow-Catholic Croats.

            In France, the pro-Hitler Vichy regime was an amalgam of Catholicism and fascism. Many French Catholics deplored De Gaulle’s fight against the Nazis.

            With time and effort, I could expand and multiply these examples of deep Catholic complicity with – and fervent approval of – fascism and Nazism, indefinitely.

            Outside Poland and Malta, the European Catholics who emerged from the fascist era with clean hands and conscience, were a definite minority – I almost said, heroic exceptions !

            Poland aside, Continental European Catholicism was weighed in the balance in the years 1920-45; and 9/10 of it was found wanting. As in, say, the Philipines today, 9/10 of it was cultural and political Catholicism, not sincerely religious Catholicism.

            Accordingly, there’s not much of it left, is there ? It tottered on in the favourable cultural and political climate of 1945-62, then fell to pieces. (As in French Canada also).

            Houses of cards do that. The descendants of the men who murdered on behalf of Franco’s Falange (and of the women who cheered on the murders) haven’t shown themselves to be sound, practising Catholics.

            Amazing, isn’t it ?

          • An article (about 15 years ago) on Padre Pio in a reputable – and traditionalist – Catholic publication.

            The other monks were enthusiastically plotting fascist Italy’s wartime military advances on maps.

            St Pio demurred and – after pointing out the obvious (that if the Axis won, it would be the end of Christianity in Europe) – made a true prophecy: “England will win.”

      • Please don’t re-define liberalism, though doing so is popular with Rightists at the moment.

        The only similarity is that, since the Sixties, most liberalism has declined into being a neo-pagan cult, as is fascism.

        There the similarities end. Fascism is nationalist and militarist; liberals are internationalist and tend towards pacifism.

        Fascism despised liberalism above all, though it hated Communism more.

    • Tonybuck123

      I don’t know where you get your information about the Church and Fascism. Sounds like you’ve been sapping up all that Marxist propaganda, ‘Hitler’s Pope’ and all that! Anyone who is for the Catholic Church and the reign of Christ the King in this world today is called a “fascist”. It’s an old Communist ruse to paint Catholicism into the same picture as brutal secular totalitarianism, such as witnessed under Hitler and Mussolini, and presently in governmental vogue in “gay marriage” liberal Europe. Wakey, wakey, Tony!!

      You are absolutely right about the sexual revolution, though. Spot on with that.

  13. Tonybuck321

    It’s not good enough just to say that the evil will pass, let’s trust in God and do nothing to help souls. That is, if you will pardon the semi-pun, passing the buck, failing in our Confirmation duty. We are expected to publicly stand up against evil, even when those who spout it or encourage it are members of the high clergy. Remember the adage: “evil abounds because good men do nothing”. Too many in this day and age are happy to sit back and let it all wash over them, hence the reason why the Church and the world are in the unprecedented mess they are. No, we have to take up the shield of faith and the sword of truth, even when it means having to sadly question the Pope himself.

    I can’t remember the saint who spoke the following, but never a truer word: “Know that all depends on God but act as though all depends on you”.

    As for Pope Francis, he is about the worst Pope the Church has ever seen. Instead of confirming the faithful in faith he creates mass confusion with calculated revolutionary soundbites. What Pope Francis calls mercy the Church calls licence. True divine mercy is balanced with divine justice. Maybe that’s why the Modernists replaced the old devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus (image of merciful heart surrounded with thorns) with the highly suspect divine mercy devotion.

    Is it really consistent with Church teaching for Our Lord to have stated that the divine mercy devotion can save the souls of long dead relatives? Doesn’t the Church teach that personal judgment takes place upon death and that the souls eternity is fixed at that point? Yet here we have Our Lord apparently promising something that sounds more Mormon than Catholic.

    It’s high time Catholics became a little more familiar with the Traditional teaching of the Church instead of just buying into today’s perfect pope pop culture. When the world loves the Pope something is seriously wrong. Our Lord was crucified!

    • I agree. Tony Buck seems to think we should just keep quiet and let things pass, but the 1986 Vatican document on homosexuality says the exact opposite:- “But we wish to make it clear that departure from the Church’s teaching, or silence about it, in an effort to provide pastoral care is neither caring nor pastoral. Only what is true can ultimately be pastoral”. In fact, if one reads the whole of section 15, from which that sentence was lifted, you can see how woefully inadequate our current pastors are in meeting the standard required by this Instruction. http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19861001_homosexual-persons_en.html

      • Westminster Fly,

        Thank you for that quote and link. I hadn’t realised that the Vatican document says that about pastoral care – that’s a very clear quote, and makes it plain that it is not pastoral or merciful to keep silent about this evil behaviour let alone to encourage it in any way.

        • You’re welcome MM – in fact, I’m posting the whole of Section 15 here as I think it’s so relevant:-

          “We encourage the Bishops, then, to provide pastoral care in full accord with the teaching of the Church for homosexual persons of their dioceses. No authentic pastoral programme will include organizations in which homosexual persons associate with each other without clearly stating that homosexual activity is immoral. A truly pastoral approach will appreciate the need for homosexual persons to avoid the near occasions of sin.

          We would heartily encourage programmes where these dangers are avoided. But we wish to make it clear that departure from the Church’s teaching, or silence about it, in an effort to provide pastoral care is neither caring nor pastoral. Only what is true can ultimately be pastoral. The neglect of the Church’s position prevents homosexual men and women from receiving the care they need and deserve.

          An authentic pastoral programme will assist homosexual persons at all levels of the spiritual life: through the sacraments, and in particular through the frequent and sincere use of the sacrament of Reconciliation, through prayer, witness, counsel and individual care. In such a way, the entire Christian community can come to recognize its own call to assist its brothers and sisters, without deluding them or isolating them.”

          Obviously, the ‘Garnethill Gang’ would never clearly state that homosexual activity is immoral, nor would their mates at Farm Street London – quite the opposite. The vast majority of organised pastoral care for people with same-sex attraction in the UK is provided by total dissidents, so therefore it is not pastoral care at all. It is leading souls astray.

    • Personal judgement takes place at death.

      But God isn’t on our time-scale; He (and His judgement) are above and outside time.

      Thus it is perfectly Catholic to pray for the salvation of those who – on our mundane timescale – are dead.

      On the feast of St Thomas a Becket once, I remember the old Irish priest celebrating Mass making a bidding prayer in intercession for the salvation of the souls of the knights who murdered St Thomas.

    • Gabriel Syme,

      Patricia Phillips, the author of the blog introductory article at the top of this thread (first published in our newsletter in February, 2015) writes about those retreats and linked to the website (Calpe) – which has since been removed. As she writes above: “is it right for someone to be working as a … priest, who …encourages homosexual people to visit internet sites which contain “gay”pornography and who offers a “massage” to any stranger who cares to contact him via the internet.”

      He is a brazen disgrace. Oops! That statement is none too “merciful” – sorry!

  14. It is somewhat Protestant to quote scripture out of context so when taking Romans or indeed any other scripture passage to highlight its homosexuality it’s easy to get into a slanging match
    It is probably more productive to look at the entire text which comes from the word textile which means fabric so the fabric of the scripture begins in Genesis with Adam and eve as husband and wife in a covenant relationship which is ruptured due to sin and then held together because of what Jesus did on the cross and ends in the book of Revelation the book of the apocalypse. The unveiling – another covenant image where the bridegroom returns for His bride the Church so in a very real sense the Bible is all about marriage and the covenant which Jesus is blood seals at Calvary which is re-presented in every single holy Mass celebrated and beautifully reminders of what it means to be married if you will that is to lay down your life for your bright as Jesus laid down his life for his bright here natural law meets supernatural law and in the holy sacrifice of the mass we find the film is and indeed the meaning of what and how we are received
    Or as a fusion says we are saved by Grace through faith so when we think about homosexuality this is why the church has always start it as a moral disorder because essentially sexuality is directed toward man and woman so use the whole bible and not just individual texts

  15. The original article – with which I agree – is about a few Jesuits distorting the teachings of the Church.

    But the above comments on the article, immediately drag Pope Francis into the controversy, without the slightest warrant for doing so.

    I have to suggest that those who do so, hate Pope Francis anyway – and I think the word “hate” is correct.

    Ostensibly for his supposed watering-down of Church teachings (which he hasn’t in fact done) but in reality for other, less creditable reasons.

  16. Tony B

    Please stop playing the innocent. Unless you are unable to read and think, you must know very well why Pope Francis is justifiably criticised, so you can pretend all you like that this is for reasons of “hatred”, but you’re not fooling anyone who actually knows and loves the Faith. If you want to keep the blinders on, that’s your choice, but don’t try to put them on everyone else.

    • Therese,

      Well said. Tony is not only accusing US of “hatred” but leading and well respected cardinals and bishops as well. There is a great deal of concern across the Church about Pope Francis; indeed, people who, hitherto, wouldn’t hear a word said against the post-Vatican II popes,and who made every excuse under the sun for their negligence and scandals (Assisi springs to mind) are coming out fighting now and organising petitions to express their deep concerns about Pope Francis’ statements and behaviour.

      Tony,

      Did Christ hate the first pope when he said “get behind Me Satan” and called him a “stumbling block”?

      Don’t be daft. Popes are not divine beings. They are not above criticism – and, indeed, Canon Law lays a duty upon the laity TO criticise them when necessary.

      In fact, I think it is self-evident that anyone who is still making excuses for this pope and/or who sees nothing much wrong in ridiculous statements like “who am I to judge” [homosexual activity] is about as Catholic as the nearest rabbi.

    • I object to:

      1) The way in which the antics of a few liberal priests, in one country, have been broadened into an attack on Pope Francis. I deplore the gay mafias that are operating in the Church, but of course they’ve been doing so for decades, not least in face of St JP II’s hostility. It’s very debatable whether Francis has made the matter worse; or could have done so, so bad as it already was.

      2) However mistakenly Francis MAY have handled this issue – and the St Pius X approach might make matters worse – there is no excuse for denouncing his whole pontificate or labelling him a “bad pope” (like those of the Renaissance ?)

      Where are these petitions ? To what precisely do they object ? Those who oppose Francis (on political grounds, perchance ? ! ) should stop wheezing and mumbling – instead, they should “put up or shut up.”

      In 1969, Fr Joseph Ratzinger prophesied that “the real convulsion” in the Church was yet to come. This convulsion – the birth of a Church no longer Western (even “Roman”, except in doctrine) – must, and will, occur. Francis is acting as midwife, but – prior to the birth – he’s bound to give an impression of fluster and confusion.

      Though since when, were Jesuits ever flustered or confused ?

      • Tony,

        You make the classic mistake of confusing popes who have lived double lives, immoral popes, with “bad” popes. Not the case. A BAD pope is one who fails to govern the Church properly and faithfully – not one who gives in to the temptations of the flesh.

        Your interpretation of this dreadful pontificate is ridiculous.Goodness, this Pope is antagonising everyone, bishops and priests around the world, right up to and including the head of the CDF – himself once notoriously liberal but now put firmly in the shade by this pontiff.

        The Church has never been “western” so your penultimate paragraph is baloney, pure and simple. Gerragrip.

        PS – you failed to answer my question above, so I repeat it here: Did Christ hate the first pope when he said “get behind Me Satan” and called him a “stumbling block”?

        • Y seem to be hunting for heresy in everything Francis says or writes; and for bad governance in everything he does.

          And no doubt, what you seek you may well find, being very determined so to do.

          Your picture of a Church at sixes and sevens because of Francis, and bristling with antagonism towards him, is fantasy – whether alarmist fantasy or wishful thinking, only you can judge.

          Having been in his younger days an authoritarian control-freak (and sent on retreat as a last alternative to being sacked as Jesuit Provincial in Argentina), Francis is taking a more relaxed approach – one which is purposeful, not irresponsible.

          Nor is it liberal or modernist, these are words and stances from the Culture War in the Western Church, which Francis (as a non-European) wisely ignores.

          Jorge Bergoglio, as he then was, was pitchforked into the papal chair when Benedict XVI unexpectedly resigned in 2013 as earthly head of a Church in crisis – not least because his pontificate had been blighted by the child abuse scandals, the investigation of which he had most unwisely taken on in 2001 when head of the CDF.

          That Francis is the polar opposite in temperament and style to his predecessor, doesn’t mean he is the theological opposite.

          For instance, under St JP II and Benedict, homosexuals had biblical stone tablets politely but firmly waved at them. To no avail. That Francis uses a different method – a different approach – should not be taken (despite wishful thinking in gay and liberal circles) that Francis approves of homosexuality or the gay mafias in the Church.

          The world too is in crisis. That crisis was hidden when Benedict was elected in 2005, but has been visible since 2008, and seems to deepen with every passing month.

          “Man’s distress is God’s opportunity” – Francis hopes that when the crisis, the perfect storm, really hits, a Golden Opportunity (indeed a Golden Age) for the Church will begin.

          Meanwhile, there’s little that Francis can do, except tread water and try to enthuse the troops, while holding the Church together in one piece.

          Francis is – as St John XXIII was – a man of friendly and liberal temperament, but traditional religious beliefs.

          Both men have been honestly misunderstood; but just as liberal Catholics wilfully misunderstood John XXIII so as to advance their agenda, Francis is being wilfully misunderstood by some traditionalist Catholics, not so as to advance their agenda (for they have none), but so as to indulge their favourite pastimes – of posing as the only remaining True Catholics, when they are not enjoying themselves shouting “Woe, Woe” and “The End is Nigh.”

          BTW, if Jesuits have indeed preached and practised heresy regarding the homosexuality issue, they should be forthrightly denounced to the diocesan authorities, to their superiors in the Jesuit Order (both national and international), even to Rome.

          This is “doing something about it” rather than moaning fatalistically and ineffectually.

          • TonyBuck321

            There is no point in writing to Rome about anything because Pope Francis was dismissive of people who wrote to the CDF to complain and made fun of their letters. I believe the files were dumped on his orders.

            I notice you haven’t answered the question about Jesus calling Peter a stumbling block, so I would add to editor’s question by saying does that mean Jesus was moaning fatalistically?

          • Tony

            “BTW, if Jesuits have indeed preached and practised heresy regarding the homosexuality issue, they should be forthrightly denounced to the diocesan authorities, to their superiors in the Jesuit Order (both national and international), even to Rome.

            This is “doing something about it” rather than moaning fatalistically and ineffectually.”

            What makes you think it hasn’t been done? It has. In spades. I can assure you. Especially in the case of Fr Birchall SJ. And yet he still spreads his dissent with complete impunity.

  17. Ah Tony, still having the time to pop back and spout more mush, but seemingly unable to answer questions addressed to you. Tut tut. I’ll ignore your posts from now on, as a one-way, repetitive conversation is boring, to say the least.

    • Therese – you asked for “examples”; I have given them.

      Clearly, you have found them unwelcome.

      Editor removed personal insult

      I’m in neither camp. Liberals irritate me as much as your kind of traditionalist.

      Editor: then there’s something seriously wrong with you idea of what it means to be a Catholic. And anybody who defends Papa Francis is a “liberal”, with bells on. Facing up to reality time, dear Tony. Facing up to reality time…

  18. Tony

    I don’t find your examples unwelcome, merely specious. Your remarks about Spain are particularly loathsome as you ignore the many priests and nuns and civilians who were murdered by the left – but then you would wouldn’t you?

    You may fool yourself into thinking you aren’t in a particular “camp”, but your every post betrays your bias. Blinders again.

    • Therese,

      I’m just catching up now, and I admire your very “Catholic Truth” spirit in ignoring the nasty personal remarks directed at you by Mr Buck. Makes my job easier when all I have to do is delete offensive remarks in one post. So, thank you for your charity towards him. He’s on notice now.

      • Editor – Pity you didn’t take offence at the nasty remarks (personal, though cleverly phrased so as not to appear so) made against me by Therese.

    • I am well aware of the terrible crimes committed by Spanish Republicans.

      But you asked me to provide instances of Catholics siding with fascism, a point to which the crimes committed by aggressive Anti-Catholics (such as the Spanish Left) are plainly irrelevant.

      I seek always to be unbiased – but your every post betrays your bias.

  19. Tony

    You said that the Catholic Church was “riddled” with fascism, but you failed to prove your case.

    I’m truly sorry that you think I was attacking you personally, if by this that you mean that I was doubting your goodwill and sincerity; I wasn’t, and I’m not. (A hint – I’m not very good at subtlety!). No, I was hoping to make the point that in historical record, all is not what it seems, and certainly not what the media constantly reports it. You pride yourself on being unbiased, but you weren’t when you mentioned Spain.

    I do also deplore the stance that you take in regard to the devastation in the Church which is undoubted – and OBVIOUS – and which is being carried through by Pope Francis, both in his actions and in his deplorable statements. You seem to me to be denying the truth in the mistaken belief that you are defending Christ. I believe in my whole soul that you are completely wrong in this; the FACTS bear me out, and I assert my right, and my duty, conferred upon me at my Confirmation, to point this out to you, but I bear you absolutely no ill-will – indeed much to the contrary. You seem to love the Church; so do I. Please, please, open your mind, study the facts – read Michael Davies, Hamish Frazer, The Remnant etc – so many wonderful Catholic heroes to list but you’ll meet them once you dip into the above. I urge you most sincerely to do so. If you love the Church, as I believe you do, do your duty and learn what’s been done to Christ’s Bride, and then do you what your conscience tells you.

    God bless,

    PS. Editor Cor! I’m printing off your message and posting it on the wall to console me for the next time I get a telling off!….

    • Well folks, time for an update on Fr Birchall SJ.

      But first, an extract from the blog article, first published in our newsletter in February, 2015, to remind us all of just how evil is the work in which this Jesuit has been steeped:

      EXTRACTS FROM BLOG ARTICLE….

      In 2003, The Catholic Herald newspaper exposed a Jesuit-run website which contained things contrary to Church teaching on homosexuality, including links to “gay” pornographic websites. This scandalous website was suppressed by the Jesuit provincial, Fr David Smolira, but before it was suppressed, copies of the relevant web pages, were sent to then Cardinal Ratzinger at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

      The site was run by Fr David Birchall SJ, parish priest at St Wilfrid’s Church, Preston, in Lancashire (Diocese of Lancaster). His personal web page gave more details about him including the worrying fact that he was Vocations Director for the Jesuits in Britain for four years, and his unbelievably inappropriate offer for anyone to contact him “for a talk, meet, massage, drink, chat . . .”

      In another section titled “Sexuality and Christianity”, headed by pictures of two young boys kissing and two girls cuddling, visitors were invited to click on buttons to get “thoughts” on various topics, covering Love and Self Acceptance, Same-sex relationships and Bible and Church Teaching. At the end of these “thoughts” was a little speech entitled “Don’t Be Isolated”. A link on the right hand side of this asked: “Who am I? – See”. This link invited one to see who has given all these “thoughts”. When one clicked on the “See” button, it returns to Fr David Birchall’s home page. A list of Fr Birchall’s “thoughts” from this section were submitted to the CDF. They were not remotely in line with Catholic teaching on homosexuality. END OF EXTRACTS

      UPDATE ON FR BIRCHALL SJ….

      Notice in the parish bulletin of St Aloysius, 8 May, 2016… (a copy of which was given to me with my weekly penance of the Catholic papers).

      Future Events – The Joy of Love

      There will be a presentation on Pope Francis’ Apostolic Exhortation The Joy of Love (Amoris Laetitia) given by Fr Birchall from the Ignatian Spirituality Centre. The talk will take place in the Ogilvie Centre twice:

      Either Friday 20th May at 1pm (after the 12.30 Mass)

      OR Saturday 21st May at 7pm (after the 5.45 Mass)

      You can buy a copy in the bookshop, price £4.95. END OF NOTICE.

      So, the people of Glasgow, and parishioners from the area, are to be subjected to a talk from a man who has no shame in publishing his dubious sexual enterprises online – enterprises which include inviting any Tom,Dick or Oddball who wants to contact him “for a talk, meet, massage, drink, chat…”

      At one time, we’d have felt obliged to go along to one of these talks to report back. No need. An educated guess will do. The mind will still boggle, of course, but an educated guess beats paying the parking fee for the painful duty of having to listen to the Church’s teaching being distorted on marriage, homosexuality, family life and, who knows, life on Mars. Gimme a break!

    • Albert,

      Is there something specific we should be looking for? There’s no sound, and nothing to read – the only page with text simply flashes on and off again and won’t halt. So I’m not sure what it is we are supposed to be looking for – at a quick skim it’s just a typical novus ordo type gathering.

%d bloggers like this: