Glasgow Jesuits Strike Again!editor
HUNDREDS of friends and family gathered today for the funeral of a popular Glasgow teacher who died in a sledging accident.
Large crowds attended St Aloysius Church in Glasgow to pay their respects and leave floral tributes to Lanark Primary teacher Maryam Najafian.
Temporary additional seating was needed as the church pews quickly filled up at the funeral.
The 25-year-old had been sledging in a snowy Kelvingrove Park on 18 January when she crashed, suffering fatal head injuries. She was due to marry her partner Andrew Duncan this summer.
Her funeral service was conducted at the Roman Catholic church by Fathers Tim Curtis and Brian Lamb and Imam Sobhani.
Readings were made from both the Bible and the Koran as the service closed while family members, friends and colleagues gave tributes. Source
Quite simply diabolical. I wouldn’t trust Fr Tim Curtis with my cat never mind my soul. I wonder if this brings back memories for the editor? I experienced this sort of thing first hand about eleven years ago. Absolutely shocking.
I tell you, this kind of thing makes me so thankful that I attend Mass at a SSPX church. I urge anyone with an ounce of Catholic Faith to find their closest SSPX church. Yestetday.
I wouldn’t trust Fr Tim Curtis with my cat never mind my soul.
And yet you and others who attend SSPX Masses go to him – and his brother priests at St Aloysius – for Confession? Presumably because the SSPX priests don’t have faculties? What a pickle!
Nothing to do with faculties that some bloggers go to their parishes or city centre churches for Confession. One key reason is that it is very difficult sometimes to get into the confessional in the SSPX church as the priests can only hear confessions before and after Masses which makes for queues and the risk of not getting into the box – I’m sure you read the comment on another thread about the blogger who travelled a long way from his home extra early to try to be sure of getting to Confession, but still didn’t get in (partly, I’m sure, because some penitents ignore the old adage “be brief, be sorry, be gone”.)
And I am also sure that you will have read our thread ON Fr Tim Curtis and his additions to the prayer of absolution. The man clearly thinks the Church is his personal plaything. Still, we were able to ascertain that because he does pray the key words “I absolve you…” his absolutions are valid. I certainly wouldn’t be seeking any personal spiritual or moral advice from him – would you?
So, there’s no “pickle” for anyone attending an SSPX chapel. The “pickle” is for Catholics like yourself who do not understand the Faith at all – not remotely. Your “pickle” is trying to pretend that all is well, defending all sorts of scandals, going along with every novelty and scandal under the sun, while keeping up the appearance of being a Catholic. Spend an hour browsing the pre-Vatican II encyclicals to see just how wrong you are about what it means to be a Catholic. Wrong, with bells on…
I’m afraid there’s only one pickle around here and her name begins with “E” and ends in “Anne”.
Have you ever tried to get into a confessional at the SSPX Church? Not an easy task. It’s perfectly acceptable to attend a modern parish to receive absolution provided the correct form is used.
When I attended the Confessional in Saint Aloysius a few weeks ago I knew nothing of Fr Tim Curtis. The last few weeks have been very revealing.
There’s a real diabolical agenda going on with you eileenanne when instead of being outraged at the story above you try to trip up other bloggers. It speaks volumes for you.
Well, Petrus, it seems Eileenanne is not alone in her apparent view that there’s nothing wrong with Koran readings/syncretistic funerals in Catholic churches (given her lack of comment on the subject, and the legal adage that “silence denotes consent”, I am entitled to reach that conclusion)
Our poll on the website has consistently shown a majority who think that it is OK to have Koran readings in a Catholic church. Certainly, the gap is narrowing this morning but still, it is shocking to think that so many Catholics see nothing wrong with Koran readings in Catholic churches.
A couple of years ago my daughter got into a pickle, on no less than 3 occasions, trying to attend confessions in St Aloysius.
I won`t go into any detail as to why she kept trying but on the first two occasions she managed to get onto the wee hotseat where you sit while the previous penitent is in the box but the priest escaped the confessional just as she was entering.
On the third visit she was actually on the kneeler when the priest popped his head into her side of the confessional and told her that confessions were finished.
I was a bit behind her and my wife and when I arrived at the church and she was in the porch in tears.
I won`t repeat what my reactions were, not that I would be allowed to.
My daughter, God bless her, doesn`t go to church now. I don`t blame those incidents, nor do I blame my daughter, but they certainly didn`t help.
I pray every day for her return.
If I was in charge of these type of priests I would throw all the employment rules and regulations into the bin and ask them to try to get their job back in court.
This would never have happened before Vatican 2.
No wonder I don`t like pickles.
That was really disgraceful. How on earth could the priest have turned away a penitent? Especially a young person?
The priesthood is not just a job, it is a vocation. I always thought priests, like mothers could never claim the luxury of saying they got off duty at a certain hour D.
No, it seems (to me anyway) that they only work to rule now. Maybe some have got their words mixed up and think it is vacation rather than vocation.. It`s not that my daughter was late in going and there certainly weren’t many in front of her. She wasn`t even the last in the queue.
She was trying, the poor soul, to get a few things sorted out after
suffering a wee setback in her life, hence the tears.
To be honest, I feel that if I had my life to go over again I wouldn`t be all that interested in religion, especially the plastic catholic one we have now.
I had to ask for access to the toilet once on a visit to St Aloysius and the priest stood outside the door dangling the keys in a hurry to lock up behind me. It`s a good job I wasn`t constipated or the door would have been melled in.
It’s absolutely diabolical – I agree. And yes, this report did bring to mind that other occasion when a Catholic priest allowed Koran readings during a Mass in a Catholic primary school in Glasgow – Father Peter Lennon, Archdiocese of Glasgow, who – following the publicity our report generated – said he would do the same thing again. No qualms, and no consequences. Unlike orthodox priests who are “got at” for the slightest reason. So, goodness only knows how many priests are allowing readings from non-Christian Scriptures in their churches.
It seems these Jesuits are completely out of control. First of all they acknowledge a homosexual civil partner at a very public funeral and now this. I have it on good authority that the Archbishop of Glasgow at the time, Mario Conti, contacted the Jesuit superior to complain about that incident. Let me state on the record that if I had been the Archbishop of Glasgow the priest would have had his faculties removed and kicked out the Archdiocese before he could say “Paul McBride QC”! The same should be done to Fr Tim Curtis.
I’m confused, to put it mildly. Given this unfortunate young lady’s Muslim name, and the presence of an Imam at the funeral, was she Muslim or Catholic? If she was Catholic, why was the Imam involved, and if Muslim why was the funeral in a Catholic church? We know that the Jesuits are capable of anything, but I’ve never heard of Muslims being bitten to this extent by the ecumenical bug.
I am still confused! Was this poor lady a Muslim or a Catholic? Or was it just that she was a teacher in the school and the Jesuits thought that sufficed to give her a Catholic burial?
I AM shocked. I’ve heard of the second reading at Mass being taken from a book of secular poetry (for a supposedly Catholic wedding conducted by a Protestant minister) but never from the holy book of a non Catholic religion, least of all the Koran by whose teachings the Christians in the Middle east and Pakistan are being systematically wiped out.
I can’t see why people are confused. I think her name indicates that she is a Muslim, whether or not a practising Muslim (given that she and Andrew were co-habiting, I doubt it) but I can see no reason for an Imam to co-conduct the funeral unless the deceased had been an adherent of Islam. In the absence of any more detailed information, we can only presume that, because the groom-to-be is NOT a Muslim (can’t be too many Andrew Duncans who are Muslims, surely?) someone thought it appropriate to organise a service with a mixture of Islam and Christianity – syncretism, gravely offensive to God. It strikes me as more likely than not that here we have an example of clergy trying to please everyone. If the couple were entering a mixed marriage, one of them Muslim and one A.N. Other religion, probably lapsed Catholic or vaguely Presbyterian or whatever, then it’s been agreed all round that it would help the family, avoid division if they organised a syncretistic service. Pity about God being offended, but you just cannot please all of the people all of the time, can you?
Secular readings, songs and poems are not permitted at Catholic funerals, or Catholic any other kind of liturgy. Not that anyone bothers any more. When the Irish bishops tried to end that particular liturgical abuse, the Irish faithless were livid and continued to plague their priests with demands for daft sentimental nonsense especially at funerals.
I’m confused too. Muslims are forbidden from praying with non-Muslims, so why was there an imam there? And was she a Catholic? If so, why the imam and the Koran? if she was a Muslim, why would she be buried from a catholic church?
I’m no longer confused, having just discovered that ‘Imam’ is a forename as well as the title of a Muslim worship leader. But how sad that a funeral such as this should afford yet another illustration of the dreadful, diabolical confusion reigning in the modern Church.
Requiem aeternam dona ei Domine: et lux perpetua luceat ei.
I see no reason to doubt that the Imam is an Imam – the report says that the funeral was conducted by two named priests and a named Imam, and this quite separately from the reference to friends and colleagues etc.
The only Catholics left in the Church are the SSPX!!
I would caution you in charity not to make that kind of statement. The SSPX IS NOT the Catholic Church, it is merely a faithful Catholic institution offering the refuge of Sacred Tradition to endangered souls during a time of great crisis in the Church.
The Church is where the Pope is, even if His Holiness is to blame for the present mess. I know many well intentioned priests and faithful in the Church who are not SSPX Catholics, and there are bishops too, so we have to be careful what we think and say.
I am fiercely SSPX because I know that it is a work of God in this time of mass apostasy. How do I know that? Because the SSPX has altered not a single aspect of the Faith handed down unsullied for two thousand years and cannot therefore be guilty of sins against the Faith and the Church. The same cannot be said for the post-Vatican II innovators and their supporters, who are the real schismatics!
Nevertheless, many have been caught up in the confusion, especially the young who have been betrayed and deprived of their patrimony by liberal clergy. These innocent victims have been raised in ignorance and have no idea what the holy faith was like before the post-conciliar hippies utterly wiped it out. Many, however, are beginning to catch on to the betrayal and that’s why the SSPX is seeing a constant growth in numbers, particularly of young Catholics.
But that’s not to say that the many who don’t make the transition back to the full Traditional Faith of their Fathers are by default not true Catholics.
If we contend otherwise then we change “outside the Church no salvation” into “outside the SSPX no salvation,” which is a schismatic proposition. The SSPX has never promoted or supported such a view.
I should say that I think your statement was probably the result of understandable anger at the constant scandals in the Church we are confronted with every day. However, knee jerk responses can often have serious implications. I thought I should point that out.
I’m saddened by this latest event by Jesuits, but not surprised. The tragic death of this young teacher, should not prevent us from holding them to account for their irreligious stupidity.
They have gone so far over to the dark side that the devil has moved on looking for new fish to fry, knowing full well that the Jesuits and all the others like them, are well capable of completing his work.
Could all this be paving the way for the New World Order ‘One-World Religion’? So-called CHRISLAM – a ‘hybrid’ of Christianity and Islam. I understand that its first ‘temple’ is already under construction in Berlin. Tons of stuff on Google about this.
I don’t doubt there is a move to blend all religions into the One-World Religion. There was a very interesting thread, here on CT, some time back on the UN and the One-World Order. To me, it made sense, it explained the watered down catechism books, the diabolical attacks on the Mass, the Protestantized NOM, the persistent undermining of Church teaching, all aimed at removing ‘obstacles’ to religious harmony and unity and whatever. I am willing to bet, indifferentism is no longer a sin .
I had not heard of Chrislam, – am going to look it up on Google, thanks!
A new build such as this undoubtedly costs £millions. How much of its funding is being provided by the Vatican? (Aye, we’ve seen a few ‘pochles’ of late at the Banco Vaticano!)
If we were to pose this question to any ‘Catholic’ media office or any Church prelate here in the UK, there would either be ridicule, denial or a deafening silence.
I shall bear this in mind at the next ‘Peter’s Pence’ collection….
I am not in the least surprised at anything the Jesuits do. Once the great defenders of Orthodoxy in the Church, the devil now has so firm a footing in that Order that it is fair to state that the Jesuits are the main cause of the crisis in the Church today.
If we examine the history of Modernism and how this diabolical spirit came to infiltrate the Church at the highest levels, we will find that its early theoreticians and promoters were Jesuits. When it came to Vatican II, the greater number of prominent liberal theologians were Jesuits. After the Council, the architects of change (revolution) were principally Jesuits. It was a Jesuit also (Fr. Dhanis) who led the way in suppressing the Message and Secret of Fatima. And now we have a Jesuit Pope who is a true Modernist and who accepted the Papacy knowing that St. Ignatius, the founder of his Order, forbade any Jesuit to accept high office in the Church, especially the Papacy, a strict Jesuit rule that still stands to this day.
Pope Francis has since gone around playing to the media and the public gallery with very carefully constructed statements that have resulted in further confusion and dismay in the Church. His Holiness has even consciously and deliberately split the hierarchy with his admission for discussion of the most anti-Catholic ideas that no Catholic in his right mind would countenance. Yet, Pope Francis countenances them. I read just the other day that he received a transvestite couple in private audience, which ended in embraces all round. I mean, come on!
So folks, let us understand once and for all that the post-conciliar revolution is, from first to last, a Jesuit-orchestrated revolution that has reached its climax today in a Jesuit Pope. Consequently, we should be prepared for worse scandals to come. St. Ignatius must be spinning in his grave!
Some of you may recall Pope John Paul II’s visit to Edinburgh (1982), where he met with the Church of Scotland ‘grand fromage’.
In his welcome speech, the ‘Moderator’ talked about…..’a world in which the forces of atheism and irreligion are so powerful’…How much more so are these forces in our own times!
With fewer and fewer ‘Christians’ bothering about religion at all and over 90% of Catholic school-leavers also leaving the Faith, I wonder if the proposed One-World Religion is perceived as the ‘only means of survival’. We have seen this often with e.g. trade unions, where dwindling membership results in smaller unions merging with bigger ones otherwise they would simply cease to exist.
When one-world government has finally established itself, no doubt the ‘new world order’ generals will all be atheists.
It would suit their agenda for everyone else to be atheistic, but they realise that ‘religion is the opium of the people’ (Marx) and they won’t be able to eradicate it for some time. A compromise then for the masses….’ok, you can have religion, but only if we orchestrate and control it’…
Step forward, Chrislam.
“Chrislam” – that’s the first time I’ve heard that term but it seems to have arrived at the Jesuit church in Glasgow.
I also agree with your comment above about not giving to Peter’s Pence again. I’ve made that decision now.
Editor, I admit to not reading the lead article as carefully as I might have done, but I don’t think confusion about this funeral, given that nobody seems to have full details, was surprising. My first charitable interpretation of the scandal was that the unfortunate deceased lady was a convert to Catholicism and the Muslim presence at the funeral was for the comfort of her unconverted relatives. Sad to say, this sort of ‘pastoral’ arrangement is increasingly seen at NO funerals, and if ‘My way’ has not yet been on a hymn list, it’s only a matter of time.
Given Pope Francis’s prayers with Muslims and Jews at the Vatican last year, it would, I think, be vain to hope that the Glasgow Jesuits, following in his syncretic footsteps, would be reprimanded from any quarter for this particular scandal.
A pw protected site of the Muslim Glasgow Ahlulbayi Association (GAA) shows that ‘Sheikh Saeed Sobhani’ teaches classes on the meaning of rhe Qu’ran, and the link here shows that on 26th November the Ignatian Spirituality Centre in Glasgow hosted an ‘interfaith dialogue’ attended by GAA members. Cosy. No wonder Imam Sobhani was wheeled out for this funeral. It gave these Jesuits just the sort of opportunity they are looking for to follow Pope Francis’s example.
I see what you mean – my interpretation of the lack of full details was that the powers-that-be in St Aloysius were trying to keep the whole thing as quiet as possible. I took it as read that the deceased was a Muslim, although not practising. I seriously doubt that she would be a convert to Catholicism, given that she and her “partner” were cohabiting but I could, of course be wrong. There’s a first time for everything!
Anyway, you will see that the Ignatian Spirituality Centre (long a cause of scandal up here) features on the front page of the February newsletter which, I am happy to report, is now online along with all the rest of the website which disappeared for a couple of hours there! Phew!
You make a central point in your concluding words – you are right; Pope Francis has given the green light to the Modernists now to follow the “gays” out of the closet – and we are now witnessing the opening scenes of the long awaited epic movie, The Wheat from the Chaff…
PS “…and if ‘My way’ has not yet been on a hymn list, it’s only a matter of time.” Hilarious, Christina – well said, so true!
I’m reminded of the cremation service of my next-door neighbour (of no particular religious persuasion) who died suddenly and tragically, leaving a wife who had early-onset Altzheimer’s disease. I went hoping to be of some support to her and her young daughter, who would have to take on a carer’s responsibilities.
The presiding clergyman tried to give a faintly Christian overtone to the proceedings, but at the end my poor neighbour’s coffin slid through the curtain to the loud strains of ‘Fly me to the moon’.
Simultaneously, my back-row pew companion (a complete stranger) and I looked at each other, and we both collapsed in helpless giggles, ineffectually disguised as coughing fits.
LOL! I would not have been able to hide my helpless giggles! That’s really incredible that anyone would play that at a funeral. I only hope things are never that bad in the Catholic Church that any priest would allow something so ludicrous as that.
As well as the indifference that these idiotic stunts cause, I think its important to realise that the two parties approach such events from very different angles.
To the Jesuit / modernist mind, having Islam represented at a service in a Christian Church represents a step on the way to their goal of “one world religion”. They understand it as a coming together of equals to create common ground.
But to the Muslim mind, entering the buildings of other religions – including those of Christianity, the true faith – represents their own dominance, the ascendency of Islam. They understand these ceremonies as the public submission of the other religions to their own.
This is exactly why we could reference several local examples of Islamic prayers being conducted in Catholic Churches, but not one single example of the reverse. (I am open to correction).
I think these ceremonies are useful to Islam only so far as to portray it as a moderate and friendly faith, when Islam is in the minority. However, a quick glance at the news will highlight how Islam behaves toward other religions when it is in the majority.
Well said. And it is interesting to read the link posted by Christina and to note the very benign attitude to Sharia Law. The Jesuits in Garnethill, who are forever recommending visits to non-Christian places of worship and other ecumenical events, really are the equivalent of Lenin’s “useful idiots”.
This is appalling. How can a book which inspires Sharia Law with the subjugation of women, the sexual use of non Moslem women, the beheading of blasphemers, the cutting off of the hands of thieves, public floggings, and people are looking hard to find the word love in it be read beside the teachings of Christ. Any idea that this is somehow creating understanding is offset by the despair and sufferings of others who are being victimised by Sharia Law. Perhaps these priests should look at the real world and decide where they stand. Who knows perhaps the prefer the Koran. I look forward to seeing the editor in her burka, just to show solidarity.
I never thought of that – do you think I’d suit a burka? I’ve settled for raincoat and dark glasses when going into town, just in case I bump into the Archbishop, but you’ve given me an idea there!
As well as the indifference that these idiotic stunts cause, I think its important to realise that the two parties approach such events from very different angles
These Jesuits, in common with many other ecumenical useful idiots have seemingly uncritically swallowed the Muslim document ‘A Common Word’, (written in consequence of Pope Benedict’s Regensburg address?) hook, line and sinker, and are falling over themselves to ingratiate themselves with the adherents of the world’s most intolerant religion. Jesuits used to be formidable intellectuals, but in embracing this document, with its would-be ‘love of God and neighbour’ theme, they are equating the trinitarian God with the false or demonic god, Allah; failing to understand that our God IS love and can be understood and experienced only through faith in the Father, Son and Holy Ghost and that true love of neighbout can only follow from this faith.
This response ‘A Common Word Between Us and You’ by four Yale scholars is endorsed by a long list that includes all the usual suspects. It begins by cow-towing to Muslims, and asking for the ‘forgiveness’ of a false god or demon with the words … we want to begin by acknowledging that in the past (e.g. in the Crusades) and in the present (e.g. in excesses of the “war on terror”) many Christians have been guilty of sinning against our Muslim neighbors. Before we “shake your hand” in responding to your letter, we ask forgiveness of the All-Merciful One and of the Muslim community around the world. This in craven response to the usual Muslim claim of victimhood, As Muslims, we say to Christians that we are not against them and that Islam is not against them – so long as they do not wage war against Muslims on account of their religion, oppress them and drive them out of their homes (the sheer gall of this leaves one open-mouthed!).
In refreshing contrast to the signatories of the above document, and all the useful idiots intoxicated with ecumenism, an Anglican theologian has written a critique which is worth reading. I’m sorry to put in so many links, and boring ones at that, but I do think that the mention of the St. Aloysius’ Jesuits capers highlight something important and deadly that is going on in the Church, and it is as well to be fully aware of it.
Some years ago, an assistant priest at a parish in Luton was ‘gushing’ from the pulpit about his visit to one of the local mosques. As a gesture of respect he had to remove his outdoor shoes before entering, as I recall.
The gist of his sermon was that…’we all need to be more open, tolerant and welcoming towards those of other ‘faiths’, just as he was made welcome at the mosque, because none of us knows what the future holds’…..Reminds me of lyrics from the old Blue Mink charts hit …’well, we gotta recipe for a get-along scene – oh what a beautiful dream!’….
Vatican II was surely the great big ‘Melting Pot’, where the seeds of betrayal were sown.
It always amazes me that these numpties don’t see the contradiction in the way they mock Catholic traditions (such as women wearing mantillas/hats/scarves on our head in church, out of respect for the Blessed Sacrament) and yet will respect the Islamic traditions of removing their shoes before going into their mosque, even though the real reason for the removal of shoes is not that the mosque is somehow sacred ground, but simply to keep the carpet clean! I know someone is bound to challenge that statement to don’t take my word for it, here’s a Muslim explaining the custom.
Can you imagine the reactions if we suggested lengthening the life of church floors by removing shoes on entry? These same numpties would be quick enough to point out that the Catholic “tradition” is to hold a second collection to buy new carpets when necessary.
Did I call these shoe-removing-inter-faith clergy “numpties”? I need to watch it – I’m getting far too charitable in my old(er) age…
Your comment is too personal for our blog. We have no time for the “resistance” (to nothing) nonsense, so we decline to give them any publicity.
Note, though, for future reference, that we have a General Discussion thread for anything not covered by the topics offered. However, please stick to commenting on issues, and make no personal remarks – see our About Us section. These will always be deleted. Thank you.
Comments are closed.