Priest: Police Doctrinal Integrity of Bishops, Priests & Theologians…

Priest: Police Doctrinal Integrity of Bishops, Priests & Theologians…

August 19, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – In his book Magisterial Authority, Fr. Chad Ripperger, PhD, says “the Church will not climb out of this tumultuous period” without reversing the “practice since the Second Vatican Council onward not to police the doctrinal integrity” among bishops, priests and theologians. The crucial observation comes at the end of nearly fifty years of destructive leniency, which has in the Francis pontificate taken on new dimensions.  Read more hereVaticanIIdocs


The examples in the Lifesitenews report of an ongoing – and growing – attitude of dissent among bishops, gives Fr Ripperger’s warning a stark urgency. But is his suggestion to police doctrinal integrity a practical one?  Any attempt, for example, to reinstate the anti-Modernist oath would be likely to result in outright rebellion.  So, how to police those who are supposed to be policing the Faith is the key topic of this thread.  Share your thoughts…

Comments (109)

  • Summa

    Well here in Brisbane we have Bishop Mark Coleridge. His leadership involves Orwellian Linguistical Gymnastics, moving the Church towards a post-heterosexual dystopia by embracing the usual bunkum of inclusion, diversity ad nauseam. In short, if he’s our local ecclesiastical cop then we’re in trouble.

    August 20, 2016 at 11:11 am
    • Fidelis


      What I can’t get over is, were these bishops always like this? How could they hide it so well for years before Vatican II? How could they hide their LGBT sympathies so well, even denouncing that sin in public, as did Cardinal O’Brien? What is going on with them?

      August 20, 2016 at 7:11 pm
      • Summa

        I suppose they are just sinners like the rest of us, although the particular sin and the aggravating circumstances with their responsibilities to their flock, makes things quite grave.

        When you have 70% of Catholic priests in France, denying the true presence in the Eucharist, you know there is a demonic work at play in Vatican II.

        August 21, 2016 at 10:53 pm
  • Athanasius

    It’s difficult to know where to start with this one. The first priority must be the election of a Pope who is both orthodox in teaching and strong in character. Then I suppose he would have to commence his Pontificate with a command to the world’s bishops to unite with him in a public and solemn act of consecrating Russia to Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart. That act will bring forth a flood of graces that will change many hearts and minds. After this, a new doctrinal Council to reassert the Church’s true teaching and exorcise all errors and ambiguities from Vatican II. Then a restoration of the Holy Index along with a new Syllabus condemning today’s Modernist errors and abuses, backed of course with a willingness and determination to censure all those who dissent from Church teaching, including severe punishment for rebel prelates if necessary. And last of all, a very strict selection process for future episcopal nominations with a moritorium on all careerist clerics. These are just the immediate issues that need addressing to get the Church back to something akin to sanity.

    August 20, 2016 at 1:34 pm
    • Fidelis


      I do agree about the Consecration. That has to come from the very top, so without a very good pope, nothing can change. Things will only get worse, IMHO.

      August 20, 2016 at 7:12 pm
  • Gerontius

    Tough one this!

    Perhaps we should ask Our Lady Undoer Of Knots to obtain for the Church a Pope in the mould of Cardinal Sarah.

    The Unfailing Novena of Mary Undoer of Knots

    Maybe a perpetual novena to Our Lady for this intention is what is required.

    August 20, 2016 at 2:46 pm
    • Fidelis


      Isn’t Cardinal Sarah a novus ordo priest? I can’t see any change worth talking about coming from any pope who is not 100% traditional and that means putting the Mass at the top of the agenda, IMHO.

      August 20, 2016 at 7:14 pm
    • Nicky


      Thanks for that link to the devotion of Our Lady Undoer of Knots. I’ve never heard of that so it was very interesting to read. I have plenty of knots to undo so I am glad to know of that title – it’s amazing that it’s not been promoted more officially.

      What was disappointing about that site was that it lists the mysteries of light. It’s the first thing I look for in a website about the rosary and so far most of them include these new mysteries.

      August 22, 2016 at 5:26 pm
      • Gerontius


        Thanks for reply….. and look at what Iv’e just found….. During the late 80s/early90s, I had the privilege of working with Bishop Robson who was at that time my Parish Priest.

        It would not surprise me in the least if he consecrated his diocese to Our Lady of Fatima. He was a great PP then, and is a great Bishop now.

        Our Lady of Fatima, please protect this good man.

        August 24, 2016 at 3:58 pm
      • Josephine


        I’ve heard that Bishop Robson is OK about the Traditional Mass, so that is good. He also tweeted when Amoris Laetia was published, linking to articles giving it a harsh critique on traditional websites, like the Remnant, so he’s seems OK.

        August 24, 2016 at 9:12 pm
      • Gerontius

        Yes indeed Josephine,

        He’s a good Bishop, a shepherd with backbone speaking out, and not afraid to lead his flock from the front.

        I sincerely hope he becomes our next Cardinal, one who I hope, will be instrumental in removing the pernicious fruits of the Heretical Modernist Masonic Doctrine, so dangerous to the salvation of souls, from Holy Mother Church in Scotland.

        Deo Gratias.

        August 24, 2016 at 10:40 pm
  • RCA Victor

    I agree with Athanasius, that the first requirement is an orthodox and fearless Pope (i.e. an Abp. Lefebvre in the Chair of Peter) and that he must then perform the Consecration, as requested by Our Lady. In this new grace-filled environment, with the exorcism of the satanic enthronement ceremony of June 29, 1963 completed, I think the next step is to undo the re-organization of the Curia that was ordered by Paul VI, and to re-establish the Holy Office, whose responsibility it was to do precisely what Fr. Rippenberger calls for. From the Encyclopedia:

    The Congregation of the Holy Office defends Catholic teaching in matters of faith and morals: “Hæc S. Congregatio . . .doctrinam fidei et morum tutatur.” Whence it follows, and is explicitly affirmed in the “Sapienti consilio”, that the Holy Office deals with all matters which, directly or indirectly, concern faith and morals; it judges heresy, and the offences that lead to suspicion of heresy; it applies the canonical punishments incurred by heretics, schismatics, and the like. In this the Holy Office differs from all the other congregations, which are without judicial power, or, at least, may exercise it only at the request of the parties interested, while the Holy Office has both judicial and administrative power, since the legislator rightly believed that the congregation exclusively empowered to pass upon a doctrine, and qualify and condemn it as heretical, should also be the judge in heretical and kindred cases. From the fact that the purpose of this congregation is to defend the Faith, it follows that dispensation from the impediments of disparity of worship and of mixed religion (which by their nature imperil faith, and which, by Divine law itself is granted only upon guarantees given by the non-Catholic party) pertains to the Holy Office. The same is true of the Pauline privilege. And as the judicial causes connected with this privilege and with impediments of disparity of worship and mixed religion have a remote connexion with the Faith, it was declared that these causes belonged to the jurisdiction of the Holy Office (see decision of the Cong. of the Consistory, January, 1910). With regard, however, to the substantial form of the celebration of mixed marriages, the pope withdrew all authority from this congregation, wishing article 11 of the Decree “Ne temere” to remain in force.

    August 20, 2016 at 3:19 pm
    • editor

      RCA Victor,

      “I agree with Athanasius…”

      Well, now, who’s a clever clogs! Good move, our Victor, very good move…

      I agree about re-establishing the Holy Office. If they place it right next door to my Department for Wimmin, I can police that, just to make sure… 😀

      Seriously, a strong Holy Office in some form or another, will have to be set up once the current madness has passed…

      August 20, 2016 at 7:56 pm
      • RCA Victor


        Would that be a Department for Deaconesses? (Don’t worry, I’ll agree with you as well, but it might take a few more zeroes added to my paycheck….)

        August 21, 2016 at 2:50 am
  • Fidelis

    I don’t think anything can change until we get a thoroughly good pope of the same kind as Pope Saint Pius X. We need a Pius XIII before anything can improve IMHO.

    August 20, 2016 at 7:12 pm
    • editor


      I wouldn’t say nothing can change until we get a really good pope, because some of the orthodox Cardinals (Sarah, Burke) may not be perfect, but they’re a heck of a lot more perfect than the present pontiff and they would certainly put certain things right, if not all.

      In the longer term, of course, we do need a Pius XIII – with that I do agree. Preferably with my unworthy self running one of the key Vatican departments – e.g. the Department for Wimmin…!

      August 20, 2016 at 7:54 pm
  • spudeater

    “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?”

    Oh, dontcha just love it when a subject is posted and a suitable Latin epithet can used in response! (Must look it up later and see what it actually means…).

    Anyway, perhaps the partial liquefaction of the blood of St. Januarius when Pope Francis visited Naples last year is of significance. No, I haven’t gone mad, stay with me…

    I remember reading at the time, and possibly on this actual website, that the last time the blood liquefied was during the visit of Pope Pius IX who ascended to the papacy with a reputation as a liberal but who eventually proved to be a pillar of orthodoxy and that there may, MAY turn out to be a correlation between the trajectory of his pontificate and that of Pope Francis. Granted, there is really no comparison to be made between the two men and the current malaise afflicting the Church, starting from the top and infecting all ranks of the clergy, is so virulent and all-encompassing that only an event of the spiritual magnitude of the Consecration of Russia could restore the Reign of Christ through His Church, but perhaps that partial liquefaction (assuming it did actually happen and was not an ’embellishment’ concocted by a media-savvy Vatican apparatchik) is an indication that the current papacy may yet take (or more likely be forced to take, by potentially unprecedented world events) a wholly unexpected and different course. THEN, the doctrinal enforcers can start cleaning House and the whip-of-cords-making business can really take off.

    August 20, 2016 at 9:31 pm
    • editor


      “Perhaps…the current papacy may yet take (or more likely be forced to take, by potentially unprecedented world events) a wholly unexpected and different course.”

      I think you may well be on to something there. Yip. You heard it here first, on “this actual website”…

      August 20, 2016 at 11:18 pm
      • spudeater


        If that’s a picture of your depeddee in the Department for Wimmin, I have serious doubts about your chances of success in righting the many wrongs inflicted on the Sisterhood by the Church throughout the centuries. I think even the British Prime Minister is more likely to succeed in rescuing Blighty and her full name is Theresa May-Butibetshedont.

        August 21, 2016 at 12:44 am
    • RCA Victor


      I’ve been praying a Rosary intention for months for the conversion of Jorge Bergoglio and/or his speedy removal from the Chair of Peter. That said, I seriously doubt he has the mental capacity to make a convincing about-face like, say, Saul of Tarsus/St. Paul. Or should I say, he might be forced to make an about-face, but it would probably emerge from his mouth as more incomprehensible babbling.

      August 21, 2016 at 2:48 am
    • RCA Victor


      You got me curious, so I looked up your Latin phrase:

      August 21, 2016 at 2:52 am
  • Athanasius


    You need to give it a rest with the selfies!

    August 21, 2016 at 12:30 am
    • RCA Victor


      I notice she has red shoes! The shoes of the Fisherwummin??

      August 21, 2016 at 2:53 am
      • Athanasius

        RCA Victor

        You may be on to something with the fish wife association!!

        Sorry Editor, just slash my pay into negative figures. It was worth it.

        August 21, 2016 at 2:41 pm
      • spudeater

        RCA Vic,

        Please don’t give Ed. any ideas. Next thing we know she’ll be putting out her hair nets for a catch.

        August 21, 2016 at 2:54 pm
  • editor

    Well, you lot are a shameless bunch, having a go at a poor defenceless lady (I use the term loosely, obviously!) so all pay is frozen for the foreseeable…

    Now, back on topic, I thought this shocking news was a must-read for this post – here is one example of the way the crisis in the Church is affecting us here in Scotland. This from Catholic Family News:

    UK (Scotland)
    Same-sex, humanist weddings exceed Catholic weddings

    THE NUMBER of same-sex wedding ceremonies exceeded the number of Catholic weddings in Scotland in 2015, according to an annual demographic report released by Scotland’s government.

    Over 5% of weddings that took place in Scotland last year were same-sex ceremonies. 1,671 same-sex weddings took place-975 of women, and 696 of men-while 1,438 Catholic weddings were celebrated, down from 2,004 a decade earlier. The year 2015 was the first full year in which homosexual civil marriages were legal.

    For the sixth consecutive year, weddings conducted by Humanist Society Scotland exceeded the number of Catholic weddings. The number of weddings conducted by various humanist groups now exceeds the number of weddings conducted by the Church of Scotland, the nation’s main Protestant body.

    In 2015, there were more deaths (57,579) in Scotland than births (55,098), but because of migration from the rest of the United Kingdom and overseas, the population increased to a record 5,373,000. Source

    So, it seems to me that among the first steps to be taken by Pope Pius XIII to end the crisis in the Church, would be to sack every bishop and priest who did not stand out firmly against the roller-coaster LGBT campaigners who fought – and won – the battle to change the definition of marriage. By their complicit silence, the Catholic clergy and hierarchy have enabled the reducing of the importance of marriage to the point where most people are choosing a “humanist” wedding, whatever the heck that might be. Crazy world.

    August 21, 2016 at 5:51 pm
    • RCA Victor


      May I suggest a preliminary step that seems necessary for the sacking of prelates and priests: root out, excommunicate and laicize the members of the “Lavender Mafia,” who are and have been in bed with the LGBTQRSTUVWZXYZ coven (frequently literally) for at least two generations, and thus militating for the same goals, within the Church, as this army of satanists does outside the Church,

      August 21, 2016 at 6:27 pm
    • Elizabeth

      I couldn’t agree more! I cringe every time I hear a man refer to his ‘husband” or a woman her “wife”, it is so obviously unnatural. I cannot recall a single English bishop or priest speaking out against it when the legislation went through.

      August 21, 2016 at 8:05 pm
      • editor


        It was almost impossible for the hierarchy of the UK, north and south of the border, to object to same-sex “marriage” when they’d all given their blessing (so to speak) to Civil Partnerships. That meant that all they were objecting to, was the use of the term “marriage”. Recognising the legitimacy – in any way – of homosexual activity meant they had lost the war.

        One of our readers sat behind Alex Salmond, former leader of the SNP, during the funeral of a well know partnered homosexual solicitor in a city centre church in Glasgow (St Aloysius Jesuit church) and, as he heard the priest refer over and over again to “Paul’s partner” in the most indulgent terms, our reader thought, rightly, how Alex must have been laughing up his sleeve, since this funeral took place at the height of the same-sex “marriage” debate. Alex Salmond knew that the Parliament had nothing to fear from the Catholic Church. The legislation would – and did – go through on a prayer, if you’ll excuse the pun.

        So, RCA Victor is correct – one of the many “first steps” required to put this Church crisis right, is to expunge all traces of those bishops and priests who have raised homosexual activity from being one of the four sins crying to Heaven for vengeance, almost to a canonisable virtue.

        August 22, 2016 at 9:32 am
    • gabriel syme


      In my opinion the popularity of humanist weddings is down to it being a simple product, which is fully customisable. As regards the ceremony, people can have anything they want, held wherever they want. And no particular commitment or values are required to be made or assented to, all that is required to access this product is having the money and willingness the buy it.

      In a country like Scotland where mainstream religion (protestantism) has collapsed, leaving only minority faiths, we are at a strange point in history, in that there are a lot of young people who have no traditions (in terms of their understanding of marriage and what a marriage ceremony looks like etc) which is why fully customisable humanist weddings are popular, because a lot of such people just want to “make a ceremony up” themselves.

      A lot of so called “humanist celebrants” are actually wedding planning businesses first and foremost. The personalised ceremony is simply part of what they arrange.

      The Bishops in Scotland & elsewhere are definitely failing regarding Marriage.- the Church’s view is now so completely alien to many in Society, (even Catholics) and how the Church teaches about marriage is too-little too-late and little more than “box ticking”.

      Undoubtedly more people would desire a Catholic wedding, if the Church made a proper fist of its presentation and teaching in marriage. Though this is offset by the fact that in Scotland Catholics are only about 16% of the population, (which caps the possible number of Catholic weddings), whereas anyone at all can buy a humanist wedding, which helps put the comparative marriage statistics in context.

      I got married in 2012, and it occurred to me that the diocesan marriage preparation course we attended, shortly before our “big day”, was the first time the Church had ever broached the subject of marriage with me (and the others present).

      You wouldn’t agree to buy a house without first learning where it was built and how much it cost, so why are Scots Catholics only learning about marriage after agreeing to get married? (I bet its the same in Rep Ireland and this would help explain the remarkable same sex marriage vote, and why so many young people in particular voted for this).

      Its absurd that the Church only thinks about teaching about marriage (1) after a couple has already decided to get married and (2) years after secular society has started to shape a persons views on marriage, via the media and popular culture.

      Children should learn about marriage, so they can understand and value it from an early age, which would also inform their perspective of their family environment. It shouldn’t be an afterthought for adults, a box tick in the run up to a wedding ceremony.

      August 22, 2016 at 12:03 am
      • Nicky

        Gabriel Syme,

        “In my opinion the popularity of humanist weddings is down to it being a simple product, which is fully customisable.”

        I know what you mean, but the Catholic weddings are getting to be as bad. I once saw a couple turning to the congregation to make their vows, i.e. turning their back on the Tabernacle, and the usual awful music was on offer.

        It’s all the same, anyway, whatever the motive for choosing humanist weddings, no Catholic who really believed the faith would do that.

        August 22, 2016 at 5:29 pm
  • dominiemary

    August 21, 2016 at 9:04 pm
    • RCA Victor


      Thank you for posting this. How interesting that the sacking of Abp. Nienstadt by Pope Francis was portrayed among certain traditionalist talking heads as more evidence of Francis’ persecution of tradition-minded bishops, using some minor infractions as an excuse. Well, this video certainly demonstrates that Nienstadt had committed far more than “minor infractions.” It appears he was a typically dirty homosexual predator.

      August 21, 2016 at 11:04 pm
    • editor

      Dominie Mary,

      I’ve now watched the video right through and it is truly terrible to see and to read, first hand, the duplicitous correspondence seeking to destroy evidence of crimes against children by senior churchmen. The lawyer, Jeff Anderson, makes a couple of comments which I think bear repeating here – comments with which I fully agree.

      Firstly, he quotes Pope Francis saying that Bishops must be vigilant in protecting children, and that bishops should be removed from office who are implicated in child abuse, whether by cover-up or whatever. The lawyer then – rightly – keeps pointing out that “if the Pope’s words mean anything…” he will act to discipline (even dismiss from the clerical state) those clergy and hierarchy found to be guilty of abuse or cover-up. If Pope Francis’ words mean anything, that is true. If actions speak louder than words, however, then clearly his words mean nothing.

      Secondly, towards the end of this devastating expose of the disgraceful (but not disgraced – he’s still in good standing, RCA Victor, apparently he “resigned”, was not “sacked” according to the lawyer) Archbishop Nienstadt et al, Jeff Anderson insisted that “all roads of concealment and cover up lead to Rome” and he calls for the most serious action to be taken against all those implicated, right up to those within the Vatican who called for the destruction of evidence, naming the former papal nuncio to the U.S. and Cardinal Re, among others.

      Thank you for posting the video, Dominie Mary – it’s not pleasant to learn about this disgraceful dereliction of duty, but we take heart from two things: (1) “It is better that scandal should arise than that the truth be suppressed” (Pope Gregory The Great) and (2) that these scandals are clearly perpetrated by faithless hirelings – not by fully believing Catholic priests and bishops, of whom there do not seem to be an awful lot around, in the post-Vatican II “springtime”.

      So, we continue to pray for the Consecration of Russia when the restoration of the true Faith will begin.

      August 23, 2016 at 6:16 pm
  • Margaret Mary


    That’s a completely shocking video. I’m beginning to think it will be impossible to “police” the bishops and priests, even with a really good pope. Things have really got out of hand.

    Here in Scotland, the hierarchy remain silent while the homosexual lobby marches on, quite literally, in their “Gay Pride” marches. This year they are gloating over having got marriage rights but that’s not the end, it’s not a full stop, just a comma, because they now are talking about their next goal being to “topple” the education system. They’re after the hearts, minds and bodies of young people.

    The silence from priests and bishops is deafening on this. I am horrified at their lack of concern, or lack of courage, whatever it is.

    August 21, 2016 at 10:32 pm
  • Athanasius

    Margaret Mary

    “Gay Pride” is an interesting banner they march under. Wasn’t it Pride that caused the fall of Lucifer, and isn’t it pride that the Church teaches is at the root of every sin? Yes, a very interesting banner indeed.

    I watched a YouTube video of Bishop Fulton Sheen the other night, entitled “False Compassion”. The liberal pro-homosexual lobby should listen to what this wise Bishop had to say on the subject as far back as 1964. The world has been turned on its head.

    August 21, 2016 at 11:22 pm
  • sixupman

    Rebellion or Obedience?

    Obedience facilitated the unnecessary changes to the ‘Old Mass’ and eventually its Abrogation. It also allowed victimisation of clergy who did demur both to that Abrogation and an advancing Protestantisation of even the NOM and much more. Salford Diocese is on the road to becoming the Galloway of E&W and a church of which +Maurice Taylor would be proud.

    Wholesale reorganisation with laity managed parishes and the installation of the Permanent Diaconate [none at present] on a large scale, with a “Mrs. Proudy” in each parish no doubt – Liverpool lists both Deacons and wives inn their year books. The inexorable rise to the making of married (hetro) clergy and possibly even worse (?).

    The prelates and Obedient clergy sowed the seeds of destruction. Some (few) diocese are now having recourse to ICSP< FSSP and others with good wider effect. Apparently there is to be a conference of Traditional Orders, including SSPX, not before time.

    You claim the NOM is malodorous so why not rebellion, even at this late stage. But, before you exclaim the purity of SSPX, I am acutely aware of The Society emulating the Diocesan Church in misuse and abuse of power by District Superiors and the cliques in which they have surrounded themselves – I merely quote, as a single instance the diabolical treatment of Fr. John Rizzo and others. The departure of +Williamson may not have eradicated the problem in its entirety.

    August 22, 2016 at 8:31 am
    • Laura


      The old Mass was never abrogated. The bishops just said that it was. Pope Benedict made it clear in Summorum Pontificum that it had never been abrogated.

      “Art 1. The Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI is the ordinary expression of the lex orandi (rule of prayer) of the Catholic Church of the Latin rite. The Roman Missal promulgated by Saint Pius V and revised by Blessed John XXIII is nonetheless to be considered an extraordinary expression of the same lex orandi of the Church and duly honoured for its venerable and ancient usage. These two expressions of the Church’s lex orandi will in no way lead to a division in the Church’s lex credendi (rule of faith); for they are two usages of the one Roman rite.

      It is therefore permitted to celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass following the typical edition of the Roman Missal, which was promulgated by Blessed John XXIII in 1962 and never abrogated, as an extraordinary form of the Church’s Liturgy.”

      About the SSPX “purity” – I’ve never seen that claimed on this blog. The opposite, in fact, because I’ve read many times comments that the Society is “not perfect” or words to that effect. Nothing is perfect, of course, but you know what I mean – nobody’s claimed that it was fault-free.

      August 22, 2016 at 3:08 pm
    • Athanasius


      Your raising of the matter of Fr. John Rizzo some 20 years after he left the SSPX is not conducive either to peace or charity. I was there when Fr. Rizzo left, he left in fact after Mass in Glasgow. Yes, he was unjustly treated by Bishop Williamson in Idaho, injustice that was exacerbated when he was sent to the UK where many of Bishop Williamson’s supporters resided in the priories at the time. But I think in fairness we have to add that Fr. Rizzo did not behave appropriately at the time of his departure, by which I mean he cared very little about the harm his sudden departure would do to those who actually respected him. There was no little selfishness and self pity in his behaviour. Far be it for Fr. Rizzo to suffer any injustice in silence for Our Lord.

      It would have been better had you not raised so unsavoury a recollection from the past. I cannot see what supernatural good your comment will serve.

      August 22, 2016 at 11:43 pm
      • sixupman

        I suppose it is a view of Fr. Rizzo’s conduct, when viewed from a saintly pedestal.

        I can give you a relatively late UK situation where the misuse/abuse of power was deployed – in the end to the financial detriment of SSPX. I sent the offender my only copy of “Luke Delmege”. Also where +Williamson was afforded comfort in one UK priory – after his de facto split.

        For the record: if it was physically/practically possible for me to hear SSPX Masses, I would.

        August 23, 2016 at 7:50 am
      • Athanasius


        “I suppose it is a view of Fr. Rizzo’s conduct, when viewed from a saintly pedestal.”

        Again, was there any need for that?

        August 23, 2016 at 3:17 pm
      • sixupman

        Was there any need to qualify/malign Fr. Rizzo (in effect) in your own comment? He is a ‘New Yorker’ which explains much of that which appears unacceptable to you.

        Sefl-righteousness never brought converts to The Faith – example did.

        August 23, 2016 at 5:12 pm
      • Athanasius


        May I suggest that you take your leave of this blog until you regain some modicum of charity and respect for others. I am really shocked at your behaviour, completely out of charater for you.

        August 23, 2016 at 6:35 pm
      • sixupman

        What do you know of my character? You have me at a disadvantage there! If plain speaking offends, in that it may contradict your own held views and standards, so be it.

        The participants to this blog are not “the elect”, some do exist in the NOM world which here you give every impression of denying.

        It is entirely up to yourgoodself to terminate these exchanges.

        August 23, 2016 at 7:06 pm
      • Nicky


        There’s a difference between plain speaking and rudeness. You seem to be looking for a fight.

        I come on here occasionally to read and sometimes to contribute and I’ve never thought the bloggers here are claiming to be “the elect”. You seem to want to defend the NOM although nobody was talking about it until you came along – LOL!

        August 23, 2016 at 8:23 pm
      • sixupman

        A longer experience would educate you further.

        Not a fight, merely a refusal to roll-over to superior attitudes.

        One has to consider the situation in the overall.

        August 23, 2016 at 9:09 pm
      • Athanasius


        Fr. Rizzo was a fine priest who did a lot of good for the SSPX and was greatly liked and appreciated by most. He was not, however, the saint you appear to want portray him. In fact when he left the SSPX he went online and did as much damage as he could to the Fraternity’s reputation without a single thought apparently for weaker souls who may have read his stuff and been scandalised by it. Yes, Fr. Rizzo had his faults. He would not have acted as he did had the FSSP not been recently created by Rome at the time for him to fall back on.

        I know another priest in the SSPX, a really devoted American priest, who was also persecuted by Bishop Williamson and his deputies, much more so than Fr. Rizzo. The difference is that he has remained faithful to the Archbishop and his apostolate, knowing that a few bad eggs are not representative of the entire basket. This priest is very holy and wise, an author of books that have helped many souls avoid certain errors.

        Truth is, you were not around at the time and you don’t have the full picture. I do have the full picture and that’s why I can write objectively.

        And speaking of objectivity, the greater majority of SSPX clergy are good, holy priests. Being human, however, they are as prone to weakness and sin as the rest of us. In fact, the devil targets them more and that’s why we should pray for them.

        August 23, 2016 at 7:12 pm
      • sixupman

        Wrong! I was at church, in Preston, when an ashen-faced priest informed us of Fr. Rizzo’s abrupt departure and I am also in a position to have knowledge of the other cases to which you have alluded. But at that time, and I shall avoid Cumbrian vernacular coarseness – though seriously tempted, +Williamson and his personal mafia were still the apple of your eyes. Whereas, I am on record as challenging +Williamson even before his elevation. What of those quislings who remained in The Society for sake of status and self-preservation – in your terms they stuck-by Msgr. Lefebvre – not, they betrayed him.

        What about SSPX UK clergy, worthy men, who through Obedience to a quisling, remained silent?

        Censorship: the laity were to be denied the awful truth of what went on at Post Falls? For the greater good – sounds very Vatican II Church to me. One miscreant was spirited-off to Switzerland. A recent UK Superior opined that Post Falls was the epitome of true Catholicism and I feel that he retained your obeisance.

        Now, of course, there exists a veritable Lavabo to distance yourselves from which you were once, by silence, complicit.

        For the record: I currently spend four hours on a Sunday to effect hearing a TLM; when in Cumbria, I drove myself and other from Carlisle to both Newcastle and Sacriston three or four Sundays a month; in Somerset, it took me close to seven hours, involving public transport, to hear an SSPX Mass. The fact that I hold in great affection my current emeritus parish priest and have had the honour of receiving Communion from his hand; that I am very friendly with another diocesan priest who has been persecuted by his diocese for challenging his bishop on ecumenism, et al, has led me to be vilified on this blog in the past. I am currently challenging the bishop, of my present diocese, upon the basis of his proposed re-organisation – which appears to be a step on a laity led church, as feared in Germany, but not as advanced, and as envisaged by +Maurice Taylor. If all this renders me as having “an (NOM) axe-to-grind” – as suggested by your exalted Editor, then so be it. The difference being, I do not reside in a cocoon.

        I will remind you, in the days of Fr. Black, SSPX had cordial relations with both diocesan and Anglo-Catholic clergy – what was good enough for the redoubtable Fr. Black should be good enough for you all.

        Back to you.

        August 23, 2016 at 8:24 pm
      • editor


        For the record, I regularly attend Masses offered by diocesan priests. And I am friendly with diocesan priests who do NOT offer the traditional Mass. I’m meeting one for a cuppa on Thursday. So, take care not to jump to the wrong conclusions about people, even the bloggers here, whom you appear to detest.

        Now, this thread is not about the SSPX so here’s the deal. I will leave your latest post on the subject (8.24pm) and any replies to it, but any further comments from you on the subject will be removed as soon as I see them, so don’t waste your time writing more vitriol.

        I have tried to reason with you but you appear to be filled with hatred – at first I thought it was hatred of the SSPX and/or the old Mass, but now it is clear that your hatred is directed at “this blog” (usually a euphemism for “editor” – see if I care…)

        So, let’s move on. Tell us what, in your view, would be the most important thing that needs to be done to begin the process of restoring the Catholic Faith in the UK. That’s the topic. Check out the blog introduction if necessary and share your thoughts on the best way forward, in your opinion.

        August 23, 2016 at 11:07 pm
  • sixupman

    Laura, I am well aware that the episcopate lied over The Old Mass and abrogation.

    But you see I am clearly lacking of the erudition repeatedly expounded on this blog.

    I am just an ordinary guy in the pew.

    August 22, 2016 at 6:28 pm
    • Laura


      I am just an ordinary woman in the pew. It sounds like you are offended but I was only saying the old Mass wasn’t abrogated because you said it was. It’s a lie that the bishops told for years, so it would not be surprising if you did think that. It’s not a big deal, but sorry if I said the wrong thing. I didn’t mean to put you down, just innocently thought you would be glad to know the truth. Sorry.

      August 22, 2016 at 11:01 pm
  • Therese

    While I agree that the first step for a future Catholic pope is to uproot and laicize the homosexual invaders in the hierarchy, I think there will be a massive job to be done in re-educating possibly the majority of those clergy left in the Catholic faith. There are so many examples of parish priests who seem to have lost the basics. A friend of mine was recently received into the Church – sadly the modern Church – and I was appalled when she mentioned that she had just had her first confession – some weeks after her reception and First Holy Communion. I have given her some solid Catholic sources to learn about the Faith for herself, as it’s much too dangerous to leave this to local clergy unless one is absolutely certain of their credentials to teach the Faith.

    August 22, 2016 at 7:38 pm
    • editor


      Spot on. When priests of the generation of the dissident Monsignor Basil Loftus, who writes every week in the (Anything but) Catholic Times, say that we need to get behind the Vatican II programme and forget all that went before, you know that re-education in the Faith is a must, in any restoration work. However, the likes of Monsignor Loftus appear to be so embedded in their new religion that they are lost to the truth. The new candidates in seminaries would be, hopefully, open to the truth – indeed, I’ve just had a conversation with friends who pointed out that the majority of future priests, just entering seminaries, are already of a “traditional” mindset. The new religion bunch is dying out, for which praise the Lord!

      August 23, 2016 at 8:36 am
  • Elizabeth

    We have an African priest in our parish for a couple of years while he studies catechetics at Maryvale. In his sermons he comes out with a lot of theologically unsound stuff: he does not believe that anyone goes to hell, he talks about “the great religions of the world” he was practically dancing in the aisle when he referred to Amoris Laetitiae, and the year of mercy. Let alone the damage he does here, he will go back to teach in an African seminary. Heaven knows what they are teaching him in college. If the laity are to be properly taught the faith then the seminaries must be overhauled but those who should do this are not themselves educated as many bloggers have pointed out. So “top down” or “bottom up” how can this mess be put right?

    August 22, 2016 at 9:19 pm
    • RCA Victor


      Funny your African priest should mention the “great religions of the world.” Rorate Caeli is featuring an excerpt from St. Pius X’s Notre Charge Apostolique which begins with this:

      “We fear that worse is to come: the end result of this developing promiscuousness, the beneficiary of this cosmopolitan social action, can only be a Democracy which will be neither Catholic, nor Protestant, nor Jewish. It will be a religion (for Sillonism, so the leaders have said, is a religion) more universal than the Catholic Church, uniting all men to become brothers and comrades at last in the ‘Kingdom of God’. We do not work for the Church, we work for mankind.”

      (In other words, the Freemason doctrine adapted for the destruction of the Faith).

      You should ask your priest what he thinks of Cardinal Sarah’s ad orientem speech…

      August 23, 2016 at 12:13 am
      • Elizabeth

        RCA Victor,

        It would indeed be interesting to know what he thinks of what Cardinal Sarah has said. I have just properly read the ad orientem speech, having to my shame only read summaries till now.
        It is a speech that calls out for real prayerful consideration. How sad that Cardinal Vincent’s reaction was to immediately contact his priests and pretty much tell them to ignore the request for ad orientem liturgy. If that was brought back I think it would have a big impact on restoring the Mass to a sacrifice rather than a ‘celebration’. Also ++Sarah appeals for Holy Communion to be taken kneeling. His words seem to fall on deaf ears sadly.
        If I get the chance I will ask our priest what he thinks about the subject. I wonder if it has even been mentioned at Maryvale! (Which is a house of studies near here for clergy and lay people, esp in catechetics.)

        August 23, 2016 at 8:02 pm
  • sixupman

    At the time we were told and the clergy largely accepted that The Old Mass had been abrogated/banned – only when BXVI intervened [how many years later] that it was disclosed to be untrue. At the time did you believe it to have been abrogated/banned by the Vatican? That does not exclude myself, you and others ignoring that Vatican edict – but the Vatican edict stood all the same.

    I am well aware how clever the contributors to this blog are, it is demonstrated daily ‘in spades’! Demonstrating the same might be considered the venial sin of pride.

    August 23, 2016 at 8:01 am
    • Therese

      I’m not remotely clever, Sixupman, but I knew many years ago that the “Old Mass” had not been abrogated, because I researched the question and read books written by clever people, who enlightened me. Easy peasy, and nothing to be proud of, even venially.

      August 23, 2016 at 1:24 pm
      • sixupman

        Boasting again?

        August 23, 2016 at 2:43 pm
      • Therese

        Oh,it seems like I touched a nerve.

        August 23, 2016 at 2:51 pm
      • sixupman

        No madam, you did not. You merely demonstrated the self-superiority redolent throughout this blog in relation to those who have the temerity not to conform to the narrow view self-congratulatory nature evident here.

        Might I refer you to the blog operated by a diocesan priest and a layman upon the matter of SSPX.

        August 23, 2016 at 5:03 pm
      • editor


        I am puzzled by your comments here, culminating in your unkind description of us as guilty of “self-superiority” – by which I presume you mean we are “arrogant” or “know-it-alls”. If I’ve misunderstood, please correct me. I like to know if I am wrong, so do not hesitate to correct me. I will thank you in due course, when I see your correction.

        Nobody here, as far as I can see, has demonstrated the kind of “superiority” you appear to mean. Offering a factual correction is not being “superior” .

        You wrote:

        “Obedience facilitated the unnecessary changes to the ‘Old Mass’ and eventually its Abrogation. It also allowed victimisation of clergy who did demur both to that Abrogation…”

        Laura then explained that, although the bishops lied and gave the impression that the old Mass had been abrogated, it really had not been, and she quoted Pope Benedict’s Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum, where he explicitly said this Mass had never been abrogated.

        However instead of thanking her for going to the trouble of providing the exact quote and link, you insult her by replying that you knew that all along: “Laura, I am well aware that the episcopate lied over The Old Mass and abrogation…”

        Unlike my unworthy self, Laura let that pass where I would have replied: “Well, why the blankety blank did you say it had been abrogated, if you knew it hadn’t?”

        Then you go on to make a rather childish remark to the effect that you are not as erudite as the rest of us, or whatever. Nobody needs to be “erudite” to get a simple fact right. Most people in the Church today DO think that the old Mass was banned – at least for a time – and even now many have no clue about Summorum Pontificum (“some more what?”) So there is no shame is admitting that one didn’t realise it hadn’t been abrogated in the first place. People of every academic ability around the world were astonished to discover, via Summorum Pontificum, that the old Mass had NOT been abrogated. So, my guess is that it’s not our perceived “superiority” that is the problem, but, rather, your inferiority complex. Without any good reason, may I assure you, because I usually enjoy and learn from your contributions to this blog, so this exchange today has taken me aback. You have no reason to consider the rest of us “superior” when we are no better or no worse than your good self. We’re all in here trying to educate ourselves in the Faith to keep our Faith alive at this time of horrendous crisis in the Church with more scandals on a daily basis that the local chip shop churns out fish suppers.

        In case I’m wrong about your “inferiority complex” and the fact is that you just don’t like us, then I must add for the record that perhaps blogging (and possibly any kind of discussion) may not be for you, Sixupman, because in any discussion, we should all learn something (if only about our own character) and as adults, we should be prepared to admit to having been wrong about this or that, and grateful to be corrected. That’s the mature attitude, not to take the huff and shoot the messenger(s). I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve been wrong myself – many, many times. I don’t see it as a cause for shame. Quite the reverse. I’d rather be corrected than languish in my false information, and if someone has gone to the trouble of posting quotes, articles, links whatever, to help me realise where I had been wrong, then I feel gratitude, not an urge to insult them.

        Now, life is too short to engage in animosity. Let’s put this spat down to a misunderstanding, some crossed wires, and return to fighting the real enemy, the “principalities and powers” (St Paul to Ephesians) which are causing mayhem in the Church in our times.

        PS I have paid a flying visit to and scrolled down to where there is an article about the SSPX along the lines of “I like them but…”! I’ll read it properly later but my guess if that it’s the usual, “they’re not perfect” analysis, which we all know. Nothing is perfect in this world, and we have pointed out many times that the SSPX priests and laity are not perfect any more than the priests and laity in the rest of the Church are perfect. The Society is, however, clearly God’s “lifeboat” for us in the current crisis. Not a parallel Church, as is mischievously implied – at least that’s what I thought I read in my brief visit. I’ll check that out properly later, and If I’ve got it wrong, I will “‘fess up” as they say these days!

        August 23, 2016 at 6:51 pm
      • sixupman

        You in fact confirm my case.

        I am puzzled why you do not have a preamble to this blog stating that those who occasionally avail themselves of the NOM [on a qualified basis] are not likely to be welcomed here.

        At least I have achieved an end in conforming your view of your [blog participants] own superiority – but you are too cowardly to admit it.

        At least you cannot accuse me of small mindedness, can you?

        August 23, 2016 at 7:01 pm
      • editor

        Ah, so that’s it. You attend the Novus Ordo Mass and think we judge you badly for that. Clearly, Sixupman, you have difficulty in understanding the nature of discussion and debate. If I say “stealing is wrong”, I’m not to know if you have ever stolen and thus am not making any personal judgment about you. It’s an objective fact. Similarly, when we discuss the crisis of the Mass, we are not judging those who attend it – quite the reverse, we often express sympathy for those who either don’t know the real reason for the new Mass (to Protestantise it, and to Protestantise those who attend it) or who attend it out of a sense of duty, not having a Traditional Mass available. We sympathise with those people while not pretending that there is no problem with the new Mass. If you are angry because we don’t encourage you to attend it, then be angry. I’m not going to pretend that I think the new Mass is a good thing, I don’t.

        I wouldn’t dream of accusing you of anything, small-mindedness included. The only judging going on here, is on your part. You judge us to be “superior” and take my latest comment as proof, so there’s really nothing more to say, except please forgive me for any apparent superiority. If you could hear my confessions, you would know that I have no cause whatsoever, to feel superior to anyone.

        I’m going offline now, but, in any case, I think we should leave matters there, although my long experience with people who have an axe to grind is that they refuse to do so! For my part, I’m off to attend to other things, a bit more pressing than whether you like “this blog” or not 😀

        God bless.

        August 23, 2016 at 7:09 pm
      • sixupman

        Still a denial of the truth of this blog?

        I have no axe to grind, as you would discover if you visited wider ‘blogdom’.

        August 23, 2016 at 7:15 pm
      • Nicky


        What IS “the truth of this blog”?

        August 23, 2016 at 8:20 pm
      • editor


        I visited wider “blogdom” only this morning and left a comment – see here
        I can’t recall ever seeing your username in any of the blogs I’ve visited, so if you wish us to check you out, do the obvious thing and post a link.

        August 23, 2016 at 11:13 pm
      • Therese

        Oh, I think I did.

        As to the rest of your first paragraph, you are seeing what you want to see, not what is there. I wonder why that is, but it certainly doesn’t demonstrate an open mind.

        As to your second paragraph: I know the blog you refer to very well, and the priest who writes it, for whom I have a great deal of respect and affection. He describes some people associated with the SSPX who have extreme views, none of which have been expressed here.

        August 23, 2016 at 7:25 pm
      • sixupman

        Yes, but those who expressed said extreme views were once the “apple-of-your-eyes” – only now distancing yourselves. Further, Fr. Dickson has questioned one of your current prelates – where do you stand upon that?

        You are being selective, no?

        August 23, 2016 at 8:29 pm
      • editor


        “You are being selective, no?”

        No, Therese is NOT being selective. YOU – on the other hand – are being ridiculous. Stop your silly nonsense, going back over stuff that is years old. Who cares? Gerragrip.

        August 23, 2016 at 11:28 pm
  • Therese

    I really wonder what the heck you’re talking about. Apples of my eye, my eye! If you are in the mood to listen, then listen. While I have every respect and admiration for Archbishop Lefebvre and for the stupendous stand he took to preserve the Catholic faith and Tradition, I am not a “groupie”, who thinks that every priest in the Society is a saint. All I care about is getting the Mass, and, I might add, if it wasn’t for the Society, Fr Dickson and the other very welcome priests wouldn’t be able to say the Tridentine Mass today, because the bishops would have ground it – and them – underfoot, as they wanted to do. The were unable to do so because of the “threat” of the Society, and had to give in, with a very bad grace in most cases, and “allowed” those “troublesome” priests who still had a vestige of Tradition left in them to study the Mass and subsequently say it, usually on very restricted terms. For that alone I am eternally grateful to the Society and its priests, as should you be.

    August 23, 2016 at 8:57 pm
    • sixupman

      You avoided the question?

      August 23, 2016 at 9:06 pm
  • Therese

    What question?

    August 23, 2016 at 9:16 pm
  • Athanasius


    It seems pretty clear to me that you are a man with a conflicted conscience, hence the aggression towards the SSPX and this blog.

    You simply cannot maintain a foot in both camps and hope to maintain your Catholic identity. You are either a full time Traditional Catholic with all the persecution and inconvenience that comes with it, or you’re a full time Novus Ordo Catholic content to justify attending the New Mass with all its inherrent abuses.

    Personally, I left the Novus Ordo Mass behind 30 years ago. I made the decision that I could not in good conscience before God continue to support with my presence the liturgical and Sacramental upheaval I was witnessing. It has not been easy but it has been worth it. I know others who have made greater sactrifices, people who travel from Aberdeenshire to Glasgow or Edinburgh every week for the Traditional Mass. Now that’s commitment to the faith. None of this flip-flopping between rites and then blaming everyone else for the natural conflict that raises in the soul.

    August 23, 2016 at 11:06 pm
    • editor


      Methinks you have hit the nail firmly on the head. Well said.


      Sister (Very) Superior

      August 23, 2016 at 11:38 pm
      • Athanasius


        I wish that wee nun would stop nodding her head. She reminds me of that noddy dog people used to put in the back window of their cars.

        August 24, 2016 at 1:18 am
      • editor


        Your (cheeky) wish is my command. Nodding nun replaced.

        August 24, 2016 at 9:36 am
      • Athanasius


        Is that new nun leaning back on her heels? Looks like she’s slacking! By the way, I was only joking about the nodding nun.

        August 24, 2016 at 2:46 pm
      • Helen

        Aw, can I see her nodding?

        August 25, 2016 at 11:13 pm
      • editor


        Your (nuisance) wish is my command. Nodding nun re-instated…

        She’s very typical of the modern Catholic – has to be doing something all the time, even when praying the rosary. It’s all about active participation these days, init…

        August 26, 2016 at 12:35 am
      • RCA Victor


        Is that nun from Nodding-ham?

        August 26, 2016 at 1:27 am
      • editor

        RCA Victor,

        “Nodding-ham”… Love it!

        Rumour has it that she is offering her rosary for Pope Francis’ conversion to Catholicism – she’s certainly praying with her whole heart and soul, so let’s hope the rumour is NOT a mere rumour!

        August 26, 2016 at 9:09 am
      • crofterlady

        Perhaps the nodding is when she recites the name of Jesus? I know we all nod in a similar manner when reciting the Rosary.

        August 26, 2016 at 10:12 am
      • RCA Victor


        Are you implying that we all fall asleep during the Rosary?

        August 26, 2016 at 2:57 pm
      • Laura

        RCA Victor,

        There’s a lovely prayer of St Louis Marie de Montfort to offer up distractions or the danger of falling asleep (LOL!)

        The Holy Rosary according to the Method of St. Louis de Montfort, Written by St. Louis Marie de Montfort

        Introductory Prayer

        I unite with all the saints in heaven, with all the just on earth, and with all the faithful here present. I unite with you, my Jesus, in order to praise your holy Mother worthily and to praise you in her and through her. I renounce all distractions which may arise during this Rosary. I desire to say it with attention and devotion as if it were the last of my life. Amen.


        We offer you, Lord Jesus, this Creed in honour of all the mysteries of our faith, the Our Father and three Hail Marys in honour of the unity of your being and the Trinity of your persons. We ask of you a lively faith, a firm hope and an ardent charity. Amen.

        August 26, 2016 at 9:42 pm
      • crofterlady

        Ha ha, no! I meant we all bow our heads at the name of Jesus during the Hail Mary!

        August 26, 2016 at 11:29 pm
      • Laura


        That would mean she was saying her Hail Marys at about 300 mph LOL!

        August 26, 2016 at 9:38 pm
      • crofterlady

        Hilarious, exactly! But maybe she is one of these “speed” operators!

        August 26, 2016 at 11:31 pm
    • Summa

      Athanasius, well said. I wonder though if the label we use of ‘Traditional Catholic’ does us more harm than good. We know stick to the timeless faith, but I prefer to differentiate between Catholics (Traditional Catholic) and Modernists. The former is spot on yet the latter is a wee bit problematic. (I know many who go to NovusOrdo and they are unwitting Modernists as opposed to full out heretics – as they have been brought up in the N.O. and know no better)

      August 24, 2016 at 2:50 am
      • editor


        I do my best not to describe myself as a “traditional Catholic”. I say that I am a Catholic “one of those old fashioned types who believe it all, usually labelled a traditionalist these days, which at one time was the only type of Catholic around!”

        Words to that effect. I do think it’s important to keep emphasising that we are only forced to use these labels at all because of the widespread dissent through to apostasy in the Church today with people describing themselves as Catholics who are – in fact – no such thing. If they hold to “liberal” views, they are about as Catholic as my mobile phone – although, come to think of it, my mobile phone accompanies me to traditional Mass etc. so is probably a heck of a lot more Catholic than those “liberals”. You have to laugh 😀

        August 24, 2016 at 9:40 am
      • Helen

        Well I hope your “Catholic” mobile phone is turned off during Mass!!

        August 25, 2016 at 11:14 pm
      • Athanasius


        I see what you mean about labels but I don’t quite know how else to phrase the difference between those faithful to tradition and those caught up in the Novus Ordo mess. I also accept that many who attend the Novus Ordo are not deliberate Modernists. This is particularly true of all under the age of 50 years who were raised in the Modernist atmosphere. I’m sure there are many well intentioned Catholics in the NO who just don’t have a clue about the old faith.

        August 24, 2016 at 2:53 pm
      • Summa

        Athanasius, well I completed three years at Junior Seminary in Coatbridge and I can hand on heart, say I’d never heard of any other Mass except for the one we used: Novus Ordo. I did however note a difference between my home parish St Catherine Laboure in Balornock. Fr. Toy would never have allowed guitars and tambourines anywhere near the chapel.

        August 24, 2016 at 10:16 pm
      • editor


        Nor did Fr T allow the sign of peace.

        I’ve tried to check the spelling of his name but can’t find anything – I’ve always thought it had an “e” on the end (Toye) but you’ve sown a seed of doubt in my mind.

        August 25, 2016 at 9:08 am
      • Summa

        Yes, it was Fr. Toye. Sorry!

        August 25, 2016 at 11:09 am
  • Athanasius


    Yes, some priests kept a greater sense of the sacred than others. They were, sadly, few and far between, however. I have no doubt Fr. Toy took a bit of stick in quiet from his hippie confreres.

    August 24, 2016 at 11:09 pm
  • Summa

    I was too young to remember what the other priests at the parish, Fr. Gilmartin and Fr. Currie were like. I only have fond memories of them at school.

    I believe the latter is in the north of Glasgow now?

    I however can tell you from the song we had to sing when Fr. Gilmartin was leaving, where he went…(!) all those years ago too…

    Goodby-ee, Goodbye-ee
    We’ll be off to see you in Mulguy-ee (Milngavie)
    Cheerio chin chin
    Fr. Glimartin
    Och aye, we’ll be by Mulguy-ee

    Isn’t it the stragest things you remember? I think Ms Roonie taught us it too, at St Catherine’s PS

    August 25, 2016 at 11:34 am
    • Athanasius


      Today, the next line would be:

      Hello-ee, Hello-ee
      Deacon Dan is the man we’re left tae
      He’s a gas with dry Mass, ya beauty.

      Or am I being overly cynical?

      August 25, 2016 at 4:31 pm
      • Summa

        Ha! Deacon Dan?

        August 25, 2016 at 10:15 pm
  • RCA Victor

    I have to wonder, since I’m still in the middle of Fr. Malachi Martin’s The Jesuits, whether suppressing the Society of Jesus (again) would contribute a great deal of momentum toward the internal policing of the clergy. After all, when you consider that Jorge Bergoglio was formed by this Society, you would have to conclude that it is still, as it was back when the revolution took hold, a reeking theological, doctrinal and philosophical sewer, and probably, to some considerable degree, a private homosexual club (no, I’m not intimating that Bergoglio is a homosexual, but he certainly seems to be inclined to promote them, so it would be reasonable to assume that he was frequently in their company as a Jesuit – and obviously has no problem with their behavior). The Church would be much healthier if this cancer were eliminated completely.

    August 25, 2016 at 3:52 pm
    • Athanasius

      RCA Victor

      Given the sheer number of Jesuit theoreticians and foot soldiers who have spread the poison of Modernism in the Church over the past 100 years or so, I think a complete suppression of the Order would mark a positive return to supernatural sanity. It can’t happen quickly enough for me.

      August 25, 2016 at 4:37 pm
      • Gerontius


        I think a complete suppression of the Order would mark a positive return to supernatural sanity. It can’t happen quickly enough for me.

        Absolutely bang-on Anathasius, I agree entirely!

        What a great pity. They were once the Shock Troops of the Church, and it’s most ardent defenders of doctrinal orthodoxy, and now…….

        August 25, 2016 at 10:10 pm
      • editor


        “… and now”

        They’re just shocking troops! Well, it’s getting late, best I can do for now 😀

        August 25, 2016 at 10:18 pm
      • Gerontius


        Here’s an example of Jesuit modernist teaching from Pope Francis to fellow Jesuits on the subject of priestly formation.

        andrea tornielli
        vatican city

        Discernment is a key word in the sections of the “Amoris Laetitia” that deal with welcoming and guiding wounded and “irregular” families. It is precisely this discernment that “priests are really in need of” today, during their formation as well. Francis said this in a conversation he had with a group of 28 Polish Jesuits in Krakow in the afternoon of 30 July. A summary of the conversation which lasted around 40 minutes was transcribed by Antonio Spadaro, the director of Italian Jesuit periodical La Civiltà Cattolica, and is published in the latest issue of the periodical.

        “I ask you to work with seminarians,” the Pope told the group of Jesuits. “Above all, give them what you have received from the Exercises: the wisdom of discernment. The Church today needs to grow in the ability of spiritual discernment. Some priestly formation programs run the risk of educating in the light of overly clear and distinct ideas, and therefore acting within limits and criteria that are rigidly defined a priori, disregarding concrete situations: ‘you must do this, you must not do this’. Then, when the seminarians become priests, they find themselves in difficulty when they have to offer guidance to so many young people and adults. Because many ask: ‘can you do this or can you not?’ That’s all. And many people leave the confessional disappointed. Not because the priest is bad, but because the priest doesn’t have the ability to discern situations, to accompany them in authentic discernment. They don’t have the required formation.”


        Source URL

        August 25, 2016 at 10:54 pm
      • Summa

        That is truly shocking.

        August 25, 2016 at 10:57 pm
      • Athanasius


        It’s interesting that Pope Francis accepted the Papacy when the founder of his Order, St. Ignatius, forbid any Jesuit from holding high ecclesiastical office unless dispensed to do so by the Pope. In Francis’ case it seems he dispensed himself. That strict rule of the Jesuits is still on the statute books.

        As for his words on discernment, this was just Pope Francis’ way of saying tell people what they want to hear and do not disappoint them by quoting the Decalogue and the moral law. How very supernatural!

        August 26, 2016 at 1:54 pm
      • Athanasius


        Yes, the Jesuits were the great champions of orthodoxy at the Reformation. Now they are the principle peddlers of heterodoxy. The devil has sure worked a big turnaround with that Order. Time I think to give it the order of the boot.

        August 26, 2016 at 1:56 pm
      • RCA Victor


        The way the Jesuits have gone, maybe they should be called the Order of the Garter….and I don’t mean chivalry….

        August 26, 2016 at 2:56 pm
  • editor

    How on earth is it ever going to be possible to “police” bishops, priests, theologians etc. when we have Papa Francis saying we’re all just fine with the “two popes arrangement”?

    August 29, 2016 at 7:40 pm

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: