Enjoy the above excellent talk by Irish priest, Father David Sherry, SSPX, Superior of the District of Canada. At 46 minutes, it’s a bit longer than we usually post, but well worth watching right through.
Father Sherry served in the Scottish SSPX churches for a while (not long enough!) soon after his ordination. As evident in the above talk, this is one priest who knows how to teach difficult concepts very simply and clearly. It’s a real gift.
Having had the pleasure of many conversations with Father Sherry, I’m confident that he won’t mind if I make a debatable point up front.
Firstly, I’ve noticed for a while that the SSPX clergy in general do not speak much in sermons about Fatima. At this point in time, it is my belief that Our Lady’s warnings in 1917 should be at the forefront of every Catholic mind in the world, all the time. There is just no other event in recent history which matches the Fatima apparitions and subsequent apparitions to Sr Lucia. Father Nicholas Gruner RIP – “the Fatima priest” – would often describe Fatima as the single most important event in the twentieth century. Thus, it is a little surprising to hear Father Sherry say, in an oblique reference to Fatima, that he “thinks” the Church will be restored through the triumph of the Immaculate Heart.
I’m not sure why priests appear to be reluctant to speak about Fatima because it’s as clear as the day is long that those prophecies are unfolding before our very eyes – goodness, the three child-seers reported Our Lady’s warning that Communism would spread from Russia before Communism was established in Russia! And it’s spreading like wildfire across the world right now. It’s already arrived here in the UK. It’s the easiest of all apparitions to explain: two of the three seers are already canonised – and they were able to reveal that Our Lady had affirmed Catholic dogmas from papal authority to the reality of Hell, by letting them actually see the tormented souls in Hell. There was a public miracle, witnessed by over 70,000 people and reported – with photographs of the massive crowd – in the local newspapers at the time. Atheists converted on the spot.
It is a little puzzling, then, that priests don’t seem to have Fatima at the front of their minds in preaching and in conversations. In the case of Fr Sherry, I know it can’t be for lack of belief in the apparitions – he gladly attended our Fatima Conference some years ago when we had the privilege of welcoming Father Gruner RIP to address a Catholic Truth audience and I have heard him speak of the apparitions, with conviction. I’m sure there will be other videos in which Fr Sherry does, in fact, speak of Fatima, but should not the Fatima Message be right at the forefront of all Catholic minds today, and shouldn’t we – priests especially – never assume that we are speaking to the already converted or informed? Repetition is the mother of education, as the saying goes…
Maybe our commentators will disagree – share your thoughts on that, but don’t forget, either, to comment on the excellence of the information in the above video, not to mention Father Sherry’s superb professional delivery – he is a natural communicator and a first class teacher.
I’ll send the link to this thread to Father Sherry, so if I disappear without explanation, start a crowd-funding campaign to pay the ransom 😀
I mean, just how much further down the road to outright tyranny must we go before the majority of people inside and outside Parliament waken up to the truth about “the virus”? Maybe if someone leaves a trail of beans from Westminster (and the other centres of Government in Edinburgh, Cardiff and Belfast) all the way to China, then the penny will drop.
There’s just no explaining the blindness around us – except in supernatural terms. We are living through the prophesied – at Fatima – diabolical disorientation, when everything in the world and the Church is upside down; the old order is being crushed and a “new normal” established, where our freedoms have been permanently removed.
God will intervene in due course – once we have been sufficiently chastened and turned back to Him. In the meantime, we need to pray, to live the Fatima Message as it applies to us, and keep watch, so that we are alert to the reality of the evil engulfing us. Let’s also do our best to alert others to what amounts to criminal behaviour by the UK Governments.
If you disagree that the recruitment of children to spy on their parents is criminal, tell us so and explain… how would you describe it? How can it be justified?
From time to time I find myself in conversation with friends sharing the same hair colour as my unworthy (silver-haired) self, when the topic of “the good old days” inevitably features. In our walks down Memory Lane we discuss friends and fashion, employment histories, church and recreational interests. We remember our favourite books, jokes and films, and I can be relied upon to say that one of my all-time favourite actors is Bob Hope. His delivery of the hilarious scripts in just about every film of his that I can remember, is priceless.
The above clip is from My Favourite Brunette. Even in lockdown, it made me laugh a hearty laugh or ten. So, given that we are living in hard times, with serious issues to discuss, debate and, of course, pray about, I think that a little light relief may be in order.
In the past, we’ve enjoyed the occasional “joke” threads, where funny stories and jokes of the “good clean” variety are shared, so this is along the same lines. Avoiding anything which is obviously unsuitable for publishing on a Catholic blog, feel free to post clips from your favourite films (movies if you’re an American 😀 ) orif you prefer to recommend a good book, tell us a comical story or joke, feel free so to do.
We can excuse this levity by simply admitting the need for a little light relief – a break from the stress of lockdown. It’s not that we are failing to take the pandemic seriously – not at all. Unlike this bridegroom’s attitude to his marriage … 😀
Daphne’s funeral will be at 11 a.m. on Monday 25th January at Our Lady of Sorrows, Effingham. It will be streamed live on the church’s YouTube channel below. Then, with a possible delay of up to a day, it will be available to watch for a couple of weeks. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFLGeHumF6yae4QGCSVg0UA
To read our discussion about Daphne on news of her death, click here
Since nobody voted Klaus Schwab or any other members of the globalist elite into positions of authority over us, they have some nerve setting out, deliberately, and unashamedly, to change the way we live, to remove our freedoms which come from God, not from any politician or self-appointed wannabe world ruler.
But what about Mark Moss’s take on how to deal with this very real threat – the plan to remove our right to privacy and to ownership whether of our homes or the clothes on our back… Is Mark suggesting anything we haven’t already identified on this blog? Can anyone add anything to his ideas about how to prepare for what the “great and the good” are planning for us in the next decade? If so, shoot – I’m all agog!
It is my considered opinion that there is no point any more in writing to politicians at any level. Things are too far gone now – lockdowns have become an accepted method of controlling the population. Generating fear really does work, and it makes no difference if we remind folk that the Government’s own alleged experts said at the outset that there is a 99.98% recovery rate in those who become infected with this virus. In other words, most people recover. At least two people in England, who were aged over 100 recovered way back at the beginning – wheeled out of hospital to a parade of staff cheerfully applauding. Doesn’t matter. There is a tiny risk of becoming infected, so best to stay at home, close schools and businesses, ban church-going, insist on mask-wearing and (anti) social distancing, with heavy handed police tactics, including hefty fines, imposed on anyone who dares to disobey. Too bad about those suffering with other illnesses; last time I checked Covid was #24 on the list of causes of death in the UK – or was that England, can’t be sure, but you’ll get my drift…it’s certainly not #1 cause of death in Scotland, or anything like it, that’s for sure.
In that context, I have every sympathy with Neil Oliver’s views, and I’m not at all surprised at the perfectly understandable attitude of his 17 year old daughter and her friends who ask “what’s the point” of studying and working to succeed in education in preparation for the world of work, when, on the whim of a Government our personal and religious freedoms may be removed, with education and work brought to an unceremonious halt.
What I find hard to fathom, though, is why someone with Neil Oliver’s obvious intelligence (and ditto Mike Graham) hasn’t apparently realised why we are in lockdown for the foreseeable future; that this is not about a virus at all, never was about a virus – that we are actually living under a system of totalitarian governance, stealthily established with the willing, if naïve, co-operation of the majority of the population; that, almost overnight, Communism has arrived. They don’t appear to be joining up the dots to reach that conclusion. Too busy, I suppose, rightly focused on encouraging the teenagers in their circle not to lose hope, but to keep planning ahead…
In any event, Neil Oliver hits a number of nails on the head in the above interview, and I fully sympathise with his response to this ongoing and apparently never-ending series of lockdowns. Do you?
A smart friend of mine who is a moderate liberal asked why I was not recognizing Joe Biden’s victory.
The friend made the case that Mr. Biden had gotten more votes, and historically we recognize the person with the most votes. Normally, we accept the outcome of elections just as we accept the outcomes of sporting events.
So, my friend asked why was 2020 different?
As I thought about it, I realized my anger and fear were not narrowly focused on votes. My unwillingness to relax and accept that the election grew out of a level of outrage and alienation unlike anything I had experienced in more than 60 years involvement in public affairs.
The challenge is that I — and other conservatives — are not disagreeing with the left within a commonly understood world. We live in alternative worlds.
The left’s world is mostly the established world of the forces who have been dominant for most of my life.
My world is the populist rebellion which believes we are being destroyed, our liberties are being cancelled and our religions are under assault. (Note the new Human Rights Campaign to decertify any religious school which does not accept secular sexual values — and that many Democrat governors have kept casinos open while closing churches though the COVID-19 pandemic.) We also believe other Democrat-led COVID-19 policies have enriched the wealthy while crushing middle class small business owners (some 160,000 restaurants may close).
In this context, let’s talk first about the recent past and the presidency.
In 2016, I supported an outsider candidate, who was rough around the edges and in the Andrew Jackson school of controversial assaults on the old order. When my candidate won, it was blamed on the Russians. We now know (four years later) Hillary Clinton’s own team financed the total lie that fueled this attack.
Members of the FBI twice engaged in criminal acts to help it along — once in avoiding prosecution of someone who had deleted 33,000 emails and had a subordinate use a hammer to physically destroy hard drives, and a second time by lying to FISA judges to destroy Gen. Michael Flynn and spy on then-candidate Donald Trump and his team. The national liberal media aided and abetted every step of the way. All this was purely an attempt to cripple the new president and lead to the appointment of a special counsel — who ultimately produced nothing.
Now, people in my world are told it is time to stop resisting and cooperate with the new president. But we remember that the Democrats wanted to cooperate with Mr. Trump so much that they began talking about his impeachment before he even took office. The Washington Post ran a story on Democrat impeachment plots the day of the inauguration.
In fact, nearly 70 Democratic lawmakers boycotted his inauguration. A massive left-wing demonstration was staged in Washington the day after, where Madonna announced she dreamed of blowing up the White House to widespread applause. These same forces want me to cooperate with their new president. I find myself adopting the Nancy Pelosi model of constant resistance. Nothing I have seen from Mr. Biden since the election offers me any hope that he will reach out to the more than 74 million Americans who voted for President Trump.
So, I am not reacting to the votes so much as to the whole election environment.
When Twitter and Facebook censored the oldest and fourth largest newspaper (founded by Alexander Hamilton) because it accurately reported news that could hurt Mr. Biden’s chances — where were The New York Times and The Washington Post?
The truth of the Hunter Biden story is now becoming impossible to avoid or conceal. The family of the Democrat nominee for president received at least $5 million from an entity controlled by our greatest adversary. It was a blatant payoff, and most Americans who voted for Mr. Biden never heard of it — or were told before the election it was Russian disinformation. Once they did hear of it, 17% said they would have switched their votes, according to a poll by the Media Research Center. That’s the entire election. The censorship worked exactly as intended.
Typically, newspapers and media outlets band together when press freedom is threatened by censorship. Where was the sanctimonious “democracy dies in darkness?” Tragically, The Washington Post is now part of the darkness.
But this is just a start. When Twitter censors four of five Rush Limbaugh tweets in one day, I fear for the country.
When these monolithic Internet giants censor the president of the United States, I fear for the country.
When I see elite billionaires like Mark Zuckerberg are able to spend $400 million to hire city governments to maximize turnout in specifically Democratic districts — without any regard to election spending laws or good governance standards — I fear for the country.
When I read that Apple has a firm rule of never irritating China — and I watch the NBA kowtow to Beijing, I fear for our country.
When I watch story after story about election fraud being spiked — without even the appearance of journalistic due diligence or curiosity — I know something is sick.
The election process itself was the final straw in creating the crisis of confidence which is accelerating and deepening for many millions of Americans.
Aside from a constant stream of allegations of outright fraud, there are some specific outrages — any one of which was likely enough to swing the entire election.
Officials in virtually every swing state broke their states’ own laws to send out millions of ballots or ballot applications to every registered voter. It was all clearly documented in the Texas lawsuit, which was declined by the U.S. Supreme Court based on Texas’ procedural standing — not the merits of the case. That’s the election.
In addition, it’s clear that virtually every swing state essentially suspended normal requirements for verifying absentee ballots. Rejection rates were an order of magnitude lower than in a normal year. In Georgia, rejection rates dropped from 6.5% in 2016 to 0.2% in 2020. In Pennsylvania, it went from 1% in 2016 to .003% in 2020. Nevada fell from 1.6% to .75%. There is no plausible explanation other than that they were counting a huge number of ballots — disproportionately for Mr. Biden — that normally would not have passed muster. That’s the election.
The entire elite liberal media lied about the timeline of the COVID-19 vaccine. They blamed President Trump for the global pandemic even as he did literally everything top scientists instructed. In multiple debates, the moderators outright stated that he was lying about the U.S. having a vaccine before the end of the year (note Vice President Mike Pence received it this week). If Americans had known the pandemic was almost over, that too was likely the difference in the election.
The unanimously never-Trump debate commission spiked the second debate at a critical time in order to hurt President Trump. If there had been one more debate like the final one, it likely would have been pivotal.
This is just the beginning. But any one of those things alone is enough for Trump supporters to think we have been robbed by a ruthless establishment — which is likely to only get more corrupt and aggressive if it gets away with these blatant acts.
For more than four years, the entire establishment mobilized against the elected president of the United States as though they were an immune system trying to kill a virus. Now, they are telling us we are undermining democracy.
You have more than 74 million voters who supported President Trump despite everything — and given the election mess, the number could easily be significantly higher. The truth is tens of millions of Americans are deeply alienated and angry.
If Mr. Biden governs from the left — and he will almost certainly be forced to — that number will grow rapidly, and we will win a massive election in 2022.
Given this environment, I have no interest in legitimizing the father of a son who Chinese Communist Party members boast about buying. Nor do I have any interest in pretending that the current result is legitimate or honorable. It is simply the final stroke of a four-year establishment-media power grab. It has been perpetrated by people who have broken the law, cheated the country of information, and smeared those of us who believe in America over China, history over revisionism, and the liberal ideal of free expression over cancel culture.
I write this in genuine sorrow, because I think we are headed toward a serious, bitter struggle in America. This extraordinary, coordinated four-year power grab threatens the fabric of our country and the freedom of every American. Click here to read at source
I fully sympathise with the author of the above article. Indeed, I will forever think of Joe Biden as The Man Who Stole America… What about you? And – very importantly – what about America? What lies ahead for the U.S.A. under the Biden-Harris Harris-Biden administration?
Here’s one chant from a crowd of thousands of Americans, which neither Joe Biden nor Kamala Harris will EVER hear. I’d bet on it…
And for now, a final address from President Trump to the nation… note: “for now”…
January 18, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Following a September 2020 interview with LifeSite’s Jim hale, Dr. Leland Stillman this time speaks out against the “dark collusion of government actors … and corporations,” which is stifling dissent among medical doctors and scientists, as it pertains to pandemic policies.
Back in September, the young doctor had spoken out against forced vaccinations. Stillman had noted that a COVID-19 vaccine must not be made mandatory, and that forcing people to inject it only “serves certain special interests.”
In this new interview, he noted how several doctors are even being targeted and punished financially and personally if they do not obey the COVID “orthodoxy” of the medical and government authorities. Stillman described this suppression of dissent in the medical community as reaching “a level of totalitarianism that even Orwell and Huxley would have struggled to envision.” To view video and read entire report at source, click here...
There are reports this morning on the refusal of the Westminster Government to identify a way out of lockdown. Click here to read more.
Note this from one MP – the Deputy Chair of the group, Steve Baker: “We locked down the country and shut down our schools on the basis of a forecast, so why can’t we open it up on the basis of one too? It is not sustainable to leave the public and British businesses languishing any longer.”
Is Steve Baker right – or is the Prime Minister right to refuse to commit to ending lockdowns and restrictions, in the spirit of “better safe than sorry”? Is “staying safe” the most important thing?
The Archbishop-Elect of Dublin, Dermot Farrell, gave an interview to the Irish Times soon after his appointment had been announced by the Holy See. (Click here for a transcript of the interview.)
The new archbishop declares himself in favour of women deacons and married priests. He does not find in the Scriptures an argument against the ordination of women to the priesthood. He calls the teaching of the Catechism of the Catholic Church on homosexuality merely technical. He also says he has no problem with the private blessing of rings for divorced and remarrying couples and for homosexual couples (though he finds public blessings problematic because people often misconstrue them as actual marriages).
Amid so many other troubles, the Irish Church appears to be headed for more rocky days.
Farrell’s treatment of Church teaching and practice regarding homosexuality, for example, is dismissive: “It’s a technical description. People misconstrue that then because it is technical theological language.” He considers amending this technical language, because “I think Pope Francis has discussed that (removal). It came up at the last Synod.”
Really? Farrell is referring to this teaching of the Catechism: “Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that ‘homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.’ They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.” (CCC 2357)
In common parlance, calling language in a document “technical” can mean that it is unintelligible or is commonly misunderstood by the uninitiated, and is there to serve some arcane or legalistic purpose. Its removal is desirable but may be difficult to do if sticklers, purists, or legalists object. Better just to ignore it and treat it as a dead letter, as in “Technically speaking that is true, but. . .”
To describe the clear, unchanging, and unchangeable teaching of the Church on the inherent immorality of homosexual acts as technical language that could, and even should, be dispensed with is plainly a rejection of that teaching.
The rejection of homosexual activity, and the homosexual lifestyle, by faithful Catholics, however, is not a misconstruing of “technical” language found in the Catechism. Those who want the Church to embrace and bless the homosexual lifestyle object to the language of the Catechismnot because it is misconstrued by clueless people who think it means that no one should engage in homosexual acts because, being intrinsically disordered, they are immoral. Rather, they object because the language is easily and correctly understood to mean just that. The problem for them is not the allegedly confusing words used, but rather the clear meaning of those words.
Archbishop Farrell, in response to a question about blessing rings for divorced and remarried couples and for same-sex couples, says:
The difficulty with blessings is that they are very often misconstrued as marriage. Priests have given these blessings in the past. I remember one colleague of mine. I had said to him – he used to have this ceremony of the blessing of rings – I said to him I don’t have a difficulty with blessing rings if you’re doing that here in the house but if you go out into the public domain, in a church, and bless rings as you see it. . .they turned up with 200 people and they saw it as a marriage. Sometimes people use that phraseology. . .you’re into confusion there. It can be misconstrued as “yes, the priest married us.” Blessings are always going to be misconstrued and that’s where the difficulty arises because once you start blessing things like that people are going to construe that as a marriage. We can’t have that sort of situation in the Church because it creates all sorts of problems in terms of our own teaching and these teachings of the church have been constant.
Leaving aside the question of blessing the rings of divorced and remarried couples, what exactly are we to understand is the meaning of blessing the wedding rings of same-sex couples, whether in private or in public? Is it a misconstrual to consider that the priest who does such a blessing approves of the relationship that the homosexual couple has entered into (which is a counterfeit, pseudo-marriage), and asks God’s favor and approval upon that relationship as symbolized by the rings?
The Modern Catholic Dictionary defines a blessing thus: “In liturgical language a blessing is a ritual ceremony by which an authorized cleric in major orders sanctifies persons or things to divine service, or invokes divine favor on what he blesses.” The dictionary’s entry on rings states: “Conferring the ring is an integral part of the marriage ceremony to signify the mutual love of husband and wife, and wearing the ring symbolizes their pledge of marital fidelity.”
The main problem with blessing wedding rings of a same-sex couple is not that people will become confused and think that the priest was actually marrying them. No, the main problem is that a priest who does such an unholy act is giving the impression that God will favour what He has condemned. Same-sex “marriages” are not marriages in any way, shape, or form. It’s a gravely sinful relationship in which two men or two women pledge to sodomize each other. No blessing should ever be invoked by a priest upon this unnatural relationship nor upon the pirated symbols of the holy estate of marriage.
Archbishop Farrell says: “I don’t have a difficulty with blessing rings.” If that’s true, what he does have is a more fundamental difficulty: God has warned shepherds who mislead their flocks into paths of sin and error that they will be held accountable. Let us pray that the new Archbishop of Dublin will forswear his comments and reaffirm the Church’s actual teaching and practice. Click here to read at source
There’s really nothing left for me to say – except pray forpoor Ireland. As if it’s not due a break. From my trip to Dublin at the time of the abortion referendum I have one memory which will be forever fixed in my mind and it is this: handing out our leaflets and engaging with the few members of the public who didn’t tell us to blankety blank off, I met one woman who expressed herself heart-broken about the state of the Church in Ireland, that it had come to this – a referendum on murdering the unborn. She told me that she had daughters who were going to vote in favour of legalising abortion, and her tears fell. My heart went out to her. Catholics have been very badly served by the clergy in Ireland. And after the abortion and then the same-sex “marriage” votes, the Pope is still not satisfied; the people of Ireland need yet another bad bishop – and one who is not afraid to publicly display his fake Catholicism.
As I intimated at the beginning of this short comment – there’s really nothing left for me to say. Over to you…
Martin Luther King, as pointed out in the above video, quotes Catholic teaching on unjust laws to legitimise the civil uprisings in the USA against the segregation of black people from the rest of the population. King points out that those who invoke this right to disobey unjust civil laws must be prepared to take the consequences – such as imprisonment. Thus, it is made clear that the motive for such civil disobedience is conscience, not malice.
At this time, when we are prohibited from the worship of God in our churches because of “the virus”, what should Catholics do – pressure priests for “secret” Masses or openly attend churches, bearing in mind that the priest is the person most likely to have to pay the consequences. We’re hearing of a Scots priest who has been handed a hefty fine for allowing parishioners to attend his Mass recently. Such is the confusion around us that I’m not clear in my own mind whether or not members of the congregation are also liable to fines – informed contributors please enlighten me on that score. It’s not the virus of which people are afraid when it comes to assessing the restrictions, it’s the fines and the fear of losing hearth and home which is forcing compliance. My entirely unsolicited and unqualified legal advice to anyone found breaking a “Covid law” is, in any case, to refuse to pay fines and let the matter go to court in due course. I’ll pray for you 😀
It should go without saying (but I’d better say it anyway) that if you happen to know of any underground Sacraments which you suspect may be on offer, you must not say so on this thread, or anywhere else on this blog for that matter. This thread is to discuss the principles of law and our obligation (or not) to obey all laws – even perceived unjust laws. Do the current Covid laws, especially the prohibition on attending churches, fit the definition of an unjust law, according to the thinking of Saint Thomas Aquinas and Saint Augustine…
IS is true that “an unjust law is no law at all” ?