Bishop of Paisley aka Judas Iscariot in Praise of Protestant Reformation…editor
From Premier Christian Radio…
This month marks the 500th anniversary of the Reformation. And all through this month on Premier we are going to be hearing from theologians, church leaders, historians and many others about their own personal reflections on the Reformation. Ian Britton went to meet Bishop John, the Bishop of Paisley, to get a catholic [sic] perspective on the Reformation.
Click here to listen to the bishop (pictured) admitting that Vatican II protestantised the laity in compliance with the Protestant Reformers’ demands in liturgy and language (out with that old Latin!) and of course we knew nothing of scripture before the Reformation; according to “Bishop John”, too, lay people were never actively engaged in spreading the Faith prior to Vatican II – that is, thanks to the Reformation we now know better. Ignorance may be bliss for the ignorant, but it’s really annoying for the rest of us to have to listen to such falsehoods. Never mind Martin Luther, Judas Iscariot is alive and well in the Catholic Church in Scotland today, aka Bishop John Keenan of Paisley.
Our Lady of Fatima, Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us!
I have just posted the following comment on the Premier Christian Radio blog here:
Bishop John Keenan is a disgrace. He shows such utter ignorance of the Catholic religion and of the damage caused by the schism of the Reformation that it beggars belief. We have just launched a discussion on the Catholic Truth blog, featuring your interview with this modernist bishop. [gave link to this thread]
Bishop Keenan is a child of Vatican II; he has never known the Church before that Council, which will, undoubtedly, one day be heavily corrected, if not declared null, by a future Pope and Council, when the Faith is fully restored. The Bishop is far too young to ever have been taught the Faith himself, he is, in fact, a victim of the current crisis engulfing the Church. END.
Bien vu! c’est très juste., as for Pope Francis, I suppose
Pope Francis is old enough to remember and thus know much better!
I agree he is a disgrace, but not so sure about likening him to Judas Iscariot in the headline. That’s a bit strong, surely?
No, it’s not too strong. Judas betrayer Our Lord. That’s what Bishop Keenan does in this interview. I’m shocked that you don’t see the link.
I do see the link but I’m not sure it’s fair – after all, the Bishop’s motivation isn’t to make money, is it, and although he’s wrong I think it’s because he’s misguided, I don’t see any deliberate intention to betray Christ. That’s what I meant by being “too strong”.
We cannot judge motivation. We may only judge actions. Judas Iscariot betrayed Christ to the Jewish authorities, for some cash. Bishop John Keenan betrayed Christ to a Protestant radio station, probably unpaid, but confirming the presenters and audience in their errors and heresies.
Both men were traitors. I can’t see any problem with the link. Is there a better one?
Listening to the Bishop annoyed me! I also wrote on the Premier Christian Radio blog.
The bishop celebrates the idea of silence whilst praising the noisy, superficial, banal and vociferous Novus Ordo liturgy. At the same time, he downgrades Latin and the beautiful contemplative Gregorian/Tridentine Rite. His idea that the laity who witness the Gregorian/Tridentine Mass do not fully participate in the worship of God is erroneous and lacks understanding of the history and theology of the Church and the meaning of participation. In fact, one can suggest that the modern liturgy no longer expresses the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ on Calvary and is more akin to the Protestant Communion Service of sacrifice and praise, Thank you for that Vatican II. It’s a fallacy to think that Catholics did not have access to Scripture prior to the Reformation. The main problem was that only the educated classes could read . So, consequently, the Bible was read to the ordinary people during the Mass, by the celebrant.
An absolute scandal ! Full of red herrings and inaccuracies. This idea that the laity didn’t understand the Mass because it was in Latin is a total nonsense. First of all, the laity followed the Mass in their Missal, which was in Latin and English. They followed closely not only the text of the Mass but the rubrics. When was the last time you saw the laity using a Missal at the New Mass? Therefore, I would say the laity understood the Latin Mass better than they do the New Mass. Secondly, a large number of people studied Latin at school. It’s not a difficult language to understand. My nine year old son manages to follow the Mass in Latin without issue. Thirdly, the laity were properly catechised and understand the Mass well.
This “active participation” nonsense needs to be put to bed once and for all. I attended the New Mass for 25 years and yes, I rhymed off the responses, usually in an unthinking way. This does not equal active participation. What has happened is that in the name of “active participation” Lay people have started to perform functions routinely that should be reserved to the priest. This is usually a small band of people, therefore a two-tier laity has emerged. No, St Pius X was promoting true, interior, active participation long before Vatican II. He wrote:
“The Holy Mass is a prayer itself, even the highest prayer that exists. It is the Sacrifice, dedicated by our Redeemer at the Cross, and repeated everyday on that altar. If you wish to hear Mass as it should be heard, you must follow with eye, heart and mouth all that happens at the altar. Further, you must pray with the priest the holy words said by him in the name of Christ and which Christ says by him. You have to associate your heart with the holy feelings which are contained in these words and in this manner you ought to follow all that happens at the altar. When acting in this way you have prayed Holy Mass”
THIS is “active participation”! Not women prancing about on the sanctuary or teenagers holding hands around the altar!
I must also take issue with the inaccuracy that Catholics weren’t encouraged to read the Bible. First of all, the Church granted an indulgence to the laity who spent time reading the scriptures. Secondly, the laity all had their own Missals and read the scriptures there. It’s a total liberal lie to suggest otherwise.
Bishop Keenan is too young to know what the Church was really like before the Council and has, unfortunately, swallowed the liberal propaganda. Speak to the elderly people who haven’t been brainwashed and they will tell you that everything the bishop said about the Church before the Council is inaccurate.
However, the one good thing to come out of that shocking interview is that the liberal mask is now slipping and the Protestant agenda of Vatican II is finally being exposed , even by the prelates of the Church. The Protestant mindset of the modern Catholic bishop is demonstrated perfectly in this interview. God have mercy on them for the damage they are doing to the Church.
Well said, indeed!
I’ve just Googled to find Bishop Keenan and he was born in 1964, so he grew up with the new Mass and the “one religion is as good as another” heresy. No wonder he hasn’t a clue – that becomes very clear in that interview.
He’s not much younger than me, so if he hasn’t a clue, it’s because he had liberal parents who loved VII – and probably similar Priests, teachers etc. Otherwise he had clues but chose to ignore them. Unless he put 2 + 2 together and got 5 like the rest of them! Anyway, whatever age he is, he should by now have studied the history and tradition of the Church and noticed something’s not quite right.
I completely agree. He’s had plenty of time to study the crisis and just reading this blog is enough to educate anyone on any topic, no matter what age they are.
I can think of at least two occasions when Petrus, the blogger here who is in Paisley Diocese, has posted on the Bishop’s Facebook page with links to this blog. I don’t think he can use his age as an excuse.
Not much else to add you addressed the nonsense we heard and sadly we have to listen to this from the VII clergy constantly. So so sad! Hope in the lord as Bishop Fellay continualy reminds us and we shall be freed from all iniquity.
Splendid comment. I endorse every word. I do wonder, though about your final sentence. I wonder if God really will have mercy on the likes of Bishop Keenan for the damage he is doing to the Church. I can’t see it, since he thinks he’s doing nothing wrong and won’t ask for mercy.
This idea that the laity didn’t understand the Mass because it was in Latin is a total nonsense
How right you are, it is a sad sign of the times that the lies the Protestants once used to disparage the Church now gain currency within the Church itself.
This is the same bishop that led the Rosary Crusade of Reparation in London on the 14th October. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeS1TmISlxk Our Lady of Fatima, pray for him.
Unfortunately, it is events like that Rosary procession which fool so many ignorant Catholics that all is well. Take this comment from beneath the video:
It won’t copy for me but the sense of it is “the beauty of Catholicism: the same prayers, chants, same Faith all over the world!”
They sung the Salve in Latin, and some of the old hymns, but the sermon/homily not recorded, more’s the pity.
Still, Bishop Keenan would have known his audience. I’m guessing he has earned the same nickname as one of the English cardinals (names escapes me at the moment) who was called “the cushion” by his clergy because he was the possession of the last person who sat on him.
Not kind, sure enough – but if true? Shocking weakness of character seems to be a feature (if not a requirement!) of episcopal office these days.
No wonder, as we discussed on the previous thread, according to great Fathers of the Church like St Athanasius, so many of them end up in Hell: “the floors of Hell are paved with the skulls of bishops”
I was at the Rosary Crusade – and I don’t recall anything wrong with the sermon – my ‘radar’ is usually quite good about that sort of thing (unless I’ve completely zoned out for one reason or another), but I don’t recall anything memorably excellent either. I recall he spoke of the recent re-consecration of Scotland to the Immaculate Heart of Mary and also the forthcoming re-dedication of England as Our Lady’s Dowry in 2020 (I thought it was going to be next year – why wait another 3 years – it should be done a.s.a.p.!) but there wasn’t much more than that.
He basically said; Cranmer was right. This was not good coming from a Bishop. But perhaps not surprising.
What the Bishop didn’t mention was the fact that Luther didn’t believe in the ministerial priesthood and so definitely wasn’t for bishops. Maybe that’s something he doesn’t want to learn from the Reformation, LOL!
I agree – a completely disgraceful interview, such a coward.
I am appalled. I sincerely pray that the Church may be guided by good, solid clergy who really know the teaching of the Church.
Please pray for my brother who is in hospital after a stroke.
Perhaps you’d like to indicate how this can come about (without direct divine intervention) at this stage with (culpably) ignorant bishops like this running the show?
Because, remember, born in 1964 or not, Bishop Keenan has a duty to make sure he knows the Faith. He knows we’re in crisis, so he is culpable for his ignorance now.
I’ve always considered him to be an ambitious cleric and I don’t see that changing until he gets the red hat and then it won’t change because, like Cardinal O’Brien of unhappy memory, he will see himself in with a chance of the white hat.
You heard it here first, folks!
Our Lady of Lourdes, pray for him!
Maybe now people of a “conservative Catholic” mentality will stop saying Bishop Keenan is orthodox. He’s obviously not, if he thinks any schism benefits the Church! If Christ thought schism would help make His Church better, he would have said so, LOL!
Hear, hear! I totally agree. I’m shocked at Bishop Keenan on that radio interview. How dare he attack the Church like that, on a Protestant radio show, too. It’s disgraceful.
I’m not going to listen to this bishop’s talk, since I’d rather not lose my breakfast, but apparently a primary feature of the diabolical disorientation is collective amnesia. First, forgetting Tradition and acting as though there were no such thing, and second, in this case, forgetting that Luther despised the Church, despised the Papacy, despised the Mass, and despised the priesthood.
So what these pitiful Judases – Pope Francis being the Judas-in-Chief – are doing is celebrating being despised and mocked. Is this their perverted idea of humility?
For any Catholic, clergy or laity, to celebrate or commemorate this anniversary is as perversely deranged as thinking that one can be changed from a man into a woman, or vice-versa.
Kudos to Petrus for his powerful opening post, to which I can only add that Cardinal Willebrands, the Dutch apostate, told us way back in 1970, that “We must rehabilitate Martin Luther.” Apparently he had his ear to the ground as the infiltrators – disguised as clergy – goose-stepped by. Or, he was one of them!
Before Vatican II we could better follow the texts of the Liturgy and of the Epistle and the Gospel as we do now…
1) We learnt Greek and Latin at school,
2) at Mass, much more concentrated, we could read the translation in parallel with the Latin text NEVER MODIFIED NOR ALTERED.
Therefore, “it is indeed really annoying for us to have to listen to falsehoods” such as we could not follow scriptures and were ignorant of all that etc…
Nowadays, we are in the hustle and bustle, with endless and often unintelligible readings…
It is virtually impossible to concentrate in prayer. I begin to wonder whether the Mass did not become a bad taste entertainment and our churches theatre halls?
[Gosh] a minute was all I managed to listen to this [bishop] for . No doubt his hero would be John Knox rather than Saint John Ogilvie. Can’t really comment back after the minute and my language can usually be workshop language as regards this [protestantised bishop].
Comment removed. Stick to the topic, please.
I’ve found it here but not read it yet. I need to work up the energy and charity to read it since the author is the priest who called the Society priests “wolves” at his first Mass (buffet afterwards) in the parish of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Balornock a while back.
In his (culpable) ignorance he insisted that the SSPX is in schism, and that in the presence of some truly confused lay people who attend the Balornock Mass and often don’t know whether they are on foot or on horseback; there was at least one anti-Society man present who was undoubtedly thinking that all his Christmases had come at once. So, I may read the article if and when I find a minute but I’m never going to be impressed and will question everything he’s written. After all, a priest who thinks the SSPX is in schism – with contemporaries of Archbishop Lefebvre and Vatican sources providing plenty of documentation to the contrary and that easily available today – can hardly be trusted to deliver an accurate appraisal of a man who lived centuries ago. Can he, now?
I’ve just read the Dowry article and I suggest that someone send it to Bishop Keenan!
About Fr. Maudsley’s alleged comments about the SSPX: it just shows his ignorance because their (the SSPX) status is easily verified online and elsewhere. Therefore, yes, it would make one think twice about any opinion of his although, in the case of the apostate, Martin Luther, this is more than verifiable too, both online and in a myriad of places.
That Bishop Keenan didn’t check his sources more than surprises me! Or does it?!!
There is nothing “alleged” about Fr Maudsley’s ignorant and rude remarks about the SSPX clergy. He made them to me, in the presence of at least a half a dozen others, including the Parish Priest. Feel free to check it out.
I said “alleged” because I wasn’t party to the comment but, you’ll be delighted to know, that I take your word for it!
You really did choose the right avatar…
On the Diocese of Paisley Facebook page there are a surprising number of comments not altogether happy about this interview. I copied this one but there are others, so there is some hope out there:
I understand Bishop John would have been looking to find something positive to say about the Reformation for the sake of our separated brothers and sisters. However, I do feel the facts of the ‘Reformation’ support the more accurate description of ‘Revolution’. The effects of which are still being felt today not least in the proliferation of Protestant denominations separated from the Church established by Christ himself! The church Christ promised the gates of hell would never prevail against! The revolution was a very sad event indeed and nothing at all to celebrate! This was a short clip however, and I pray these facts were discussed later. Having just left Fatima, where people from across the world celebrated the centenary of the final apparition, it was uplifting indeed when the full community were able to participate in the universal language of our church, Latin.
It is a common misconception that Vatican two forbid Latin, instead it permitted Mass to be celebrated in the vernacular as well.https://www.facebook.com/BishopJohnKeenanPaisley/?ref=py_c
Surely doing what he can to save Protestants from Hell is far more charitable than praising the renegade priest Martin Luther?
Sent from my iPhone
I completely agree, of course! I think Maria McGill was just doing what people do all the time, trying to find something “positive” to say to explain why the Bishop said what he said to praise the Reformation.
I saw your comment up there, same as here, first rate, also the link to this blog – great stuff (you’ll surely be getting that pay rise now, LOL!)
Thanks for your kind words. Yes, I think my salary is rising so it’s now in negative equity!!
Sent from my iPhone
The interview with Bishop Keenan brings home once again the sorrowful truth that the Vatican II Reformation is first of all a “The Revolution in cope and mitre”. It is the deviation of high prelates from the truths of our Holy Catholic religion. How applicable are the words of Archbishop Lefebvre in the case of this wretched bishop Keenan: “The martyrs sacrificed their lives for the truth, now they sacrifice the truth”.
What I would like to ask this unfortunate bishop is: “Where was lay activity focussed on Calvary?” Were the lay activists the Blessed Virgin, St. John and the holy women, or were they the executioners? True lay activity at Mass is for the people to be united in sorrowful heart and attentive mind with the priest in the offering of the Divine Victim, as Pope Pius XII so aptly described proper participation in the Mass.
How lost this bishop is to the Sacrificial nature of the Holy Mass as offered on an altar by the priest in persona Christi; Christ the High Priest offering Christ the Victim to God the Father in reparation for sin.
For Bishop Keenan it is a community gathering over a table, a mere Eucharistic celebration that demands restless activity on the part of the laity if it is to be relevant. What a lost soul he is to have adopted so Protestant a mindset! St. John Ogilvie must be spinning in his grave at such blatant infidelity to 1900 years of Catholic liturgical teaching and practice. Indeed, bishops like John Keenan even betray Vatican II, which states clearly that Latin must be retained for the Canon of the Mass. Pope John XXIII also insisted that Latin remain the liturgical language of the Church.
Is Bishop Keenan so ignorant that he doesn’t know these basic facts? Is he so unthinking that he cannot even recognise the ridiculous and contradictory position he and his Reformation confreres place themselves in by arguing for the vernacular over the Latin language?
The “Cause” placed above Our Lord on the Cross was written in Latin, Greek and Hebrew, the same three languages retained by divine providence in the ancient Latin Mass of the Catholic Church for 1900 years up to the time of Bugnini the liturgical butcher!
Martin Luther once declared: “destroy the Mass and you will destroy the Catholic Church”. Luther made this declaration knowing, as an apostate Catholic, that the Holy Mass is at the heart of our faith. Weaken the heart and the body will begin to die! Bugnini recognised the same principal truth and that’s why in 1974 he rejoiced publicly in announcing that his new vernacular liturgy “is a conquest of the Catholic Church”.
Just how great a conquest it was is historically recorded in an unprecedented 50-year decline in seminaries, religious houses, vocations, and numbers attending Mass on Sundays, not to mention a remaining laity given over to Protestant Communion in the hand and largely in dissent from the Church’s infallible moral teaching.
And speaking of dissent, how can bishop Keenan reconcile his Protestant-friendly remarks with the infallible dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus? He speaks of the necessity of evangelising if one is to be regarded as a true Christian, yet undermines by silence the divinely revealed truth that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church, invincible ignorance aside.
Is he being charitable by not revealing this truth to his Protestant friends presently residing in the darkness of religious error? No, he is not charitable, he is cowardly, a bishop guilty of the sin of human respect who is quite content to see his neighbour live and die in falsehood rather than speak plainly, as Our Lord did, in the hope of winning back those who have gone astray. What a difference between the Divine Shepherd of souls who came to bear witness to the truth and the prelate in Paisley who exchanges the truth for a lie, condemned ecumenism!
And as for the myth he perpetuates – i.e., that Protestants have taught Catholics how to better appreciate the Sacred Scriptures – he clearly hasn’t worked out yet that almost all of the so-called “Sola Scriptura” Protestant sects have contradicted the Sacred Scriptures in the matters of divorce and homosexual activity. The Catholic Church alone remains faithful to the divine Scriptures in these and all other moral matters, despite Pope Francis’ damaging personal views. If this is not clear evidence that Christ remains faithful to His promise that the Gates of Hell will not prevail against His Church, then I don’t know what is.
It was the Catholic Church that gave the world the written Scriptures, not the Protestant Reformers who brazenly usurped the Petrine authority with personal interpretation of the Scriptures and ended up split into hundreds of different groups all believing different things, though remaining united always in their rejection of the Vicar of Christ on earth. And Bishop Keenan believes this travesty to be a great boon for Catholics today. Little wonder Our Lady of Fatima referred to the Third Secret in terms of a “diabolical disorientation” at the highest levels in the Church!
Superb comment. Just one thing…
I remembered that the quote from Luther (destroy the Mass/destroy the Church) was called into question in a previous discussion, so I have spent some time trying to find a source for it – without success.
There is a sentence in his writings relating destruction of the Mass to destruction of the papacy: “Having triumphed over the Mass, I think we have triumphed over the whole papacy.” Source – which, of course, might be considered mere semantics. No Mass, no Church, no papacy, no Church. Still, in light of our (somewhat damaged now) reputation for providing documentary evidence for all important statements, I thought I ought to correct what seems to be – at best – an obscure quote from Luther. If someone else can find an original source, of course, that would be welcome.
You are, of course, right to check out the veracity of this statement attributed to Luther. Here is a translation lifted from a trustworthy source. Unltimately, I believe Luther did say what I stated only in a more convoluted way.
“In his 1522 Martinus Lutherus contra Henricum Regem Angliæ (Martin Luther against Henry King of England), Luther writes (in translation by Rev. E. S. Buchanan, M.A., B.Sc., New York: Charles A. Swift, 1928 and with my emphasis):
For this book of the King, as it is about the best in Latinity of all the books that have been written against me, so is it above all others the most blockish and stupid, so that I could almost attribute it to our writers in Leipsic, who are wont thus to babble when their babblement is at its best. Having triumphed over the Mass, I think we have triumphed over the whole papacy. For upon the Mass as upon a rock is built the whole papacy with its monasteries, its bishoprics, its colleges, its altars, its ministers, its doctrines, and leans on it with its whole weight. And all these things must fall with the sacrilegious and abominable Mass.”
That is the exact quote I gave above! I think that is the correct one, albeit that it’s really semantics, word play, as I said above, because both quotes mean the same thing.
Sad but unsurprising from Bishop Keenan.
(I really detest the “Bishop John” stuff, talking about “trying too hard”).
Many contemporary Bishops are as ignorant as the people they are responsible for and understand their main role as being similar to that of a politician: that is, tell whoever they have in front of them what they want to hear. Bishop Kennan is (in)famous for this.
Re: your remark about the “Bishop John stuff”
I was just thinking about that and how it is only priests and bishops who go in for this sort of informality. Other professionals expect their office to be respected. Who calls their GP “Doctor John” or “Doctor Jim” or even “Doctor Who”?!
It’s a strange mentality, as if such (often forced) informality helps forge a closer relationship (that being the in-word) – not with me, it doesn’t. I find it much easier to be myself, to speak frankly, when observing the professional boundaries.
In fact, I’ve noticed that when dealing with solicitors on a professional basis (yip, still trying to keep out of jail) they do seem to prefer being called by their first name, rather than surname, but still maintain an unmistakeable air of professionalism. Especially when the bill’s due 😀
Only Catholic clergy, it seems to me, hold to the idea that if they act like they’re NOT really clergy, somehow we will find it easier to speak to them, confide in them. Doesn’t work, not with me. I’d sooner chat to Father Smith than Father Joe. And I’ll never chat with Bishop John. Not now, for sure. I’m bound to be off his Christmas card this year…
Obviously, of course, Deacon Augustine is the exception to all of the above!
it is only priests and bishops who go in for this sort of informality
Spot on and I was making the same point to Postman Pat and Fireman Sam only this morning! 😛
As well as being reminiscent of these children’s characters, the informality seems almost to indicate a rejection of their own status and a desire to hide any difference between the clerical and lay states.
Another way in which the understanding of what a priest is is damaged with an undoubted negative effect on vocations.
I also think it’s false humility. They think that they are being humble and not letting the office “go to their head” when what they are really doing is making it about the man and not the office !
Sent from my iPhone
what they are really doing is making it about the man and not the office !
That is an excellent point!
Excellent point. I remember reading about an incident when a priest used the title “Eminence” when speaking to the then newly appointed Cardinal Winning. He corrected the priest by telling him to revert to his Christian name (Tom) saying “do I LOOK “eminent”?” Clearly, he did not have a clue. Did not know that it is the office of Cardinal which is “eminent” not the holder of the office.
“Postman Pat”… an excellent analogy with children’s fictional characters. Well spotted.
Editor – I think they like people to be informal so that anyone disagreeing with them will keep their opinions to themselves. It’s much harder to take to task a Jimbo than a Father James, whilst a Father Smith can expect the full wrath of a Trad Catholic. Personally, all the personal informality and nicey-nice chitchat gave me the creeps when I was still attending Mass (NO)- particularly when conducted over the pews with those sickly smiles and grins which are all the rage.
I just clicked on the link . Dear Lord— I didn’t last even thirty seconds. I felt physically sick…
It’s a pity you didn’t listen right through. It’s what they call an “education” these days…
Bishop Keenan will be made Archbishop of Glasgow upon +Philip’s retirement, if not sooner, should the current archbishop be translated to a curial position in Rome. Archbishop Keenan would likely then be elevated to the cardinalate. He has close connections to Opus Dei.
Evidence? Or are you having a Walter Mitty moment?
Wait and see! I am do hope I am wrong though.
Comments are closed.