Dissident Fr Timothy Radcliffe Keynote Speaker at Dublin Conference…editor
The following article appeared over on the Protect the Pope blog earlier today. Thanks to Catholic Convert for alerting us to it.
Fr Timothy Radcliffe OP, well-known liberal and dissenter, has bizarrely been chosen to be one of the keynote speakers at Dublin’s 2014 International Conference on Divine Mercy. Fr Radcliffe openly dissents on the Church’s teaching on homosexuality and Holy Communion for the divorced and re-married. Fr Timothy Radcliffe OP frequently celebrated Mass for the gay dissent group the Soho Masses Pastoral Council. During the reign of Pope Benedict XVI Fr Timothy Radcliffe was stopped from speaking at the General Assembly of the Catholic development agencies. Fr Radcliffe is well known for his liberal positions on morality, including his public opposition to the Church’s teaching on homosexuality.
The Divine Mercy Conference website states:
Divine Mercy Conference 2014
The first International Conference of Divine Mercy was held in the R.D.S. over 23 years ago. We celebrate our 23rd conference 2014 in the knowledge that Sister Faustina is now Saint Faustina. The theme of the first conference was “Mercy Our Mission”. The theme and the speakers were the product of much prayer and discernment by a committee of men and women gathered together in Eucharistic adoration under the spiritual direction of Fr. Cathal Price.’
Fr Timothy Radcliffe OP will be speaking on both Saturday and Sunday.
A selection of Fr Radcliffe’s writings expressing dissent from the Church’s teaching:
Fr Radcliffe gave the following contribution to the Church of England ‘s review of homosexuality and gay marriage:
Fr Radcliffe OP expands the meaning of fertility to include gay sex
But not every marriage is fertile in this way. We must avoid having a mechanistic or simplistic understanding of fertility. Jesus speaks a fertile word: This is my body, given for you. He is God’s fertile word. And surely it is in the kind and healing words that we offer each other that we all share in fertility of that most intimate moment. When Jesus met Peter on the shore after Easter, he offers him a word that renews their relationship. Three times he asks him; ‘Do you love me more than these others?’ He allows him to undo his threefold denial. Sexual fertility cannot be separated from the exchange of words that heal, that recreate and set free.
How does all of this bear on the question of gay sexuality? We cannot begin with the question of whether it is permitted or forbidden! We must ask what it means, and how far it is Eucharistic. Certainly it can be generous, vulnerable, tender, mutual and non-violent. So in many ways, I would think that it can be expressive of Christ’s self-gift.
We can also see how it can be expressive of mutual fidelity, a covenantal relationship in which two people bind themselves to each other for ever. But the proposed legislation for ‘gay marriage’ imply that it is not understood to be inherently unitive, a becoming one flesh. […]
And what about fertility? I have suggested that one should not stick to a crude, mechanistic understanding of fertility. Biological fertility is inseparable from the fertility of our mutual tenderness and compassion. And so that might seem to remove one objection to gay marriage. I am not entirely convinced, since it seems to me that our tradition is incarnational, the word becoming bodily flesh. And some heterosexual relationships may be accidentally infertile in this sense, but homosexual ones are intrinsically so.
Sexual ethics is about what our acts say. And I have the impression that we are not very sure of what gay sexual acts signify. Maybe we need to ask gay Christians who have been living in committed relationships for years. I suspect that sex will turn out to be rather unimportant.’
Fr Radcliffe on Holy Communion for Catholics who are divorced and re-married:
I would conclude with two profound hopes. That a way will be found to welcome divorced and remarried people back to communion. And, most important, that women will be given real authority and voice in the church. The pope expresses his desire that this may happen, but what concrete form can it take? He believes that the ordination of women to the ministerial priesthood is not possible, but decision-making in the church has become ever more closely linked to ordination in recent years. Can that bond be loosened? Let us hope that women may be ordained to the diaconate and so have a place in preaching at the Eucharist. What other ways can authority be shared?’
Protect the Pope comment: It is frankly ridiculous seeing a photograph of Fr Timothy Radclife OP on the home page of Dublin’s 2014 Divine Mercy Conference alongside photographs of St Faustina, Blessed John Paul II and Blessed Fr Sopoko. How could the organising committee of men and women who prayed and discerned who to invite as speakers choose a liberal priest well-known for his dissent from the Church’s teaching? Their decision is incredible. Click on photo for details of the Divine Mercy Conference.
Yet again, I as a prospective Catholic Convert, am confronted by a manifest heresy from the commanding heights of the Catholic Church. If I didn’t know about the SSPX or Catholic Truth I would have given up- it’s that concerning to me. If I’ve said this once, I’ve said it a thousand times, how can he be allowed to remain in Holy Orders, perform the Sacrifice of the Mass and receive/ dispense Holy Communion. I can’t help but think about what Our Lady of Good Counsel said to Mother Mariana in Quito, 1610- ‘the clergy will become perverse’. This, to me, doesn’t solely equate with the pederasty scandal, it equates also with heretical priests espousing perverse ideals, which would surely make every Pope recoil in horror, particularly the great anti-Modernist warrior, St. Pius X. Individuals such as Radcliffe would have been reported to the Holy Office and excommunicated a long time before it got this far, but I suspect Radcliffe has allies high up in the Roman Curia protecting him. This is not a surprise given that Cardinal Mario Ciappi, the Theologian to four Popes and like Radcliffe a Dominican, said “In the Third Secret, it is foretold, among other things, that the Great Apostasy in the Church begins at the top.”
And to think that when Cardinal Basil Hume died, the disgraced Cardinal O’Brien wanted Radcliffe to succeed Hume. This demand is all the more chilling given the personal actions of O’Brien, the man who Ratzinger didn’t want John Paul II to make a Cardinal.
This is all the more worrying given that St Dominic formed the Order of Preachers to combat heresy, and I have no doubt that St Dominic is turning in his grave.
The Catechism is clear about intercourse of the homosexual nature: 2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.”142 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.
And on marriage: 1601 “The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament.”
It seems Radcliffe is also contradicting the Catechism and therefore the infallible Magisterium of the Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, and is in a state of heresy. Didn’t St. Thomas Aquinas say ‘who disbelieves [even] one article of faith does not have faith, either formed or unformed’.
I completely agree with you. This priest has been doing the rounds for a long time, and YouTube is full of videos of his talks.
It’s noticeable that the bishops and Vatican do nothing about open dissenters like him yet jump on a priest like Fr Despard for telling the truth about homosexuality in the Church.
Excellent comment. You have summed up the dire situation re the toleration and promotion of heretics and supporters of perversion in the proverbial nutshell.
I’m very pleased that you now see the truth about the SSPX – you are one of the very few people I’ve encountered who, while originally accepting the propaganda, went to the trouble of investigating the truth and maturely admitted, and continues to admit, the truth. I know cradle Catholics who still, persistently, refuse to acknowledge the truth about the SSPX – that when Our Lady said at Quito that Mother Mariana was to “pray that my Son will send a prelate to restore the priesthood”, she was speaking of Archbishop Lefebvre. Well, put it this way; she sure wasn’t speaking of Pope Francis!
It’s truly a disgrace that Fr Timothy Radcliffe is to be the keynote speaker at the Divine Mercy Conference in Dublin. Unthinkable. But will any of the alleged “traditionalist” Catholics in Ireland do a darn thing about it? Don’t bother watching this space.
CC, please desist from converting to the Holy Apostolic Faith, you do not appear to have any love for the Lord Jesus Christ and HIS teaching. You have it seems an inordinate and disquieting knowledge of all things legal, and of being led astray by others who also show little love for the LORD. Your apparent commitment to the schismatic sspx suggests that you are not as yet mature enough or of sufficient intelligence to make such a serious commitment to the catholic faith. I will pray that you find a spiritual director who can guide you in the right direction
Ed: notably you make no comment about the invitation to Fr Timothy Radcliffe, known homosexual sympathiser, if not activist. Given your previous support for homosexual “rights” on this blog, we can, therefore, draw our own conclusions about why you are being so nasty to Catholic Convert and why you are keen that he don’t convert to the Faith. One more orthodox and traditional Catholic! Perish the chasdom thought. Whatever your motivation (and who cares), do NOT call into question anyone’s personal intelligence on this blog – trust me, you have no room for criticism of anyone else in that direction, not when you haven’t taken time to check out who it is that claims the SSPX is schismatic – in order to learn that it’s not the Pope. Any numpty who, by this stage, doesn’t know what constitutes “schism” shouldn’t be too far from his mother’s apron strings. Now, no more personal remarks from you please and thank you. Comment on the issues or take a hike.
Why thank you kind Sir (or is it Madame) for insulting my intelligence, or indeed lack of it as you see it. God Bless You.
It is because I love Jesus Christ and His Church that I feel I must speak out against the toleration of sin. Did Jesus tolerate sin? No. Suggest you read John 8:1-11 or John 2:15-16 to study Our Divine Lord’s lack of tolerance towards the adulteress or the moneylenders. I am showing love by preventing the encouragement of sin. Would you have me nail Christ to the Cross again?
You have it seems an inordinate and disquieting knowledge of all things legal […] apparent commitment to the schismatic sspx
Chardom is oblivious to the irony in his comment.
No, MilesImmaculata, I was/am aware of my deficiencies in that department. Just wondered how long it would be before someone on this demented blog would prove to me that they couldn’t resist the temptation to pompously point it out!!!!!!! Not long at all!!
Ed, Very sorry, I wasn’t aware that every comment on this blog had to include some reference to homosexuality, rather an unusual requirement but – ‘homosexuality’ – does that satisfy you? You are of course free to draw your own conclusions; most of them are usually very misguided and wrong so they don’t really count for much. As for personal remarks, perhaps you should follow your own advice Editor. People could possibly, just possibly respect and listen to you a bit more if you could just drop the self righteous indignation and sarcasm which you usually employ in all that you write and say.
Ed: the topic is the invitation to a known dissident priest, known, above all, as a homosexual sympathiser, to put it mildly. Not to comment on the very basis of the topic is odd, to say the least. Are you or are you not, bothered at all that Fr Timothy Radcliffe has been invited to speak at a Catholic Conference? I await your answer to that simple question with much interest.
Now, Santa needs my help this afternoon so I’m afraid any further insults to me from you will have to await my return from the North Pole. Sorry about that, but you just don’t seem to be able to take a telling, chasdom – you seemed so keen to get into moderation and who am I to deny you that particular joy?
As for the “self righteous indignation and sarcasm” and the rest, of which you so uncharitably accuse me, who cares? Sticks & stones etc. Do I look bovvered?
I suspect that I should not use the name of a certain previous commentator, lest my posts linger in moderation. However, I have not established my support for the SSPX on the basis of my most learned, intellectual (not to mention glamorous and witty) colleague, the Editor and her arguments. Though they did lead me to look into it more.
I have come to the conclusion, based on the facts that there is no rhyme nor reason to upholding the Second Vatican Council- it was only pastoral, and none of its documents were declared infallible, whereas Trent and it’s decrees were binding. See the definition here- http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04423f.htm This is because, whilst the Pope can be (and dare I say is) heretic, he cannot impose his heresy on the faithful.
Even the 1983 Code of Canon Law says that the Council was not binding- “Although not an assent of faith, a religious submission of the intellect and will must be given to a doctrine which the Supreme Pontiff or the college of bishops declares concerning faith or morals when they exercise the authentic Magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim it by definitive act; therefore, the Christian faithful are to take care to avoid those things which do not agree with it.”
Likewise, with regards to the Mass, St Pius V I suggest you read the following from Quo Primum:
“Let all everywhere adopt and observe what has been handed down by the Holy Roman Church, the Mother and Teacher of the other churches, and let Masses not be sung or read according to any other formula than that of this Missal published by Us. This ordinance applies henceforth, now, and forever, throughout all the provinces of the Christian world, to all patriarchs, cathedral churches, collegiate and parish churches, be they secular or religious, both of men and of women – even of military orders – and of churches or chapels without a specific congregation in which conventual Masses are sung aloud in choir or read privately in accord with the rites and customs of the Roman Church. This Missal is to be used by all churches, even by those which in their authorization are made exempt, whether by Apostolic indult, custom, or privilege, or even if by oath or official confirmation of the Holy See, or have their rights and faculties guaranteed to them by any other manner whatsoever.
This new rite alone is to be used unless approval of the practice of saying Mass differently was given at the very time of the institution and confirmation of the church by Apostolic See at least 200 years ago, or unless there has prevailed a custom of a similar kind which has been continuously followed for a period of not less than 200 years, in which most cases We in no wise rescind their above-mentioned prerogative or custom. However, if this Missal, which we have seen fit to publish, be more agreeable to these latter, We grant them permission to celebrate Mass according to its rite, provided they have the consent of their bishop or prelate or of their whole Chapter, everything else to the contrary notwithstanding.
All other of the churches referred to above, however, are hereby denied the use of other missals, which are to be discontinued entirely and absolutely; whereas, by this present Constitution, which will be valid henceforth, now, and forever, We order and enjoin that nothing must be added to Our recently published Missal, nothing omitted from it, nor anything whatsoever be changed within it under the penalty of Our displeasure.
We specifically command each and every patriarch, administrator, and all other persons or whatever ecclesiastical dignity they may be, be they even cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, or possessed of any other rank or pre-eminence, and We order them in virtue of holy obedience to chant or to read the Mass according to the rite and manner and norm herewith laid down by Us and, hereafter, to discontinue and completely discard all other rubrics and rites of other missals, however ancient, which they have customarily followed; and they must not in celebrating Mass presume to introduce any ceremonies or recite any prayers other than those contained in this Missal.
Furthermore, by these presents [this law], in virtue of Our Apostolic authority, We grant and concede in perpetuity that, for the chanting or reading of the Mass in any church whatsoever, this Missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment, or censure, and may freely and lawfully be used. Nor are superiors, administrators, canons, chaplains, and other secular priests, or religious, of whatever title designated, obliged to celebrate the Mass otherwise than as enjoined by Us. We likewise declare and ordain that no one whosoever is forced or coerced to alter this Missal, and that this present document cannot be revoked or modified, but remain always valid and retain its full force notwithstanding the previous constitutions and decrees of the Holy See, as well as any general or special constitutions or edicts of provincial or synodal councils, and notwithstanding the practice and custom of the aforesaid churches, established by long and immemorial prescription – except, however, if more than two hundred years’ standing.”
Here is Fr Radcliffe’s email address at Oxford University- email@example.com
Thank you for posting Fr Radcliffe’s email address – I’ve written to ask him to withdraw from the Divine Mercy Conference speaking engagement, given his notorious dissent from Catholic sexual morality.
If he does the honourable thing and withdraws, I’ll dance a Highland Fling in the middle of Sauchiehall Street on New Year’s Day. And that’s a threat!
Please would you email me the time and place if this should go ahead. I wouldn’t want to miss it (your dance that is, not Fr Radcliffe’s talk).
Made me laugh! As you can see from my “reply” from Fr Radcliffe, I won’t need to do my Highland Fling – wouldn’t have made the offer were I remotely thinking he might even answer my message never mind withdraw from the Conference!
Give me the directions to Sauciehall Street, because you doing a highland fling- that, I would pay to see!!!!
I’ve just received the following reply to my email to Fr Timothy Radcliffe:
This account is scheduled for deletion. It is unlikely that your message will be read.
Oxford University Nexus Email Service
Ho Hum. I wonder if you contacted the Dominicans in the UK they could put you in touch with him.
I’m sure that is the same Fr Radcliffe who was involved with the Soho Masses.
It’s disgraceful that he’s been asked to speak at a Divine Mercy Conference. What were the organisers thinking of? He should definitely be disinvited but what’s the bet he won’t be.
Fr Timothy Radcliffe was definitely involved with the Soho Masses. Here’s one report of interest http://www.indcatholicnews.com/news.php?viewStory=12449
It’s truly disgraceful that he’s been invited to speak at a Divine Mercy Conference and in Dublin, of all places. Those organisers must know his reputation, so it’s obvious that this is not going to be a conference pleasing to Jesus. I hope Catholic Truth organises one of their “Fly on the Wall” reports if possible, to expose the rot which will doubtless be spread at that event.
This CWR article about Fr Radcliffe says it all:- https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=7497
Also don’t forget his public statement in The Tablet of 28 Jan 2006:- “Let us glance at some touchy issues: sexual ethics, homosexuality and the ordination of women. Christian morality is not mostly about sex, despite the impression given by the media. It is fundamentally about becoming free and happy in God. But if the Church’s teaching about sex becomes radically out of touch with what Catholics live, then there is a problem. Many Catholics are divorced and remarried, or living with partners or practising contraception or are gay. To put it simply: should the Church accommodate her teaching to the experience of our contemporaries or should we stick by our traditional sexual ethics and risk becoming a fortress Church, a small minority out of step with people’s lives? Neither option seems right. In my book, I confess that I do not know the answer.”
In the same article he asks the question about homosexual people:- “Are they to be told that they must for ever be celibate?” He answers it by saying “I must confess that I do not know”. On the ordination of women, he asks the question “Is it then true that women cannot be ordained?” and again answers by saying “I confess for a third time that I do not know”
While Fr Radcliffe doesn’t seem to know an awful lot about Catholic doctrinal and moral teaching, he apparently seems to be clearer on ‘gay’ issues, according to a report on the Catholic World News website dated 6 April 2006, which quoted him as saying the following at a recent event:-
“I’m afraid I’m an old-fashioned traditional Catholic, and I believe that’s the wrong place to start. We begin by standing by gay people, as they hear the voice of the Lord that summons them to a life of happiness. We accompany them as they wrestle with discovering what this means and how they should walk, and this means letting our imaginations be stretched open to … watching Brokeback Mountain, reading gay novels, having gay friends, making our beliefs of our hearts and our minds delighting in that being…”
I am concerned about the organisers of this Divine Mercy conference. Unless they live without access to any and all modern communications and media, they could hardly have been unaware of Fr Radcliffe’s strange views. I also read on another blog they had the Medjugorje-spawned ‘Anne the Lay Apostle’ to speak at a previous event. It seems there is a lack of discernment among these people, to put it mildly.
A blessed Christmas to you Editor and all on the CT blog, and a Happy New Year!
Thank you for that very informative comment – and for your Christmas wishes which we return in buckets!
Just found this comment in an article about the Warwick St Soho Masses. Very instructive.
“My friends and I were there at Warwick Street a few years ago when those Masses began. I myself chatted with various members of the Gay Attendees after Mass. All of them that I spoke to admitted that they were practising sex. Two Lesbians told me that they were very much in love and to defend their undying love for each other, they told me that they have been sleeping together, sharing the same bed for over 20 years. I have seen men actually kissing in the congregation. I actually seen [sic] with my own eyes, a man fondling another man’s backside, rubbing him and squeezing him on the way up to Holy Communion. I have witnessed overt flirting amongst homosexuals. They seem to get extra flirty when Fr Timothy Radcliffe is the celebrant … ”
Thanks again – I read that in Christian Order at the time. It speaks for itself. Fr Radcliffe, suitable speaker at ANY Catholic event? Yeah right. If the Archbishop of Dublin were remotely doing his duty, he would have pulled the plug on this invitation in (Irish) jig time. However, as we know from other instances, some of which we’ve reported in our newsletter, he’s in the same diabolically disoriented state as almost the entire episcopate worldwide, with a few notable and welcome exceptions – none of them in Scotland, sadly. Archbishop Tartaglia (of Glasgow) penned his Christmas greetings to the readership of The Tablet (see this week’s edition). So, now we know he openly supports the two main dissident rags in the UK – Open House (Scotland) and The Tablet. His pretence of being orthodox is now laid bare for any informed Catholic with even elementary intelligence to see. Like the Pope he praises in the same Tablet piece, he is an outright Modernist and probably exchanged Christmas cards with the Archbishop of Dublin, who knows.
Watch this space – Fr Timothy Radcliffe is more than likely to appear at the invitation of dissidents in Scotland any time now. They’re getting more and more brazen, the dissidents, including the episcopal dissidents. We should remember a prayer for them at the Crib this year, as truly, time is running short. Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for them.
Don’t forget Fr Radcliffe also spoke at the recent Eucharistic Congress in Ireland as well. As I said before, for one who ‘doesn’t know’ anything, he does an awful lot of air miles in order to share his lack of knowledge with others.
It is a feature of life in the church at this time, that those who dissent from the divine revelation about religion and morals are the ones who are picked to speak in public about it. It is shocking.
Talking of dissidents, a la Pope Francis, it’s just been on BBC news about his first Christmas in the Vatican, and how everybody ‘lurves’ him. Ooh, we all like [Pope Francis] coz he loves gay people, ooh we all like [Pope Francis] coz he’s not ‘evil’ like Benedict, ooh we all love [Pope Francis] coz he doesn’t obsess over abortion. They had this moron on from America, something Kelly, saying it’s good that the Pope is downplaying the rules and sin.
Isn’t it the Pope’s job to point out sins in the world? You don’t join a club without knowing the rules, do you? Or am I in a parallel universe?
It’s the Neo-Catholics who live in a parallel universe. A universe where the principle of non-contradiction doesn’t apply.
Instead of Fr. Radcliffe OP it should read Fr. Radcliffe P45.
Or should that be “Fr Radcliffe OP45”!
I’ll put that on his envelope when I send him his marching orders. It’ll give him an idea of what is inside.
Comments are closed.