Catechism of the Catholic Church (675)

Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers. The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the “mystery of iniquity” in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh. ~ Catechism of the Catholic Church (675)

Sunday, 23 November 2014

Diocese of Arundel and Brighton Prepares for its Golden Jubilee

The year 2015 marks the Golden Jubilee of the Diocese of Arundel and Brighton and even if you still feel a bit weird and weary in the wake of Kieran Conry's exit from the Bishops' Conference of England and Wales, certain figures in the Hierarchy desperately want you to celebrate 50 years of Arundel and Brighton. So get happy!

Well, obviously, I don't want to be considered a 'party pooper', but I'm not feeling terribly enthused about this AMEX Football Stadium-based festival. Exactly what is there, for example, right now at least, to celebrate?

The show, however, simply must go on. Apparently! Oh and what a show it will be. For example, despite my own inability to fathom what the former Anglican Archbishop (null and void) of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, has to do with Arundel and Brighton, his presence at the event is assured. Will he be speaking? What does this individual have to do with the Diocese? What does he even have to do with the Catholic Faith? Is his conversion to the One True Faith going to be announced to the sound of trumpet blast? Or is he going to bore an already fatigued crowd to sleep with his musings which will have, I suspect, very little to do with the catechesis of a Catholic congregation that has been starved of a bishop that catechises them for a decade or three? For how long will we have to endure his thoughts? Is this about the needs of Arundel and Brighton or the needs of a rather elitist obsession among the Hierarchy to appear 'in complete unity' with those who don't believe in the Catholic Faith? I just can't shake the feeling that this event isn't about Christ, the Church or even the 'community of believers', but simply Them.

The show must go on...

Although the Cardinal Emeritus Cormac Murphy O'Connor has, at least, some link to Arundel and Brighton, having been Bishop here before giving us The Kieran Conry Show, it will be common knowledge to most in the Diocese that here before us stands a man who will most likely never answer those 'difficult questions' about how on earth he managed to get appointed his disgraced Successor who failed to teach us the Faith before finally owning up to the scandalous behaviour that made his continued suitability for such high office completely impossible. Perhaps His Eminence plans a 'question and answer' session as part of the celebrations? Or perhaps not.

That said, I am told by some laity in the Diocese that even when His Eminence himself was Bishop here, the Catholic Faith was simply not taught much then either. His Eminence had better hope that the spirit of the football terrace that leads mostly intoxicated football fans to call the referee names associated with the sin of Onanism are able to exercise some self-restraint on the big day. 'Who am I to judge?', of course, is the prevailing mood of the field hospital of sinners, but when such things are chanted, the unruly fans are never talking about the referee's solitary sins, but rather that they simply don't like him because he regularly lets their side down and makes stupid, lamentable decisions. Not that the referees ever apologise. Perhaps the analogy is apt after all.

Eucharistic Nightmare

Then, of course, a football stadium packed with Catholic sheep awaiting a Shepherd will also have to stomach a Eucharistic nightmare. How reverently, for instance, will Our Eucharistic Lord be distributed at an event like this? What containers will house the Lord of Lords and King of Kings, He Who Is King of the Universe? Clear plastic bags, perhaps? Plastic white cups as in Rio for World Sacrilege Day?

If such unworthy receptacles are used by priests and the Cardinal Emeritus, in what will most likely be a Concelebration of ludicrous proportions, how will they be cleansed so that no fragments of Our Blessed Lord are left in them? How will the Diocesan 'Safeguarding Team' ensure that no fragments of Our Lord and King are left on the football pitch to be trampled upon by Brighton and Hove Albion? How will the Faithful be able to receive the Lord reverently? Are there any kneelers on the terraces or will the youth who actually still attend Mass in the Diocese and the elderly who can actually make it to the event be kneeling on concrete? But oh, these things don't matter, do they? Because we are "celebrating the Diocese". Perhaps the Adoration that will be a part of the festival should be set aside for reparation for indifference to the Holy Eucharist that the former Bishop of Arundel and Brighton made a hallmark of perhaps every Mass he celebrated in what most people now believe was probably very lengthy periods of mortal sin because, let's face it, the former Bishop was really not into the Sacrament of Penance and made the fact widely known.

Churches in the Diocese to Close: How will those who cannot make it to the Football Stadium attend Mass?

Will people unable, for any reason, to get on the train or bus over to Falmer to the football stadium for a Church event which advertises a Mass starting at 3pm, be able to attend Mass in their own parishes?

It is most likely that all Masses within the Diocese of Arundel and Brighton on this day will be cancelled, a state of affairs that I think is really quite terrible and poses to the Faithful of the Diocese an obstacle in the way of getting to Mass to meet their obligation. I do not envy the Diocese in trying to co-ordinate some kind of celebration of the creation of the Diocese of Arundel and Brighton, but I do rather resent the idea that I cannot attend on this day a Mass within walking distance of where I live and believe that getting the elderly, those without money for bus or rail fare, the disabled to actually travel to Mass all that way when there is probably a perfectly suitable parish Church quite nearby is quite, quite wrong.

Thanks for the invite...
Sorry, I don't think I can make it...

The simple truth, at least from where I am standing, is that there is very little enthusiasm among the laity - although there will always be some enthusiasm among some laity, for an event such as this, in which we are commanded to "celebrate" a Diocese which, for the time being at least, is without its own Bishop. Nowhere in the preparation for this event is there any acknowledgement of this rather embarrassing situation. Neither will there be any provision for those who worship at the Extraordinary Form of the Mass.

Aside from the guilty, if not publicly repentant Bishop, nobody in the Hierarchy has come forward to give an account for just how it is that "nobody knew" about the behaviour of the former Bishop of Arundel and Brighton even though it now turns out that quite a lot of people seemed either know or suspect. Perhaps, by then, July 2015, a new and holy Bishop will have been appointed to the Diocese but these things do take time. Quite what Fr Timothy Radcliffe, who has advanced some seriously dodgy views on homosexuality and Catholicism - views that remain irreconcilable with Catholic teaching - has to do with Arundel and Brighton is anyone's guess. After all, not everyone in Arundel and Brighton is into 'alternative lifestyles'. Are copies of The Tablet going to be handed out for free?

One would have thought that the destructive liberalism that has cast its depressing shadow over this Diocese for really quite a long time would be the very last thing such an event required, but then, the show, as they say, simply must go on. Meanwhile, what the clergy of the Diocese think about this event I do not know, but I expect enthusiasm at this time, when clergy morale must be quite low in the wake of the Kieran Conry saga, is probably not exceedingly high. I expect some of them would resent being told to 'move on' from the Conry saga and "celebrate" the Diocese. They, I expect, will happily "move on" when the Diocese is shepherded and taught by a Bishop courageous and holy enough to bring healing to a flock of inadequately-fed, undernourished and neglected sheep.

Pray for the Diocese of Arundel and Brighton.

Pray for a new, holy Bishop dedicated to Jesus Christ and His Church.

Saturday, 22 November 2014

Porsche and the Temple

"When those who are in the Temple – be they priests, lay people, secretaries, who manage the ministry of the Temple...when they become business people the community is scandalized. And we are responsible for this. The laity is too! Everyone. Because if I see this happening in my parish, I need to have courage and tell it directly the pastor.”
- His Holiness Pope Francis

So, did money change hands for Porsche to hire the Sistine Chapel for a business event or not?

Suspicions have been raised, so someone needs to tell the Pastor!

Boycott Oxford University

Below is a form that you can send to Oxford University to express your disapproval of their lack of regard for freedom of speech...

"I hereby declare that I shall take my doctorate/masters degree/bachelors degree at an educational establishment other than Oxford University. I shall take my custom elsewhere, at an establishment that fosters an environment in which freedom of speech is valued and promoted."

Signed: _________________

Date: _________________

Let's hit these cowboys where it hurts!

We could get this signed by 99% of the United Kingdom.

Send your message to:

Oxford University
University Offices
Wellington Square
Oxford OX1 2JD

I'm filling mine out and sending it today. I was considering Oxford University for an evening class in the Alexander Technique, but I think henceforth I shall take my custom elsewhere!

Friday, 21 November 2014

What Could Possibly Go Wrong?

After the debacle of the mid-term report at the Synod, as well as the other upsets along the way, Msgr Bruno Forte, widely credited with the scandalous words in the mid-term Relatio is to be rewarded with another stab at the action in October 2015.

Forte retains a highly influential role as Secretary General. His Holiness talks a lot about priests, the Church and scandal. Good to see His Holiness finally taking aim at the powerful gay lobby in the Church. Oh, sorry, that was his predecessor!

"Nothing to see here, people. Move along now..."

The Archbishop of Paris,  Cardinal André Vingt-Trois. From the Philippines, Luis Antonio Tagle. From Aparecida Brazil, Cardinal Raymundo Damasceno Assis. From Durban, South Africa, Cardinal Wilfrid Fox Napier. 

The Relator General will be Cardinal Peter Erdo, who serves as the Archbishop of Budapest. The Secretary General, will be Italian Msgr, Bruno Forte. 

However, one name welcome on that list is:

Cardinal Napier!

Because the views of Africans are valued in to one Cardinal Walter Kasper.

I hope and pray Cardinal Raymond Burke will be outside the venue giving sage and judicious interviews to all-comers even though, sadly, his name isn't down on the list of those invited in the wake of his transfer. We have these months before next October to pray and prepare. Hold tight!

Monday, 17 November 2014

Sunday, 16 November 2014

Don't Bury the Bell

I find this justification for dropping the bell during the Eucharistic prayer problematic.

I don't know all that much about liturgy. I'm just under the impression that liturgy is a 'given' and that priests cannot simply do away with parts or aspects of liturgy on a whim, though we all know how problematic holding to such a view is in the post-concilliar Church. The above is taken from a newsletter from a parish church in the South East that I was handed. Have a read of it and let me know. True to what was in the newsletter, there was no bell for the epiclesis or for the Consecration.

Not knowing much about liturgy, I was under the impression that the bell has an important role to play in drawing the attention of the Faithful to the moments leading up to the Consecration, during which the words are uttered by the Priest which confect the Most Blessed Sacrament upon the Altar and at which the Sacrifice made upon Calvary is renewed, re-presented, albeit in an unbloody manner, upon the Altar, and that the bell indicates to the Faithful that it is at this particular moment - when the Priest says the words of consecration and raises the Body and Blood up aloft, that he raises the Blessed Host and the Chalice for the adoration of the Faithful.

The idea that there is no public distinction in worship to be made between the entire Eucharistic prayer and the moment of Consecration before which the bell calls us to adore the Lord made present on the Altar, strikes me as being a bit un-Catholic, or even Protestant, but then what do I know? The priest, interestingly, maintains this no longer happens at St Peter's. If so, I find that a bit weird and question why.

Of course, we should be prayerfully listening, or listening, while praying, during the whole Eucharistic prayer, but human nature being what it is, people's minds do get distracted, or perhaps some are even so wrapt in prayer they are not sure where they are in the liturgy and that bell is a good reminder to prepare to adore the Lord and then to adore Him when He is raised to be adored by men, women, Our Blessed Lady, the Saints and the Angels.

The last three of course don't require a bell, but we who are not ceaselessly crying out 'Holy, Holy, Holy' perhaps, in the Church's wisdom, do, to awaken us to the Lord, His Sacrifice for us the adoration and worship that is His due, to the glory of the Most Blessed Trinity, but then what do I know?

Saved by the Bell
There seems to be an assumption made by a lot of priests that everyone in the pew is a dedicated theologian with 100% attentive prayerful diligence for the duration of the Mass even though most, if not all Novus Ordo masses are simply not that prayerful in comparison to the Extraordinary Form, because the Faithful must 'participate' in a vocal manner and hear every single word of what is essentially the Church's highest and most fruitful prayer. Anyway...

Calling us to recollection of the Sacrifice which Our Lord made for us seems no bad thing. Not calling us to that inner recollection might give us the impression that nothing particularly important is happening when a priest consecrates the Most Holy Sacrament of the Altar. It's a shame this particular church has decided to 'experiment' so willfully in contradiction to the Church's perennial wisdom and practice, but then, it looks like the ongoing 'experimentation' project is something cherished once more in Rome.

The Church has apparently completed major renovation works and at no small cost. I am told that the confessional booth, which has disappeared, the statues of St Anthony of Padua and the statue of the Sacred Heart, both of which were focal points of devotion for quite a few, will return, 'when a space has been found for them'. I hoped these sacred items and places would be in the architect's plans but who am I, a layman, to ask for such things?

I was very heartened to hear of the renovation of the particular Church, because the Crucifix had been moved back to the centre of the Church above the Tabernacle. The walls look beautiful and the floor looks wonderful. Perhaps, I shouldn't post on it, but, as a lay man, I find it a bit unsettling when, on a whim, priests and Popes just get up and decide one day that tampering with the liturgy and redesigning the Church while not giving public reassurances that the confessional booth and the statues will reappear is a bit disorientating, though, as I say, the Church looks very beautiful and I generally admire the work the priest has done.

I stress that I am told that both statues and confessional will in time, return. I might not be the only person who is thinking about this. It's not the 1970s all over again, the Church looks very much more beautiful than it did, but I sincerely hope that every priest is desirous to give a visible sign that Confession is good, devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus is good...and St Anthony of Padua is good to have on your side.

Names of clergy and church have been removed. 

These things seem small and unimportant to some but small things can make a big difference as we heard in the Gospel today.

Thursday, 13 November 2014

With Apologies to The Bealtes...

Francis turns the Church into a marketplace
Walter is the agent with the plan
Francis says to Walter
"Oh, you are two-faced!
That Pentin interview pissed off the Africans!"

Ah, do the Bergoglio

Ah, do the Bergoglio

Francis takes his doctrine over to Raymond
Raymond says, "This spits in Our Lord's Face",
Francis says to Raymond, "You Pelagian!
Clear out your desk and then just clear out of the place."

Ah, do the Bergoglio

Ah, do the Bergoglio

In a couple of years they have built their Rome, sweet Rome
With a herd of heretics running in the Square
And heading Congregations...

Happy never after in the Catholic Church
Sold to one David Rockefeller
Emptied of Her doctrine
She's an NGO
Thank Francis, Walter, Marx, Freud, Darwin and Oscar

Ah, do the Bergoglio

Ah, do the Bergoglio

In a couple of years they have built their Rome, sweet Rome
With a herd of heretics running in the Square
And heading Congregations...

Happy never after in the Catholic Church
Sold to one David Rockefeller
Emptied of Her doctrine
She’s an NGO
Thank Francis, Freud, Walter, Marx, Darwin and Oscar

And if you want some fun
Call Monsignor Ricca

If you can't laugh what can you do?

The Temple of His Body

Jesus answered, and said to them: Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. The Jews then said: Six and forty years was this temple in building; and wilt thou raise it up in three days? But he spoke of the temple of his body. ~ St John 2: 27


'Now you are the body of Christ, and members of member.' ~ 1 Corinthians 12

Evil will have its hour, but God will have His day. ~ Ven. Fulton Sheen

Tuesday, 11 November 2014

Is the Demonisation Process Underway?

A fascinating theological exegesis emerges from a recent Pope Francis homily on light, dark and grey Christians and that is that God does not love everyone. There are light Christians, dark Christians and the grey Christians and 'God does not love these'. This is a controversial thing to say, for any Christian. Does God love the lukewarm, grey, mediocre Christian? Can God's love be earned? Who is worthy of God's love? Does God love the 'good Christian', let us say the Franciscan ideal, but loathe, or not love the 'bad or lukewarm Christian'. 

Aside from the conclusion that I have drawn, that a Catholic Church that capitulates to the prevailing pagan culture of the West is a lukewarm, grey Church that has nothing much to say to anyone anymore about anything, I do wonder whether a process of demonisation is under way. Perhaps it has been underway for a year and a half and I hadn't understood it.

Recently we have heard more about Pagan Christians. "They" or "them" is a nearly daily refrain of the Pope followed by a swift, sharp criticism towards someone, some 'kind' of Christian. Do we only find out who they are when they have been demoted or moved elsewhere? Are papal homilies really opportunities for Francis to elaborate on the Lectionary reading of the day or are they an opportunity for him to take aim at his theological or ideological opponents and issue a public denunciation? 

How far does the demonisation of, in Francis's opinion, 'the pharisees', the 'pagan Christians', the 'grey and lukewarm' Christians, the 'enemies of the Cross of Christ' in the Catholic Church extend? Of course, for more denunciations you can read the not-often-updated-because-I can't-keep-up with-the-insults Pope Francis Little Book of Insults

Of course, we should all search our consciences for those times that we sin against Christ and by our sinfulness and selfishness fail to live up to the name of Christian. Yet, I cannot help feeling that there is a particular kind of Catholic (If you are Jewish, Muslim, Evangelical, Protestant, Hindu, atheist or consider yourself a genuine Pagan, don't worry, Francis gives you a pass...) Francis has in mind, and its not necessarily the people I would usually associate with those who, for example, hate Christ and His Church.

I have always thought that despite the many, terrible sins that I have committed, the sins I commit and the vices I unfortunately have, despite my lukewarmness in so many ways, my lack of charity and zeal for souls, my indifference to others, that God loves me still. And I have not just considered this a truth to apply to myself, but indeed to all I know, be they Catholic, of other denominations or complete atheists and/or pagans. 

And if for a moment (and of course, I do actually have those moments) I truly considered that God does not love X, Y or Z, or 'that type' of person, I would, I have always thought, cease to be a Christian. I might think it, but I would be wise not to state it because only God knows who he loves and who might be so set against Him that He rejects. God's wrath is upon those who reject Jesus Christ, the Gospels and Epistles tell us. God's wrath awaits those who refuse to repent from mortal sin, but that God loves every human being is, I think, the very reason why we are called to love every human being. God loves all people because He made them for Himself, whether they accept Him or not whether we love Him or not. I cannot say that God loves all that this person does, just as God does not like - may loathe - all I do and indeed, do not do. I cannot say God loves all this person says, thinks and believes and acts, but I can say that God loves everyone and patiently waits for us all to repent and embrace the Gospel of Our Lord Jesus Christ. 

So when the Supreme Pontiff of the Holy Catholic Church says of certain Christians, that 'God does not love these', that is a serious thing to say indeed and one that needs surely some kind of clarification. The idea that Francis might say that God has withdrawn Himself entirely from people who Pope Francis, or Jorge Bergoglio, the man, takes exception to is to say, 'I know who God loves and who God loathes', thereby sharing in God's own thoughts. It is also to say that God loves the man Jorge Bergoglio very much but detests certain Christians. Who could these people be? Who does God not love? 

It would appear that the separation of the sheep and goats in in progress, in the mind of Pope Francis but it it not necessarily Our Lord doing the judging. No, it is he who said, "Who am I to judge?" Does His Holiness, if this is so, ever think that it is possible he could be wrong? Abortion is a sin crying out to Heaven for vengeance, all kind of murder also. So is sodomy, but it is not faithful Catholics who stand around saying...

...and God waits patiently for their repentance and, we must believe, loves those who commit these acts. The logic of Pope Francis, however, if God does not love 'some', 'certain people', might lead you to conclude that he doesn't. Why? Because to say that God loves some but not others is to entertain a bizarre kind of Christian relativism that could easily even lead someone to ask whether the Pope is a Christian. In order to ask the question, of course, that person would have to be some kind of fundamentalist and believe - shock - that God loves everyone - even the ones Pope Francis doesn't like. And Pope Francis of course! A lot of men have accused Christians and Saints and even thought they were pleasing God by doing so. In fact those who sought the execution of Our Saviour thought, I believe, that God did not love Him. My heart tells me that Pope Francis's homilies are about religion. My mind says, 'Politics'.

Monday, 10 November 2014

Millstones, Sound Doctrine and Tradition

'Since, as president, he will be God’s representative, he must be irreproachable: never an arrogant or hot-tempered man, nor a heavy drinker or violent, nor out to make money; but a man who is hospitable and a friend of all that is good; sensible, moral, devout and self-controlled; and he must have a firm grasp of the unchanging message of the tradition, so that he can be counted on for both expounding the sound doctrine and refuting those who argue against it.'
 - St Paul's Letter to Titus

All in all, today's Mass readings are pretty firm and hard-hitting. Yes, they pack a punch for all of us. Our Lord does not soften the blow in His message to those who cause scandal. Neither, however, does St Paul in his letter to Titus in which those in teaching authority in the Church are given sharp and clear advice about how to live and - and I can't help feeling this is timely - what to believe and what to teach. Oh for a little clarity like this from Rome, or, indeed, certain quarters in England and Wales! Pope Francis, according to Vatican Radio, said that 'Jesus chose to be blunt rather than polite to get the message through to the Apostles.' Just how 'polite' is Our Lord in the rest of the Gospels and when? Polite is nice, we are taught to be polite, but polite is not necessarily as a virtue. Only on Sunday we heard how Our Lord threw over tables in the Temple. Polite? Perhaps Our Blessed Lord should have reassured those who made the Temple "into a marketplace" that though He was not keen on the practice, and therefore when on a cleansing mission, how 'valued' and 'welcomed' these individuals were!

Scandalised by the Synod

Many Catholics feel a little 'under the cosh' at the moment. A little 'scandalised' by recent events at the Synod and, indeed, a little scandalised by the lack of clear teaching coming from Rome. It is interesting, therefore, what His Holiness chose to focus on in his homily this morning and what he decided to overlook.

First, the millstones. Well, that is quite a frightening phrase from Our Lord.

"Obstacles are sure to come, but alas for the one who provides them! It would be better for him to be thrown into the Sea with a millstone put round his neck than that he should lead astray a single one of these little ones."

Hmm...oh dear. A single one? Gulp. Well, I'll be frank and say that I have, at times in my life, many times indeed, led people away from Jesus Christ rather than to Him. This is truly a terrible thing. If a lay man can cause spiritual and moral damage to others through his selfishness and sin, how greater then is the impact when a priest or worse a bishop fails to lead men and women to Christ through his life and especially through his teaching? Then how much greater is the damage when the man in question is a Pope? A single little one, a few thousand or one billion? I won't labour the point. After all, only Our Lord can judge His Holiness. Who am I to judge?

Don't blame BBC: Pope Francis never made his doctrinal positions clear
The 'Job Specification' and the 'Job Description'

In our part of the world, we have recently experienced this first hand. Bad, in fact, woeful neglect in teaching and a terrible example of scandal that destroys faith and the Church's message. Despite his personal failings, it has been lamented by many that what really hurt was the individual's decision not to teach that which he was charged with the duty to teach. That is, the Catholic faith and Catholic morals.

"Little ones", perhaps as the individual did not understand, need not mean children. The individual said words to the effect, "Don't worry, it wasn't with minors!" It can simply mean those who are weak in faith, ignorant of the Gospel, vulnerable, placed in your care, those who need instruction and teaching because you are in authority over them.

Now, it so happens that St Paul places at the end of his 'person specification' for a man in teaching authority over others in the Church "a firm grasp of the unchanging message of the tradition" and the reason why. Why? So that he can "be counted on" (is trustworthy and dependable) for both expounding the sound doctrine and refuting those who argue against it." He must be dependable to teach the Faith.

St Paul first takes us through what kind of a man he should be, for example, if he were to be a bishop. He runs through the moral character of the individual; "self controlled, devout, not given to wine etc." Then, St Paul tells us what he must know, what he must teach and tells us that he must refute error.

The personal life of a bishop can be a cause of scandal but so, too, can his teaching. If he doesn't teach sound doctrine and "the unchanging (unchanging? yes! unchanging!) message of tradition" then to Christ and His Church he is useless and worse than useless - a hindrance to souls being saved - a cause of their destruction.

If he does not teach the tradition and sound doctrine of the Church - Christ's doctrine - and he does not refute error then it would appear from St Paul's letter to Titus that he is not doing what he is called to do. That St Paul places this at the end of his 'job specification' does not mean it is the least important in the criteria. It is placed at the end because it is the only thing named as a 'job description' immediately after having listed the personal qualities the man should have.

What happens to those in authority who do not obey the words of Jesus Christ and ignore St Paul?

It would be worthwhile asking ourselves the question:

Why would it be better for him to be thrown into the Sea with a millstone put round his neck than that he should lead astray a single one of these little ones?

The answer, we can ascertain, is because Our Lord makes clear that there is not an earthly punishment that would do justice to the crime committed by the individual. The punishment that fits the crime is eternal and horrendous beyond our imaginings. What punishment is it? The punishment is Hell: Eternal damnation and separation from God. It means Mitres, or rather those who wear them, falling into Hell if they do not obey Jesus Christ and carry out their vocation to teach the Faith.

Cardinal Raymond Burke: He was only doing his job!
I think I'll leave it there, suffice to say that what His Holiness chose to focus on in his homily today is interesting and so, too, is what he chose to overlook, as is what he almost daily chooses to overlook and cast aside, namely, his role to teach the Faithful and the unfaithful the Catholic Faith, which he must know and to refute the errors of the age both within and without the Church for the Salvation of Souls. I'm not judging His Holiness, you understand, I'm merely stating an observation from what I see and hear from his own words and those things about which he chooses to remain resolutely silent.

Those in authority over the little ones, be they priests or bishops or popes are called to know the unchanging (it cannot change) tradition of the Church and to teach and refute error for the salvation of souls. The bishop or Pope's personal qualities are important to the extent that he must be holy and strive for holiness - but his one function is to teach what has been handed on - the unchanging tradition and sound doctrine. Not his private opinion.

His Holiness says 'Don't be afraid of newness'. St Paul, on the other hand, says, "Ignore newness." Why, because, "he must have a firm grasp of the unchanging message of the tradition, so that he can be counted on for both expounding the sound doctrine and refuting those who argue against it." It looks like St Paul might have some sympathy with one Cardinal Raymond Burke. Who has a firm grasp of the unchanging message of the tradition and who can be counted on for both expounding the sound doctrine and refuting those who argue against it? Who has not and who cannot? Who resisted error? Who refuted it? Who cast tradition and sound doctrine aside or made it appear that he had? Who stood up for the truth?

It goes without saying that I am, as a layperson, myself a 'little one'. My view might be unwelcome today by bishops and even the Pope himself but still, I am 'scandalised of Brighton' after recent events and I know many others are as well. God help you if, in your arrogant determination to push through a humanistic agenda contrary to God's own laws, you ignore us!

May God have mercy on me for those times I have led souls astray and preserve me from doing so again and may God give us holy priests and even holier bishops.


Related Posts with Thumbnails