The Mystery of the Missing Tweet: English & Welsh Bishops Support Transgenderism – Dissent Prohibited…

Image

From Lifesitenews… 

The tweet was welcomed by American LGBT activist Father James Martin, SJ., who tweeted in response, “I join with the Catholic Bishops of England and Wales in praying for all transgender people, especially those who are persecuted in any way. May you know that you are all God’s beloved children.”

However, English Catholics were less enthusiastic at what some construed as a blurring of Catholic doctrine on human sexuality.
Author and speaker Father Marcus Holden responded to the bishops’ tweet by saying that the secular holiday is part of an “ideological colonisation”:

While we must pray for everyone who has died and fight against persecutions of any group of vulnerable people, ‘Transgender Remembrance Day’ is part of an ‘ideological colonisation’ which Catholics cannot support,” he wrote. “I’m surprised to see this here.”
The English priest concluded with a link to the wikipedia page about the secular, pro-LGBT innovation.
Click here to read the rest of this report, and to reach the links in the above extract…

 

Catholic Truth Comment: 

In a separate development, I received news of a deleted tweet.  Get this, folks.  The Ordinariate of Our Lady of  Walsingham, posted its own tweet (see below), dissociating the Ordinariate from the Bishops’ support for this scandalous celebration of transgenderism (for that is, make no mistake about it, what is going on – this is the usual devious “let’s pray for these persecuted people” way of communicating support for sexual deviancy) only to find themselves (we must assume) rebuked and ordered to remove their perfectly legitimate tweet. Not only is it a perfectly legitimate tweet, but a dutiful tweet.  If they were not ordered to delete it, why would they?  And who ordered them? Who put pressure on them to delete the tweet below?  Do they no longer wish to be dissociated from this statement from the Bishops of England and Wales?  Are they now supportive? What then?

Catholic Truth wholly endorses the content of the deleted tweet, and we will send a link to this blog discussion to the Ordinariate, for their information and to signal our support for their absolutely praiseworthy attempt to stand up for the Faith and true Morals in the face of this latest scandal from the Bishops of England & Wales, as they continue to push the LGBT+++ agenda.   The link is also being sent to the Bishops of England & Wales via their website. 

 

35 responses

  1. Since Cardinal Nichols & Co. supported the Soho Masses and Civil Partnerships quite openly, why should they not support transgenderism?

    I’m disappointed that the Ordinariate deleted their tweet, no doubt under pressure from the archdiocese, but that’s only to be expected, I’m afraid. I’ve always had my reservations about them – wanting to bring their own religion with them when they “converted”, LOL! So, it can’t be much of a surprise that they will go along to get along with the bishops even on such a hugely important moral issue.

    • Lily,

      I don’t know much at all about the Ordinariate, so I can’t say that you’re wrong, but I doubt if they could “bring their own religion with them” when they converted. I remember hearing something about them being allowed to keep bits of their liturgy. That’s surely not the end of the world? They certainly know more about Catholic morals than the Catholic bishops who are tweeting to support transgender celebrations!

      • Margaret Mary,

        I remember hearing something about them being allowed to keep bits of their liturgy. That’s surely not the end of the world?

        I agree with you and do not think it is a big issue. I view it as similar to how the dominicans have their own version of the latin rite, for example. I have been to a dominican rite mass and, while there were some obvious differences, it was still very easy for me to follow and understand.

        From what I understand, the patrimony the Ordinariate Liturgy comes from is ultimately the Sarum Rite (“Salisbury use”) which was the form of mass in (what is now) the UK, prior to the reformation. From one or two things I have read, I think the Sarum Rite itself is growing in popularity among the Ordinariate.

  2. Good for the Ordinariate – obviously there was pressure put upon them to delete it.

    I imagine that the organ of the CBCEW which put out this tweet was “Familias”. They are the “Marriage & Family Life” dept. of the CBCEW. All the diocesan Marriage & Family Life co-ordinators in England & Wales are supposedly members and/or take direction from this organization.

    In other news which went around Twitter earlier this month, it appears that at the National Conference of Familias (a couple of weeks ago) all the diocesan representatives were encouraged to check out a new Catechetical resource for Marriage & Family Life for use in their dioceses. A resource not from a Catholic source such as the marvellous Maryvale course in catechetics, but a resource from the Methodist “church”.

    Imagine the stink which ensued when this “breach of confidentiality” found its way onto Twitter!!!

    But these are the kind of neomarxist 5th columnists which infest the Catholic Church in these islands and you can bet your life that they are into “transgenderism” like they are into Communion for the divorced and remarried and every other perversion of truth that you can think of. I don’t know whether the bishops control them or whether they control the bishops. I suspect the latter.

    • Deacon Augustine,

      That’s always been my feeling about Bishops – that they are being controlled by self-styled experts. They are being played like a violin, and they don’t actually see it.

      It’s shocking that people who are into evil perversions like LGB + transgenderism, are in any position of influence over the Catholic hierarchy. I know it’s been going on for years but it still shocks me every time I think about it.

      • Margaret Mary,

        Well exactly. Its pretty obvious that most bishops don’t get selected for their intelligence and knowledge of the Faith. “Not rocking the boat” seems to be the major KPI that is sought after. They just need to do as they are told and admire the way in which the Holy Father incarnates the presence of the Holy Spirit for us. Schlurrp, sclurrrrp.

    • I suspect ( pardon the pun ) that their all in Bed with each other . Surely it’s time that We told these Apostate Clergymen no more money to go on your nice Holidays and Sinnods and Scratch each Others Backs . Either teach the Catholic Faith or go to the Methodists for we certainly don’t want you . And as for The Transgender Day what about the Thousands of Lives and Souls this movement has corrupted. The only good thing about them is that they and The Practicing Sodomites are fighting with each other to see who takes Front Stage in those Awful Pride Things.

      • Have you ever noticed the incongruity?:

        Homosexual: “God made me this way and God doesn’t make mistakes!”

        Transgender: “I am really this other way and God does make mistakes!”

        • Have you ever noticed this incongruity?:

          Government: we deny people with unwanted same-sex attraction the right to undergo any form of therapy to alleviate their condition.

          Government: we fully affirm the right of anyone to change their gender or define themselves however they wish, with full access to whatever ‘therapeutic’ or surgical procedure is necessary for them to achieve their desire.

  3. I am the Communications Officer for the Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham

    1) The tweet you refer to was not an official Tweet of the Ordinariate; neither I, the Ordinary, any of the Ordinariate clergy nor anyone in an official position in the Ordinariate had any knowledge of the Tweet before it was published.

    2) The individual who tweeted it has in the past acted as a volunteer on our social media sites and had the necessary password to post on Twitter. Having posted their own opinion they realised their mistake long before it came to my attention and themselves deleted the tweet shortly after posting it. They have since emailed me to apologise and request that I remove their access to the accounts.

    3) This morning, having been sent screen shots of the tweet I immediately secured the account as I had no idea where the tweet had come from.

    4) Had it still been there I would have removed the tweet because it claimed to be what it is not – an official statement of the Ordinariate’s position. The Ordinariate does not yet have an official position on ‘Transgender Remembrance Day’ as no one in the Ordinariate had heard of it until it was mentioned in the post on the Bishops’ Conference account. We have not had any opportunity to even consider it, let alone formally respond. We are seeking to discover where the idea of publicising this so called ‘remembrance day’ came from and on whose authority it was published.

    5) I have had no correspondence, in any form, from anyone outside the Ordinariate other than a request for a statement from a reporter from the Catholic Herald. No rebuke, complaint or any other comment.

    6) The overwhelming majority of the Ordinariate clergy who I have spoken to strongly oppose the attempts to impose on society a gender ideology that is clearly contrary to Catholic teaching. Some of those regret that the tweet was removed by its author. Others expressed concern over the tone of the tweet which seemed to reject praying for those caught up in the confusion that is being caused.

    In brief, the tweet referred to did not originate from any official Ordinariate channel, and was deleted by the author; neither its appearance nor disappearance should be taken as indicating in any way the views of the Ordinariate. The Ordinariate fully supports the Catholic understanding of the body and sexuality laid down in the Catechism of the Catholic Church and looks to individual Catholics and Catholic organisations to do the same.

    • Fr. Chinery, thank you for your clarification.

      I note that you say: “We are seeking to discover where the idea of publicising this so called ‘remembrance day’ came from and on whose authority it was published.”

      If you are successful in discovering this fact, you would be doing enormous service to the whole Catholic Church in these islands if you were to make that information public.

      God bless you in all your work.

    • Father Chinery,

      Thank you for your prompt explanation of how the tweet came to be posted and removed. I am very grateful for that, and for your concluding assurance that “the Ordinariate fully supports [Catholic teaching] on sexuality…”

      I am just a little disconcerted, though, by this remark:

      “The Ordinariate does not yet have an official position on ‘Transgender Remembrance Day’ as no one in the Ordinariate had heard of it until it was mentioned in the post on the Bishops’ Conference account. We have not had any opportunity to even consider it, let alone formally respond.”

      With much respect, I would say, in response, that, in terms of events held to promote any aspect of the LGBT++ agenda, there can only be one Catholic response – “No way!” The criticism that, by condemning actions, we, thereby, lack compassion for individual people or are condemning them, as persons, is disingenuous.

      It is heartening, in any case, to read that members of the Ordinariate clergy were keen that the tweet should remain. God bless them!

      The person who posted the tweet was correct in what he/she wrote; there is a clear question mark over the Catholicity of whoever penned that supportive tweet for an event celebrating transgenderism, and if that means the entire Bishops’ Conference is implicated – so be it.

      As for the “tone” of the now deleted tweet possibly suggesting a rejection of a willingness to pray for “those caught up in the confusion” – not remotely. The tweet was nothing more than a short, to the point entirely correct statement.

      When the Church condemns sin, as you know, it’s because of her love for souls, and the desire that no soul is lost. It seems to me that, more than ever these days, we need much more “tone” along the lines of the highly unpopular Old Testament prophets. Not more politically correct snow-flakery…

      Whatever was going on at the Transgender Day of Remembrance, we can be certain that nobody was condemning it as unnatural and thus, unhealthy, let alone completely opposed to God’s plan for human beings; nobody was identifying it as an outright attack on our humanity, a logical extension of the normalising of homosexual activity. Nope. we can bet money that nobody was saying any of that. Certainly not the Catholic Bishops of England & Wales (or Scotland, for that matter).

      Anyway, sorry for the sermon. Bet you’re glad, now, that women can’t be ordained!

      • Great response Ed I personally don’t think that an apology should have been offered for the Tweet maybe that’s one of the reasons am permanently in my own name Banned off of Twitter and for good measure Facebook also . Of course all those moderates of the LGBTQ2WXYZ mob are now just so nice I can see why they say us Catholics and other Christians use so called Hate Speech. One actually came on to me about Hate Speech and I said that I have NEVER hated anyone in my life . Hate is a very strong word. Do I dislike many people personally yes as it is surely my right ( of course that’s diminishing by the Day ) . Funny how the ones who attacked my so called Hate Speech weren’t paragons of virtue themselves. God Bless. J. D .

        • FOOF,

          They use “hate” deliberately to intimidate us, to force us to keep quiet about our concerns and objections to their unnatural behaviour. Your response is the one I always give: I’ve never hated any person in my life, not the worst murderer or robber in history: but I stop short at condoning their behaviour… That shuts them up… well, for about ten seconds.

          Anyway, as a reward for the first two words of your latest post, directed at my unworthy self, I thought I would reassure you as to the quality of our wonderful friendship…

      • Editor,

        I couldn’t agree more. I detected a sense of “semi-autonomy” in Father’s post. This is the problem with these modern innovations, like the Ordinariate. These Anglicans were allowed to enter “Full Communion” without properly converting. How can you truly convert when you are determined to hold onto the trappings of your man-made religion?

        The post from the priest above highlights this problem beautifully. On the other hand they claim to accept the catechism, but on the other hand the Ordinariate still needs to decide its position? Doesn’t make sense to me and doesn’t sound very Catholic.

        I truly believe that once the Church authorities return to their sense, the Ordinariate will be disbanded and the priests and people will need to make a stark choice – become a true Catholic, which means ditching the trappings of Anglicanism, or go your separate ways.

        • I think you do an injustice to the Ordinariates. Those “trappings of Anglicanism” they brought with them are far closer to the trappings of Catholicism than the trappings of the Novus Ordo Church. That is because those trappings are themselves relics of the pre-reformation Catholic Church in England i.e. the Sarum Rite. Sarum was one of those rites which received a privileged status from St Pius V’s Quo Primum by virtue of its antiquity. Had there been no “reformation” in these islands then we would probably still be using Sarum in some form today – south of the wall at any rate.

          “Semi-autonomy” was the whole point of the set up in the first place. They did not want to be under the thumb of the English Catholic bishops and Pope Benedict fully understood the reasons why. What would be the point of becoming Catholic only to be put under the control of protestant bishops? Under the last two pontificates it was understood that there was a de facto schism between the English bishops and Rome in terms of doctrine, morals and liturgy. Now Rome has become more protestant than Westminster.

          The Ordinariate churches have become a liturgical refuge for Catholics who do not have access to the TLM. At least there they can have the Mass said ad orientem using the Roman Canon and not be subjected to vile folk music.

          • Deacon Augustine,

            Had there been no “reformation” in these islands then we would probably still be using Sarum in some form today – south of the wall at any rate.

            Probably it would still be in use across the British Isles, as it was pre-reformation.

            The first book ever to be printed in Scotland, the Aberdeen Breviary, was created by King James IV after he realised the Sarum Breviary was an English creation and wanted Scotland to have its own version.

            (He must have been the Alex Salmond of his day – haha!)

            This article is interesting and points about number of similarities between the Sarum and Dominican rites:

            http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13479a.htm

            • Gabriel Syme,

              Thank you for that information. I never knew that the first book to be printed in Scotland was a Breviary!

          • Deacon Augustine,

            Whilst I see some merit in what you say, to hold onto the trappings of Anglicanism is surely to cling to the liturgical vandalism of Thomas Cranmer?

            • Petrus,

              That is true in part. Cranmer vandalized the Sarum rite of Mass to create his Book of Common Prayer and the “Communion Service” contained therein. That vandalization of the rite took the form of removing all those parts which spoke to the sacrificial nature of the Mass and the priest being a sacrificing priest as opposed to a minister in the Anglican understanding of the term.

              So, if you take what he did but then re-catholicize the rite in all important respects (by inserting sacrificial offertory prayers, the Canon etc.) then what you end up with is a rite which is once again fully Catholic in doctrine and intent, but which retains some of the beautiful English which Cranmer composed.

              One of their groups which I attended shortly before they swam the Tiber used the English Missal which was effectively the 1920 Roman Missal translated into English. Unfortunately the Vatican did not permit the continued use of that (no doubt for ideological reasons) but both “options” which they used had an infinitely better pedigree than the Novus Ordo Missae.

              Without wanting to drop anybody in it, there are parts of this country where you are far more likely to find the 1962 Missal in use in an Ordinariate church than you are in a diocesan church.

              • Sorry, Deacon, but no amount of beautiful liturgy will convince me that the Ordinariate is [not] an innovation. The liturgy used by the Ordinariate is not the Sarum Use. It may be similar, but, strictly speaking it’s not the same.

                Beautiful liturgy is NOT enough. The post from the Ordinariate priest is proof enough that they are suspect. Couple that with silly innovations like the “Ordinary” wearing all the trappings of a bishop in the afternoon and then eating tea with his wife in the evening. No, I prefer authentic Catholicism and not half-baked Anglicanism.

      • Editor,

        With much respect, I would say, in response, that, in terms of events held to promote any aspect of the LGBT++ agenda, there can only be one Catholic response – “No way!”

        You took the words right out of my [less tactful] mouth. This business about an “official position” on that scandalous Tweet is absurd, if one is truly Catholic. Apparently this Ordinariate is just as much of a rear-end-covering bureaucracy as the Vatican.

        But there was another sentence in Father’s response that caught my troubled eye:

        6) The overwhelming majority of the Ordinariate clergy who I have spoken to strongly oppose the attempts to impose on society a gender ideology that is clearly contrary to Catholic teaching.

        Overwhelming majority? Not unanimous? In other words, there are corrupt clerical moles in this Ordinariate as well. Where is the disciplinary action against them?

        Finally, God bless the volunteer who posted that Tweet. That person might just be the most faithful Catholic in the Ordinariate.

  4. Sadly, nothing will surprise me any longer about the chicanery of the Catholic bishops in England and Wales. This latest episode is simply a further refinement of the squalor into which these men are blundering. Like the C of E hierarchy before them, they are putting on the cloak of fashionable conformism and hurrying to catch up with the triumphal Parade of this new Cultural Revolution. They’re too blind to realise its not a parade they join but a Gadarene stampede to Lunacy.

  5. Who controls the English Bishops twitter feed and so is responsible for their appalling message?

    The lack of transparency – and thus accountability – is how they get away with this rubbish. Francis would be proud.

    It would have been easy enough to show concern and care for troubled or persecuted persons, without having to refer to ideological constructs (like this “day of remembrance”) or talk rubbish by implying it is possible to “change gender”.

    A sad sign of the times that it is allowed to remain while a good and dutiful (if unauthorised) response from the Ordinariate account is deleted. And how sad to think that there is an air of controversy over the condemnation of rubbish.

  6. Here’s another “sign of the times” Gabriel Syme et al, Truly, it’s difficult to know whether to laugh or cry…

    A shocking appointment by CAFOD. This from the Catholic Herald, making clear the support of the Catholic Bishops for this appalling appointment:

    Cafod has announced that Christine Allen will take over as director in the spring. Allen, who is currently director of policy and public affairs at Christian Aid, will follow Chris Bain in leading the official aid agency for the Church in England and Wales.

    But Cafod was forced to defend Allen’s suitability for the role after concerns were raised about her past record. In 2002, Progressio, the charity Allen led, endorsed the use of condoms in HIV prevention. Four years later, in an article for Chartist magazine, Allen criticised Catholic teaching on contraception, which she said “simply doesn’t stack up when it comes to HIV”. The contest between supporters and opponents of Church teaching, Allen, said, was fundamental: “The battle between these factions is about the very nature of church.”

    Allen also seems to oppose Church teaching on homosexuality: she has liked tweets in favour of redefining marriage, including one which described the Episcopalian Church’s acceptance of same-sex marriage as “Progress”.

    Asked whether her views were compatible with leading a Catholic agency, and whether she thought abortion was always wrong, Allen told the Catholic Herald: “I understand the expectations on me in this role, and my commitment to Catholic teaching is undimmed.” [Ed: see what I mean when I say, one doesn’t know whether to laugh or cry at this craziness?]

    Cafod’s board of trustees, when asked whether the appointment was likely to alienate Catholics and hurt donations, said: “Christine Allen has been asked her views as part of Cafod’s due diligence process and has satisfied the Trustees that she will uphold Catholic teaching and values.”

    John Smeaton, chief executive of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, said: “This is a surprising appointment to say the least. Progressio, the international charity led by Christine Allen for 11 years, has a simply appalling record on matters relating to the Catholic Church and Catholic teaching.”

    Smeaton observed that, during Allen’s tenure, Progressio partnered with two organisations (COMUS and Fundacion Puntos de Encuentro) which have joined a campaign to remove the Church’s status as a UN Permanent Observer.

    Bishop John Arnold, chair of Cafod’s trustees, praised Allen’s “vision, energy, and deep-rooted faith and commitment to Catholic values”. Plaudits also came from Sarah Teather, the former government minister and current leader of Jesuit Refugee Service UK, who tweeted: “This is cracking news. I let out a whoop!”

    Allen said she felt she was “coming home”, having discovered Catholic social teaching when she first worked for Cafod. She described herself as “humbled” to lead Cafod, which she called “a powerful witness of love in a world of greed and selfishness, as we seek to end the injustices of poverty, inequality and environmental exploitation”.
    https://catholicherald.co.uk/news/2018/11/22/cafod-defends-appointment-of-christine-allen-as-director/

    Truly, you could not make this stuff up.

  7. Well, when we see the likes of Katy Perry and Bono invited to the Vatican, should we really be surprised at the latest CAFOD appointment? To reiterate what I said recently on another thread, these guys are hand-picked in order to challenge, if not overturn, the Church’s traditional teachings.

    CAFOD (and for that matter, SCIAF) needn’t come rattling their begging bowl in my direction – unless they want me to throw up in it.

  8. Not having heard of CAFOD before, I had a look at their Mission Statement & Values. The text mentions “justice” and “ecology” at least as often as Francis mentions “rigid.” This appears to be a typical leftist mutation of the Catholic Faith that occurs when its followers endeavor to accomplish what Our Dearest Lord said could not be accomplished: put an end to poverty (Mt. 26:11)

    Their counterpart on this side of the pond is probably the CCHD, Catholic Campaign for Human Development, which is notorious for chronically (i.e. annually, despite being exposed by the Lepanto Institute) granting funds to pro-homosexual, pro-abortion groups, and/or groups with ties to those grave sins.

    Given the questionable nature of this appointment, I have to wonder what CAFOD’s Trustees consider “upholding Catholic teaching and values.” Maybe we should ask them if they approve of “Transgender Remembrance Day.”

  9. N O T I C E . . .

    This is a message addressed to the person who persistently submits comments which indicate that he is about as Catholic as the nearest Imam. I have not, nor will I, release his posts from moderation, not least because his username links to his own site which is manifestly sedevacantist.

    To this gentleman I say…

    Read our House Rules, please, and respect the fact that we do not waste our time discussing sedevacantism, precisely because – contrary to what you say – we are NOT “a fake Catholic site”.

    We do not have the authority, and so we do not have any duty, to investigate the validity of papal elections. Our duty is the same Confirmation duty of Catholics in every generation: to defend the faith against heresy and error, and that is what we try to do on this blog.

    Now, thank you for your interest in our humble efforts but I would urge you not to waste your time submitting comments here, as they will not be published.

    Have a nice weekend – God bless you.

  10. We live in a strange world when , if you chop your arm or leg off you are mentally ill. But if you do the same to reproductive organs, it’s somehow a right.

%d bloggers like this: