Archbishop of Glasgow: Most Catholics Faithless, But No Return To Tradition…

Archbishop Philip Tartaglia, Glasgow

A Lent challenge: Do I really believe? (From March 2020 edition of Flourish)

I believe in miracles … do you? That’s the powerful question asked by Archbishop Tartaglia this month as Lent begins in earnest. In a powerful interview with Flourish, Glasgow’s Archbishop calls for a new effort at fostering devotion to the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist and a renewed sense of the sacred.
Editor:  Why’s that, then?  Why the need for “a new effort… devotion… Real Presence… sense of the sacred…”?  Whatever happened to the “old” devotion and sense of the sacred? Could it be that the “success” of the ecumenical and inter-faith focus of the Church has led to practical indifferentism among the faithful who now believe that one religion / denomination is as good as another, that we’re all going to Heaven, no need to be “dogmatic” about anything? Jesus loves us and we don’t need “organised religion” any more.  Just a thought.

The Archbishop spoke after a recent survey in the US showed only 30 per cent of Catholics fully accepted the doctrine of transubstantiation, namely the bread and wine offered at Mass truly become the body and blood of Christ at the moment of consecration.
Editor:  Which means that 70% do NOT believe in transubstantiation… How did that happen, then?

Archbishop Tartaglia speaks frankly in the interview about the liturgical and catechetical mistakes which followed Vatican II and acknowledges that “the Church has gone through testing times in the post-conciliar period, much of it self-inflicted. There has been bad catechesis and bad theology around the Eucharist, with the result that many people cannot articulate the Church’s faith in the Eucharist even in simple terms.”
Editor:  well, Glory Hallelujah! That is some admission. Every word a jewel.  At long last, Archbishop. Still, a wee apology after the spirit of the age would be good. It’s called “taking responsibility”.  And then let’s see some action! Sacking the entire staff at the Scottish Catholic Education Service  plus reinstating Thomism in seminaries would be a start:  producing theologically literate priests and teachers can only help…

He adds starkly: “Many supportive elements of our practice, like fasting and genuflection and kneeling, and devotional prayers and practices, have been neglected. None of this has helped to nourish the faith of the People of God in the Most Holy Eucharist.”
Editor:  “genuflection and kneeling” don’t come naturally to those who think of Our Lord as merely their “brother” and who –  as the Archbishop now acknowledges  – lack belief in His Real Presence.  Who, after all, ordered the tabernacles to be placed out of sight (and thus out of mind, as the saying goes), along with the removal of altar rails and kneelers, because it is that person who bears massive responsibility before God for causing and maintaining the apostasy which Pope John Paul II once described as “silent”, but which is now screaming from the rooftops. 

But the Archbishop is clear that the answer is not a return to the past or a rejection of the liturgical changes of Vatican II.
Editor: WRONG!  How on earth does the Archbishop think we got to the stage where the vast majority of Catholics, by his own admission, do not believe in a central dogma of the Faith – the Real Presence – if not as a result of  “the liturgical changes of Vatican II”?   This has to be a rhetorical question because the answer is so painfully obvious. 
­­

He says: “The Novus Ordo, the ‘new’ Mass, is not a defective form of the Mass. Its structure is based soundly on the great liturgical tradition. Its theology is orthodox. Like any other form of the Mass, when celebrated well, it more fully achieves God’s purpose. When celebrated poorly, it obscures God’s purpose.”
Editor:  So the poor faithful are to be left at the mercy of the priest, hoping he does not “obscure God’s purpose”… What?!  The new Mass is definitely defective.  Its structure is totally contradictory to “the great liturgical tradition”: for example, never before in the entire history of the Church has the priest faced the congregation at Mass throughout. This is but one, highly distracting, innovation, one departure from Catholic Tradition which totally “obscures  God’s purpose” in the Mass and turns it into an entertainment platform, and in some cases, a circus.  So seriously did certain Cardinals regard this novel Mass, recognising that it was truly defective, that they wrote to Pope Paul VI, arguing that “…the Novus Ordo represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent. The “canons” of the rite definitively fixed at that time provided an insurmountable barrier to any heresy directed against the integrity of the Mystery.” To read the entire letter/critique, click here

And he reminds readers that the teaching of the Church has been clear and unchanging in recent decades: “There has been good and faithful catechesis and teaching on the Eucharist during the post-Vatican II era, starting from Pope St Paul VI. His successors Pope St John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI taught firmly and beautifully on the Mass and on the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Most Holy Eucharist.
Editor:  So, how come the majority of Catholics have lost the Faith – a fact which the Archbishop acknowledges?

“Pope Francis summed up the Church’s teaching simply and powerfully last year on the feast of Corpus Christi: ‘Whenever we approach the altar to receive the Eucharist, we must truly renew our ‘amen’ to the Body of Christ… It is Jesus, it is Jesus who saved me, it is Jesus who comes to give me the strength to live. It is Jesus alive.’”
Editor:  is that it?  Hardly an explanation, let alone a ringing endorsement, of transubstantiation – but merely a vague pious statement to which any Protestant could subscribe.  Protestants who believe that they receive Christ “spiritually” in their bread and wine, could pray those words.

And he ended his interview with a cry of hope … “There is no pastoral plan that can fix this situation without insisting upon a renewed and profound faithfulness to Christ and to his Gospel. The answer will depend on much more faithful preaching and teaching at all levels which will lay out for the faithful the truth, beauty and wonder of the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist so that they may receive him in Holy Communion with faith and devotion for the salvation of their souls.
Editor:  can’t argue with that – but how is this “more faithful preaching and teaching at all levels…”  to be achieved? There’s plenty of piously “hopeful” rhetoric coming from the Archbishop in this interview, but precious little in the way of concrete planning to put right the indiscipline, errors, liturgical and catechetical abuses of the past 50 plus years. And the check list below, really doesn’t offer any of that pious “hope”.  Apparently this “more faithful preaching and teaching at all levels” will be achieved as follows:

• It will be expressed in more obedient and authentic liturgy.
Editor:  that can only mean the traditional Latin Mass, offered in every parish in the archdiocese – a solution rejected by the Archbishop. 

• It will be accompanied by a much greater response to Vatican II’s universal call to holiness from all sectors of the Church.
Editor:  if “Vatican II’s universal call to holiness” is different from the perennial call to holiness of the Church since apostolic times, let’s hear it. It is, in fact, this heresy – that the Church only really began at Vatican II, with the arrival of the Holy Ghost at the Council – that has led to the current decline.

• It will demand a true conversion to the moral and social teaching of the Church.
Editor:  true.  Which will require priests and bishops to openly preach true morals, deny pro-abortion politicians Holy Communion and refuse to permit scandalous funerals, such as the very public funerals of partnered homosexuals which have taken place in Glasgow in recent years.  And in terms of the social teaching of the Church – that means priests and bishops preaching that, at the heart of Catholic Social Teaching is the belief that Christ must be at the head of every nation under Heaven. The Church is not an arm of the Social Work Department. She cannot support immoral national laws, in the name of Catholic Social Teaching.

• It will be based on a much more frequent and respectful practice around Mass, the Sacraments and an increased sensitivity to the sphere of the sacred.
Editor: that brings us full circle back to the need to restore that which has been lost – the traditional Latin Mass, and, in the meantime, an end to the various liturgical abuses now normalised – such as Communion in the hand, drinking from the Chalice and lay people playing at being priests.  We want rid of Extraordinay Ministers of Holy Communion:  when do we want it? NOW! 

• It will be supported by much more prayer, devotion and penance.
Editor:  once the traditional liturgy has been restored, “all these other things will be given to you”, to (kinda) quote the Gospel.

Its source and outcome will be a greater faith, hope and charity. It may well take a miracle of grace and conversion to restore our Eucharistic faith … but thankfully, I believe in miracles.”
Editor: yes, it will take a miracle, which is why we, at Catholic Truth, never lose sight of the need for the Pope and all the Bishops of the world to unite in consecrating Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, as Our Lady requested.  Until then, as we can see from the above interview (notwithstanding his honest admission of the dire state of the Church on his watch)  Archbishop Tartaglia is still in denial as to the only way to put matters right, which is the restoration of all things in Christ; in other words, he must give us back what modernist churchmen have taken from us in the past half-century – our Catholic heritage.  The spiritual blindness which we are witnessing in the post-Vatican II churchmen from the top down, continues to display itself in interviews such as this, where the Archbishop just cannot see that it is only when the Traditional Faith in its theological and liturgical purity is restored, that his “miracle” will be achieved. Source – March 2020 edition of Flourishofficial publication of the Archdiocese of Glasgow.

Comments invited…

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us!

22 responses

  1. WHEN was the last time your Cino Novis Ordo bishop in the Media or From the Pulpit Enunciated Let Alone Promoted the [Catholic] faith on Sexual Morals and Or the Churches Teaching on Abortion Drugs-Contraception?? They the cino bishops are too busy Covering up and Advancing Homosexual Deviants Like Grassi, Zunchetta And Cocopalmeiro of Arg.,,McCarrick and Hubbard plus Martin of Amer. Mgz….. No Knowledge of the Real Prescence when you hide the Tabernacle off to the Sde by the Little Promoted Confessional.. Or Pass Out the host like Pringle Chips in your hand. Seriously- Are you novis Ordo Bishops in Scotland, USA etc. or the Vatican oblivious or what !!! Yikes..

    • Ed Mulrenan,

      Our Scottish bishops don’t act against homosexuality at all. They have approved the embedding of LGBT rights in Catholic schools and the only priest I have read of who has been suspended, is a priest (not in Glasgow diocese) who wrote a book exposing the homosexual clergy working with the approval of the bishops in Scotland. He is still suspended, several years on, even though his book was removed from sale by Amazon at the time of the furore.

      A big funeral was held in Glasgow for a lawyer who lived with his gay partner and the priest officiating repeatedly referred to the partner, with his sympathy, during the service. Archbishop Tartaglia is speaking with a forked tongue in the above interview, I’m sad and sorry to say.

      He’ll never return the traditional Mass to its rightful place – that really would take a miracle!

  2. Few have the humility to admit mistakes such as letting go of Tradition. May be there’s a way we can help. Instead of saying go back to or return to Tradition let’s find another way to achieve the aim whilst minimising their hurt pride.
    What about more positive phrases such as moving forward to Tradition or rediscovering the Faith? This could achieve the objective without being seen to backtrack I.e. take another route.

    • Ruddy Famer,

      I’m not interested in minimising their hurt pride. They weren’t interested in the effect of bringing in all their “reforms” at the Council, a new Mass overnight, so they need to suck it up, if their pride is hurt. Their hurt pride versus lost souls, is no contest.

      • Lily
        I think you misunderstand my comments. Every person has a soul to save. if those who follow Tradition can find a way to bring non-Tradition catholics back to the fold, then that is a duty on all of us. I was merely suggesting how that could be done.

        • Ruddy Farmer,

          I understand. Sorry if I sounded harsh but I’ve no patience with the Scottish bishops of the bishops of England and Wales. I take your point, though, but however carefully it is suggested, the modernists just won’t go for it. I think we do what they did in the 1960’s – return to the “old” ways as a matter of urgency before there are no young people left in the Church.

          • Lily,

            I agree. There are precious few young people in the Church at this time, so goodness knows what the future will be like, the way things are going.

  3. Archbishop Tartaglia has made absolutely no progress in the last decade. In 2008 I wrote to him about the abuses in the New Mass and the detrimental impact it had on my faith. He initially appeared sympathetic, but basically said the same as he had in the interview above. What a damning self indictment!

    • Petrus,

      I agree. Archbishop Tartaglia isn’t interested in hearing from anyone who questions the modernist agenda. He is one of those who doesn’t see Christ as the Saviour any more, or if he does, he doesn’t say so loud enough. Jesus is just a kind of “ideal” human being. All he seems to care about it keeping in tune with the secular law.

      For example, he once said we would have to be ready to stand up and be counted against the advance of the LGBT groups, yet, as Laura points out above, he allows public funerals for gays, with their partners present. I remember reading about that funeral of a well known Glasgow lawyer. The priest mentioned the partner every time he mentioned the deceased man’s parents. It was shocking because well known public figures were present.

      I’m not impressed with the interview at all. I don’t think he’s being particularly honest, he’s just accepting the reality that the majority of people in his archdiocese, don’t believe in the Real Presence. I would add that they don’t believe in anything Catholic, TBH.

  4. You have pretty much responded to Archbishop Tartaglia’s incredible statements with sound and indisputable answers in your thread introduction.

    Archbishop Tartaglia and his fellow Modernist prelates in the hierarchy have, for two generations now, done everything in their power to change the Catholic religion to make it less “offensive” to Protestants. Now they wonder why the faithful have largely become Protestant!

    In relation to the New Mass which Archbishop Tartaglia claims is theologically sound, it should be recalled that Father (later Archbishop) Annibale Bugnini, the chief architect of the Novus Ordo described the very opposite intention when, in 1965, he declared at the outset: “We must strip from our Catholic prayers and from the Catholic liturgy everything which can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethren that is for the Protestants.”

    What he did next with the approval of Paul VI was collaborate with six Protestant ministers, mostly Lutherans, to produce his New Order of Mass. In 1967 his completed Novus Ordo production was celebrated for the first time experimentally before a number of bishops gathered for the “Rome Synod”. These prelates were largely appalled by the experience and almost overwhelmingly rejected Bugnini’s rite.

    Following this, in 1969, the famous “Ottaviani Intervention” was written and presented to Pope Paul VI in which we find those damning words: “the Novus Ordo represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent. The “canons” of the rite definitively fixed at that time provided an insurmountable barrier to any heresy directed against the integrity of the Mystery…”

    It should be clarified here that while the aforementioned Intervention was presented to Paul VI by Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci, hence its title “Ottaviani Intervention”, it was actually the combined work of countless prelates, pastors of souls, liturgists and theologians, as the text itself reveals. I clarify this because the Modernists like to insinuate that it was the work of one disgruntled old Cardinal with no vision, which is completely false.

    At any rate, Bugnini himself confirmed the concerns of these holy prelates when, in 1974, he publicly declared that his New Mass represents: “a major conquest of the Catholic Church.”

    It is interesting here to note that Martin Luther once famously declared that in order to destroy the Catholic Church one would first have to destroy the Mass. I mention this because shortly after the New Mass was promulgated, Professor Peter L. Berger, a Lutheran sociologist, referencing Bugnini’s New Mass, declared: “If a thoroughly malicious sociologist, bent on injuring the Catholic community as much as possible had been an adviser to the Church, he could hardly have done a better job.”

    Expressing his opinion even more powerfully, the renowned Professor Dietrich von Hildebrand wrote: “Truly, if one of the devils in C.S. Lewis’ The Screwtape Letters had been entrusted with the ruin of the liturgy he could not have done it better.”

    It is little wonder then that Protestant ministers of every persuasion were delighted with the New Mass, asserting that they could and would happily participate in this new rite of Mass that removes all conscience objections for Protestants, by which they meant the abolition of clear references in the Mass to sacrifice and oblation for the remission of sins, the turning of priest from high altar facing God to table facing the people, the removal of altar rails, which, together with Communion in the hand, extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion, and now drinking from the chalice, are all indicators of a major shift from belief in Transubstantiation.

    As regards Communion in the hand, this abuse was illicitly introduced into the Church without the knowledge of the pope by the late Leo Cardinal Suenens of Belgium, a friend of Pope Paul VI.

    In response to the outrage, though not wishing to upset his friend, Paul VI wrote the Instruction Memoriale Domini in which he reasserted Church teaching and practice in the administration of Holy Communion, declaring that kneeling and receiving on the tongue remains the norm and discipline of the Church. Sadly, by granting an Indult for places where “the contrary usage” had become established (illicitly), and by further expanding that Indult to Bishops Conferences which petition Rome, the Modernists very quickly supplanted the Traditional Church discipline (still in force today) with universal Communion in the hand.

    They argue that this is a return to the authentic practice of the early Christians, however Bishop Athanasius Schneider, an expert in Patristics, in his book, ‘Dominus Est, it is the Lord’, demonstrates brilliantly that the source they have actually returned to is the practice of the Protestants following the Reformation.

    At any rate, Pius XII condemns their error of antiquarianism in his Encyclical Mediator Dei, wherein he states: “… one would be straying from the straight path were he to wish the altar restored to its primitive table form; were he to want black excluded as a colour for the liturgical vestments…etc.” (ring any bells!).

    Pius also laments in his Encyclical (Archbishop Tartaglia pay heed): “the temerity and daring of those who introduce novel liturgical practices, or call for the revival of obsolete rites out of harmony with prevailing laws and rubrics, deserve severe reproof. It has pained Us grievously to note, Venerable Brethren, that such innovations are actually being introduced, not merely in minor details but in matters of major importance as well. We instance, in point of fact, those who make use of the vernacular in the celebration of the august Eucharistic sacrifice; those who transfer certain feast-days – which have been appointed and established after mature deliberation – to other dates…” And as regards the Latin language: “… He then goes on to declare: “The use of the Latin language, customary in a considerable portion of the Church, is a manifest and beautiful sign of unity, as well as an effective antidote for any corruption of doctrinal truth…”

    Here are the reasons why so many Catholics have lost the faith, why vocations have dried up, why seminaries have closed all over the world, including all seminaries in Scotland, why religious orders have collapsed. It all comes back to ridding the parishes of the Mass of the saints and martyrs in favour of a Protestant-friendly alternative with manifest Protestant frills everywhere accompanying it, such as Communion in the hand, lay administration of Holy Communion by lay people, altar girls, drinking from the chalice, removal of kneelers and the tabernacle from its central place of honour in the Sanctuary, family-friendly chapels wherein loud conversations and hand shaking are encouraged, bowing instead of genuflecting, removal from Catholic prayers of all references to Hell, Purgatory, the merits of the saints, etc., obscuring the nature of the Mass by referring to it as “The Pascal Mystery”, the Eucharistic Celebration”, etc., in fact anything rather than “The Holy Sacrifice”.

    I could go on and on citing examples of how the Modernist prelates in the Church for two generations now have gradually emptied the Church of God, and are now well on their way to emptying it of faithful as well. They stand amidst the rubble and the ashes of their “reform” wringing their hands and wondering what became of that “New Pentecost” they were so convinced Almighty God had especially blessed them to deliver. It is blindness beyond belief, a true “diabolical disorientation” well worthy of the apocalyptic scenario described by Our Lady in the Third Secret of Fatima.

    Pope Paul VI, at the conclusion of Vatican II, spoke of Vatican II as representative of “a new humanism”. He was later to lament the “smoke of Satan” which had entered the Church, the result of supplanting the supernatural with the human, yet he couldn’t see it just as they can’t see it today. And it was all done in the name of Ecumenism, a heresy long condemned by the pre-Vatican II Popes who variously describe this false doctrine as “insanity” and “subversive of the Catholic religion”.

    In fact, Ecumenism, while being heralded by its proponents and peddlers as Christian charity, is the greatest possible act against charity, for it obscures and/or silences divine truths such as the infallbile dogma “Outside the Church no salvation”, thereby confirming, like smiling assassins, so many non-Catholics in false religions that cannot save their souls. Salvation is found only in the Church established by Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Catholic Church. When our Modernist bishops and Popes come back to affirming this divine truth then there will be hope for a restoration of all things in Christ. In the meantime we can but pray for these unfortunate Churchmen whilst cleaving with all our heart to Sacred Tradition.

    • Athanasius,

      You will be pleased, I hope, to know that in responding to an email request to assist a student with sources – a non-Catholic student writing a theology essay on the changes in the Church, specifically belief in the Eucharist, since Vatican II – I highlighted (among other sources) this thread and your comment in particular. Well, I didn’t need to do so because it had already been selected!

      So, thank you for putting all that information together in one place. A superb synopsis.

      • Editor

        That is good to know. All we need now is for Our Lord to touch the heart of said student and his readers with grace and we could see at least one or two conversions to the true religion. That would be beyond price.

  5. Apologies if my lengthy post above is a little rough around the edges, not as fluent as I would have liked, a bit repetitive and some spelling errors. I wrote it very quickly, mostly from memory, with one eye on my day job, so to speak. That’s my excuse anyway!

    • Athanasius,

      I wish I could write posts that were “rough around the edges” like that one, LOL!
      It’s brilliant, with so much extremely important information packed into it, very clear and easy to read. You reminded me of loads of stuff I’ve read before but can never remember when I try to tell other people! Thank you! I really like “rough around the edges”!

  6. A Church where almost 100% of belief iin the real presence has dropped to
    less than 30% can only be described as a joke.

    If Woolworths or Mothercare had been advised to go back 60 years to
    return to where they were they would have jumped at the chance.

    The new rules regarding communion in the hand has, sadly, left me as the only person in
    my church unable to receive the sacrament.

    I would argue that taking it on the tongue is a lot safer than in the hand.

    It is certainly a lot safer for Our Lord.

    • Frankier,

      You are right – if any business had failed the way the popes and bishops of the past 50 years have failed, there would be big questions to answer. They would do the obvious thing and look back to where it all changed, where it all went wrong and they would pull out all the stops to return to what made them successful. It’s not exactly rocket science, is it.

      I love your closing comment on Communion in the hand: absolutely, Communion on the tongue is safer for Our Lord.

      Well said, you!

  7. A very happy St Patrick’s Day to one and all.

    I usually post a thread dedicated to this Feast, in remembrance of our strong links to “Catholic Ireland”, but this year I just didn’t notice the time passing – Joe Biden eat your heart out 😀

    To make up for my neglect, then, and since the Church in Ireland is in similar decline to our situation here in Scotland (and the wider UK) I decided to post the lovely hymn to Our Lady of Knock as a prayer of reparation for the bishops of Ireland on whose shoulders rests the responsibility for the loss of divine and Catholic Faith in Ireland on their watch. St Patrick, pray for us! Our Lady of Knock, pray for us!

  8. GOD BLESS YOU!

    You should post on Twitter and post this link with a caption! We must move boldly on every social media for the TRUTH and the Restoration, Exaltation and Liberation of the Holy Cross. I am unable to Twitter it from this page!

    Christina ofs (Twitter handle) Pax Christi+

  9. It is absurd that +Tartaglia bemoans the lack of belief in the real presence, while in his own Cathedral the Tabernacle is hidden out of sight as if it were an embarrassment.

    True, it was his predecessor +Conti who did this, but with his ongoing failure to rectify the situation +Tartaglia is culpable too.

    He is also culpable for failure to improve catechesis, while moaning how poor it is, and for failing to normalise the methods of distributing and receiving communion in his diocese.

    Hiding the Tabernacle, EMHC and communion-in-the-hand are all major factors in the corrosion of Catholic belief.

    The Tabernacle was demoted from being the focal point of the mass so that the clergy themselves could become the focal point and – shamefully – so the now-barren sanctuary can be packed with protestant ministers during the charade of ecumencial services.

  10. I meant to post this a long time ago, but it appears that Archbishop Tartaglia does not understand the difference between cause and effect – at least, not in the supernatural realm. He describes the effect (loss of faith, etc.) with great accuracy, but as for the cause…once again, out to lunch. Witness his ridiculous defense of the Novus Ordo. Orthodox theology? The Novus Ordo enacts no Catholic theology – it is Catholic window-dressing carelessly veiling Protestantism. Based on “great liturgical tradition”? I didn’t know the Church had a tradition which obscured the unbloody re-presentation of Calvary, tried to reduce the Holy Sacrifice to a communal meal, and removed everything from her sacred liturgy that might be stumbling block to heretics.

    What tradition would that be, Your Excellency? Martin Luther? Someone else from Pope Francis’ pantheon of heretical heroes?

    Either he is clueless and poorly catechized himself (or brainwashed by the New Springtime), or he is afraid to say publicly what he really thinks.

Leave a Reply to RuddyFarmer Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: