June – The Month of the Sacred Heart…

Comment:

As  June, the Month of the Sacred Heart dawns, feel free to discuss relevant issues, and to share your own personal devotions to the Sacred Heart on this thread, along with your favourite hymns to the Sacred Heart, prayers, poems and stories. And if you have not yet completed the First (Nine) Fridays, why not resolve to begin by attending First Friday Mass this week, on Friday, 2nd June.  Click here to learn more about the Promises of the Sacred Heart to those who make the First Fridays…

Archdiocese of Glasgow in Meltdown

On 17th May, Catholic Truth received a copy of the following Statement sent to the clergy of the Archdiocese of Glasgow, by  the Chancellor of the Archdiocese, Monsignor Paul G. Murray B.Sc., Ph.B., S.T.L…

Statement regarding Monsignor Christopher McElroy

Mgr. Chris McElroy recently informed the Archbishop of his decision to step down from priestly ministry to allow him to reflect on his future. He will leave the Cathedral on Friday 19th May. A new Administrator will be appointed as soon as possible.

Well, I think we all know by now that “reflecting on his future” is a euphemism for “I’m off”.  So, the Archbishop, presumably stuck for a suitable replacement within the geographical confines of the Archdiocese has, literally, turned to Rome for help;  I mean, think about it; his Vicar General, subject of our front page report in January is hardly going about the place cutting the mustard, is he?  (Visit Newsletter Page on our website, and select the January 2017 edition in our Archive Section). And so it came to pass that the Archbishop has recalled the young Father Gerald Sharkey from the Scots College, to take up the post of administrator in the Cathedral in Glasgow.  Photo and text below is taken from the website of the Archdiocese of Glasgow – click here for source

Father Gerald Sharkey has been named by Archbishop Tartaglia as the new Administrator of St Andrew’s  Cathedral.

He succeeds Mgr Chris McElroy who is stepping down from active ministry.

Fr Sharkey was ordained in 2006. Currently he holds the post of Vice Rector of the Pontifical Scots College in Rome, and previously served as Parish Priest of Our Lady and St Helen’s in Condorrat.

Commenting on his appointment, Fr Sharkey said: “Although I will be sad to leave the eternal city and the happy environment of the Pontifical Scots College, I thank Archbishop Tartaglia for the trust he has shown in me by appointing me as the new Administrator of St. Andrew’s Cathedral, Glasgow.  Please pray for me in this time of great change.”

He will take up his new post on the Feast of the First Martyrs of the Roman Church,
June 30, 2017.

Comment:

We wish Father Gerald Sharkey well in his new appointment.  He has a reputation for being a sound priest – which is becoming something of the norm among the younger, more recently ordained clergy, thanks be to God. 

That said, it is clear from conversations with various priests around the archdiocese and beyond, that  the informed, more orthodox clergy are of the undiluted opinion that “the game’s a bogey”: it’s over –  the archdiocese is in meltdown. 

This is not a new thought here at Catholic Truth – we’ve known this to be the case for a long time now.  Click here to read one of our previous discussions on the topic of the Archdiocese of Glasgow R.I.P.

The “new” question is …drum roll… is the end of the Archdiocese of Glasgow as it now operates under Archbishop Tartaglia… (another drum roll) … a good thing?  What – in your considered opinion – lies ahead? 

Who Is To Blame For The Failure To Consecrate Russia: You…Me…Popes?

For some time, now,  I have queried the claim (widely spread around these days, not least in the Blogosphere) that the Consecration of Russia has not been done because not enough of us are doing our bit by carrying out the Fatima requests to make the First Saturdays, pray the daily Rosary, wear the Brown Scapular etc.  In my humble opinion, that doesn’t make sense.  It doesn’t make sense to me that Our Lady would ask the Pope and Bishops to do this Consecration, in a precise manner, with no mention of any such conditions involving the rest of the faithful, and then, some years later, find the Fatima “experts” are blaming us for the failure of the Pope/Bishops to carry out the Consecration.  At our recent Conference, Father Nicholas Mary C.SS.R mentioned this claim, and when I queried it, he promised to find the origin of it. Today, I received the following email from him providing the source.  Father wrote:

Many sound authors quote Sr Lucia’s assertion that the consecration of Russia would take place “when a sufficient number are fulfilling the requests” of Our Lady of Fatima. There are also other passages from her writings and interviews where she says something similar. Nonetheless the origin of the precise quotation you questioned me about in public recently is as follows:

In 1946 Sr Lucia told John Haffert in an interview that “the Holy Father and all the Bishops will unite to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.” He then writes:

“‘And do you think the conversion of Russia and peace will follow?’ I asked, catching my breath. ‘Yes,’ she said deliberately. ‘Yes, that is what Our Lady promised.’ ‘But when, Sister,’ I asked, ‘when will it happen?’ ‘It will happen,’ she replied. ‘There might be much more suffering (we had been talking of the awful civil war in Spain), more nations may be afflicted, but it will happen when a sufficient number are fulfilling the requests.’” [John M. Haffert – Russia will be converted, Washington, New Jersey, 1956 (2nd ed.), AMI Press, p. 246]

Although John Haffert (of Blue Army fame) later went astray, at the time of the above writing, he was regarded as a reliable Fatima source, so this quotation surprised me. Still, I noted that Sr Lucia does not claim to be quoting Our Lady; arguably, then, it is possible that she was giving her own opinion. In any case, I sent the above text to a friend in the south of England, who is something of an expert on Marian apparitions in general and Fatima in particular.  He replies:

It does seem difficult to refute [that quote]. But in 1929 at the Tuy vision, Our Lady said that the moment had come (emphasis mine) for the Pope & bishops to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart.  I wouldn’t have thought it was entirely dependent on how many were living the Fatima message, because at that time, only 12 years after the initial events occurred, the full message wasn’t widely known then.  As I understand it, the message of Fatima applies to all humanity – for the laity, religious and priests to live the Fatima message:- i.e. the daily rosary, brown scapular, consecration to the Immaculate Heart, First Saturdays etc, and for the Pope and the Bishops in union with him to do all those things as well, but in their case also to specifically consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.  The Fatima Network seems to say that there must be some co-operation from the laity in the Fatima message, obviously, but it doesn’t seem to make the consecration absolutely dependent on  it.  Source

Self-evidently, it can only be a good thing if more and more Catholics make the First Saturdays, pray the Rosary, wear the Brown Scapular and make sacrifices for sinners etc.  That’s not the issue.  The issue is, IS the fulfilment of those of Our Lady’s requests which apply to the faithful at large, a condition of the Pope’s/Bishops’ fulfilment of Our Lady’s request to them to consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart?  I can’t see it.  Can you?

Note: in the original post, submitted earlier today, I omitted Father Nicholas Mary’s name and mention of the Conference, but he has asked me to amend the post to make the context entirely clear: thus, I have restored that part of his email which states that I “questioned him in public”.  Those bloggers/readers who attended the Conference and witnessed the exchange will recall that it was polite and respectful. Some may consider that I, as a mere laywoman, had no right “questioning” Father “in public”, but I did so merely to correct what I believe to be a misleading opinion about where responsibility for the Consecration of Russia, lies.  If I am proven to be wrong, I will gladly apologise for questioning Father Nicholas Mary.  I am always grateful for necessary correction myself, so feel free to speak your minds, one and all.

Comments invited…

From Trump Tower To Papal Glower…

Vatican City: Pope Francis urged US President Donald Trump to be a peacemaker and gave him a copy of his encyclical on climate change at their first meeting on Wednesday, after the two men exchanged sharp words last year.   Click here to read rest of this report

 

 

Comment:

Pity Donald Trump didn’t hand the Pope back his “climate” encyclical and tell him what, precisely, to do with it.  But not until he’d expressed a very clear view about the cold climate in the Vatican; reading that report of the visit of Donald Trump to the Vatican,  doesn’t it seem that the Pope has insulted Trump?  Grins for Obama and  glowers for Trump?  Tells its own story.  Like, says it all when a Protestant president is more pro-life and more polite than a pope.  Does it not?  Not to mention the cheek of it, to put peacemaking onto the shoulders of the new President of the USA when he, Pope Francis, holds the key to world peace if only he would obey Our Lady of Fatima and consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart.  Some nerve, then…

Medjugorje True AND False! It’s A Joke!

“The Ruini Report”: If Only It Were a Joke
The Anti-Fatima Apparition Gains Ground

by Christopher A. Ferrara
May 18, 2017

The findings of the long-awaited “Ruini Report” of the Ruini Commission (named after its chairman, Cardinal Camillo Ruini), concerning the validity of the so-called Marian apparitions at Medjugorje that have supposedly been going on since 1981, have now been revealed. The result of the Commission’s labors, which began during the reign of Benedict XVI, is just what one would expect in the post-conciliar epoch: a refusal to state clearly that a proposition concerning the Faith is simply true or false, right or wrong.

This ridiculous report “splits the difference” between a declaration that the apparitions alleged by the six Medjugorje “seers” are not supernatural in origin and thus a fake, and a declaration — like those pertaining to Fatima — that the apparitions are of supernatural origin and thus worthy of belief. In other words: the apparitions are both true and false, depending on which ones you examine! If only it were a joke.

Catholic News Agency provides an overview of this preposterous approach: the first seven “apparitions,” allegedly occurring between June 24 and July 3, 1981, drew “13 votes in favor of recognizing the supernatural nature of the first visions. A member voted against and an expert expressed a suspensive vote….”

What about the thousands of apparitions thereafter, which allegedly continue to this day at pre-announced times even though the “visionaries” said they would end, and which are filled with repetition, banalities and statements by “the Virgin” positively contrary to the Faith?  For example, in one apparition “the Virgin” states: “Before God all the faiths are identical.  God governs them like a king in his kingdom.”

Here the Commission adopted an utterly absurd two-step analysis that allowed it to avoid declaring the whole Medjugorje event a fake:

“On this second stage, the committee voted in two steps. Firstly, taking into account the spiritual fruits of Medjugorje but leaving aside the behaviors of the seers. On this point, 3 members and 3 experts say there are positive outcomes, 4 members and 3 experts say they are mixed, with a majority of positive effects, and the remaining 3 experts claim there are mixed positive and negative effects.

“If, in addition to the spiritual fruits, the behaviors of the seers is also taken into account, eight members and four experts believe that an opinion cannot be expressed, while two other members have voted against the supernatural nature of the phenomenon.”

So, when the analysis considers the behavior of the “visionaries,” the credibility of their supposed visions diminishes and no consensus even on “good fruits” emerges, although only two commission members are willing to state outright the obvious conclusion that the apparitions are not supernatural and thus are fakes. Yet these same “visionaries” are deemed credible respecting the first seven apparitions by 13 members of this laughable commission of hair-splitters.

In essence, the Commission (except for two members) has decided that the “visionaries” were telling the truth regarding the first seven “apparitions” but that, since then, they have been conducting the longest running fraud in the history of Marian apparitions, concerning which the Commission labors to avoid expressing the truth openly. And these six fraudsters are supposedly the chosen messengers of the Mother of God.

If only it were a joke. Well, it is a joke, but the Vatican is evidently going to take this report seriously despite the objections expressed by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which will be ignored just as surely as they were respecting Amoris Laetitia. As Pope Bergoglio remarked concerning the Commission’s “split-decision” during the return flight to Rome after his visit to Fatima: “At the end of 2013 or the beginning of 2014, I received the results from Cardinal Ruini.  The commission was made up of good theologians, bishops and cardinals.  Good, good, good people.  The Ruini report is very, very good.”

What is “very, very good” according to Pope Bergoglio is the Commission’s bogus distinction between “the first apparitions, “when [the ‘seers’] were young” and “the alleged current apparitions” in which the Virgin is depicted as “a telegraph operator who sends out a message every day at a certain time… this is not the mother of Jesus.” Indeed, it is not. Nor could it have been in 1981, for the Mother of God does not appear to people whom She would certainly foresee would perpetrate a decades-long fraud on the Church and the world in Her name.

Curiously, the same Pope Bergoglio who belittles what he views as the hairsplitting of theologians on matters as fundamental as the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist, suddenly finds merit in the hairsplitting of this absurd theological commission respecting the manifest fakery of the Medjugorje apparitions. But then Pope Bergoglio has never failed to be consistent in his inconsistency.

And so, the anti-Fatima apparition gains ground, while the Message of Fatima is reduced by the Pope himself to a prescription for social justice and peace among people of all religions or no religion at all. What an insult to the Virgin Mother of God, Whose warning to the Church and all of humanity at Fatima continues to be spurned by the blind guides of the upper hierarchy, who march triumphantly toward the edge of the abyss into which they would lead the rest of us.   Source – fatima.org

Comments invited…