Faithless Scots Bishops to keep churches closed until AT LEAST 2021…editor
Correction: with apologies, the headline here is misleading. The churches are not to remain “closed” until 2021, but won’t fully reopen until a vaccine or treatment has been found, which the Bishops believe will be at least 2021 – see the article below. Special thanks to the troll who pointed this out.
A working group has been set up to deal with the impact coronavirus has had on the Catholic community in Scotland.
Parish life for Scotland’s Catholic communities is not expected to return to normal until 2021, according to the church.
The Bishops’ Conference of Scotland has formed a Covid-19 working group to look at how best to meet long-term pastoral needs during the pandemic.
It will aim to ensure the church is prepared for extended measures on the operation of parishes and dioceses. Activities within parishes are expected to have some form of restriction until next year, the conference said.
Bishop Brian McGee, chairman of the group, said: “After our public masses stopped and our churches closed with almost no warning, the immediate response from our priests and parishioners across Scotland was both impressive and uplifting.
“With great ingenuity and creativity, online masses and devotions were made available throughout the country every day.
“Through this and other action, many vulnerable and lonely people continue to be supported in safe ways.
“While it will be wonderful when our parishes can reopen, we recognise that parish life cannot quickly return to normal until a vaccine or a treatment is available.
“We do not expect this to happen until at least 2021.
“This means that even when churches reopen, parish activities will still be greatly restricted, our pastoral working group hopes to identify and publicise advice or resources to help dioceses and parishes face fresh challenges in a safe manner.”
Early figures indicate high numbers of viewers are watching and downloading masses and devotions online, according to the conference. Source – The Sunday Post
This is totally disgraceful, and manifest evidence of the lack of divine and Catholic Faith in these bishops. How insulting to effectively tell God that we have no need of him now. [Maybe] we’ll be back fully next year. I have no words to describe the pity I feel for them, the contempt with which their faithlessness is being viewed in Heaven. Nobody needs a Theology Degree to know that this decision cannot possibly be pleasing to God. I won’t say any more at this point, in order to leave those of you with greater minds than mine, and probably lots more patience than I possess, to add your thoughts.
St Andrew, Patron Saint of Scotland, pray for us!
St Margaret, Queen of Scotland, pray for us!
St John Ogilvie, pray for us!
Our Lady of Aberdeen, pray for us!
I have used the following quotation from G. K. Chesterton many times before, but never has it been more applicable than to the prelates of the Modern Catholic Church: “Only dead fish flow with the current”.
We have seen a few prelates speak out in recent days about this fake pandemic being used to suppress freedom, especially religious freedom. That’s what Catholics expect from their Shepherds when the prince of this world tries with various wiles to eradicate the public worship of God. So what does the compliant cowardice of the Scottish bishops tell us, it surely confirms for us that these are men lost to supernatural faith and holy zeal, blind guides in a world gone pagan. I am ashamed of these so-called successors of the Apostles, hiding once more in the upper room for fear of their lives. They are all a disgrace and the faithful will not forget their cowardice when the Church and souls needed them most. Vatican II was Satan’s greatest victory, for the deviant spirit it engendered has struck the voice of the Church silent.
I invite everyone to view an incredible Italian 19th Century Gothic Style Oak Carved Figural Church Pulpit at https://www.jansantiques.com/Lot/jac1967.php
My preference is for marble but I have to say that Gothic style pulpit is magnificent.
Spineless cowardlys cino bishops in The Vatican, 🇨🇦 camada. 🇵🇹 Portugal and now Scotland as well…
These bishops are actively involved in promoting the New World Order – totalitarian government – and if they are not doing so knowingly, then they are culpably ignorant. This from Lifesitenews…
“May 14, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – In a lengthy interview with the German Catholic newspaper Die Tagespost (published in full below), Cardinal Gerhard Müller responds in detail to the many accusations leveled at him in the last days for having signed Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganó’s appeal concerning the corona crisis and the impending dangers of governmental control and abuse.
In light of accusations of fostering conspiracy theories, the cardinal invites people to respond to facts, instead of demeaning people who “think for themselves,” and he also points to the danger of “forced vaccinations.” Without mentioning Bill Gates’ name directly, Müller mentions that the “threat has been made publicly that 7 billion people will be forcibly vaccinated, even if the drugs have not yet been sufficiently tested, and that if people are not complying, fundamental rights will be withdrawn from them.”
Are the Scottish bishops going to extend their self-imposed lockdown of churches by refusing entry to anyone who has chosen not to be vaccinated – like my unworthy self? I am definitely not going to be vaccinated, so am I to be refused entry to a Catholic Church for that reason, even if and when the churches in Scotland re-open?
I cannot find where it says “Scottish Bishops to keep Churches closed until at least 2021”? The article seems to say the Churches will be opened soon but with some restrictions still in place and we won’t be completely back to normal until 2021.
I would be surprised if the SSPX do anything Remotely different, shielded groups will remain at home, Masses will be smaller and hand washing on arriving and leaving will be required.
This from the Sunday Post:
“While it will be wonderful when our parishes can reopen, we recognise that parish life cannot quickly return to normal until a vaccine or a treatment is available.“We do not expect this to happen until at least 2021.
Nowhere does it explain what is meant by “return to normal” but whatever they mean, it won’t happen until AT LEAST 2021.
What it is likely to mean is along the lines which you describe, with those closest (generally speaking) to the time when we will be called before God to account for our lives, not being allowed to attend Mass (and you are completely correct – I can’t see the SSPX being any different) and receive the Sacraments. Too bad that Satan doesn’t oblige and leave us all without temptation and sin until “a vaccine or treatment is available”. Then we’ll have the silly washing of hands all over the place and “social distancing” which means huge gaps in the church building – what a nonsense.
This is an outrage. And it is outrageous that these bishops are apparently not questioning, in any way, the government story. If WE can find doctors and scientists with a different take on this pandemic, why can’t they? It’s laughable to think they preach about taking the truths of the Gospel to an unbelieving world, but are unable to withstand the politically correct pandemic dogma.
The lack of a truly Catholic response to this pandemic from the Bishops of Scotland should come as no surprise. We are regularly reporting on their lack of divine and Catholic Faith but that they’ve even stopped keeping up appearances, is something else.
Yes, of course but ultimately this blog headline is quite inaccurate, we have to be very careful about exaggerating the words of others.
Editor: you are right, and I have a confession to make. I actually misread The Sunday Post report, thinking that the Bishops were saying the churches would remain closed, whereas they really say, as you point out, that they won’t be fully open or return to normal (or whatever) until 2021 or until a vaccine/treatment is found, which they believe will be “at least” 2021. That, although not quite the same as remaining closed, is still shocking. However, you are correct in that the headline is inaccurate. It wasn’t until after I had posted my last reply to you (in fact until a short few minutes ago) that I realised I had not read it carefully enough. I feel it would be dishonest to change it now, though, and so I will leave it, knowing that your correction and my admission are herein easily found for all the world to see. Mea culpa!
Some time later… I did add a correction at the top of the introduction. So, again, thank you for that prompt.
Equally, yesterday’s discussion about potentially arming UK citizens as to defend our loved ones against UK NHS healthcare workers who are (hypothetically) forcing their way into our homes to snatch our children, was also very misleading
Editor: firstly, there was nothing in that discussion to warrant your heavy criticism, although it would have made more sense to place your concerns there, instead of here. By exception, I will answer you here, but if you wish to add anything, please go to the appropriate thread. The headline – Covid-19 & Totalitarianism: Does USA Right to Bear Arms Make Sense Now? is calling attention to the fact that in the USA their constitution allows them to bear arms, in case of an aggressor, whether from a foreign government or a domestic government. Since we are facing aggression from our own Governments in the UK, it was an opportunity to explore the extent and/or limits of self-defence should a Government official, trained and authorised to enter our homes and test us for the virus and, if they deem it necessary, to remove a member of our family to take that person to a central place of quarantine. This, recall, is in the context of the fear of totalitarian one-world government, which is an ambition of organisations such as Communist China and its puppets. There was no suggestion whatsoever that NHS healthcare workers would be forcing their way into our homes, as you so misleadingly write. It was very clear from the article, and confirmed by the World Health Organisation spokesman, that there will be officials, specially trained for this task. They won’t be working for the NHS.
Presumably, was the thinking here that we might one day even consider opening fire on these health visitors, perhaps shooting them to death in our front gardens? Riddling their bodies with bullet holes and leaving them dead and bleeding at our front doors? Human beings, made in the image and likeness of God, with families and loved ones just like our own.
Editor: The point was made, over and over again, that nobody was suggesting shooting anyone. You need to go and read the entire thread instead of wasting your time and mine with silly “gotcha!” games.
Otherwise, why else ask this bizarre hypothetical question about arming UK citizens in the context of having our loved ones abducted by The State during the Covid19 pandemic? Indeed, what else are guns in the hands of civilians for, if not to murder Government representatives?
Editor: I repeat, read the entire thread – and be sure to watch the video, which I’ve copied for you below since you’ve clearly not watched it, and ask yourself if the Government would have treated its people in this authoritarian way if the people had been in a position to defend themselves. I repeatedly said on that thread that I was not advocating guns (or knives which are particularly popular in our neck of the woods as you will know); but the intelligent thing to do when faced with a novel and possibly dangerous situation – with totalitarian government looming – is to explore all possible scenarios and moral issues… Of course, I may be wrong, who knows. That’s just what I think – I prefer it to keeping my head in the sand, but, maybe heads in sand is better. Like I say, who knows…
I found this all quite shocking. Yet, in no place could I find any references to any discussion or proposals by the UK Government or Scottish Government about NHS workers ever taking our children away for testing or quarantine.
Editor: well, when you are watching the news here, and listening to what is being said, especially by the “experts”, you need to listen with three ears, so to speak. Actually, way back at the very start, I remember one professor on the BBC, commenting on their short film report about tracking and tracing in China, saying that, in order to really get rid of this virus, we need to do contact tracking and tracing such as they do in China. See the above video to check what they do in China. Then, we had the World Health Organisation stating that officials will soon have to enter homes…It’s already on the blog somewhere, look for it. I can’t devote my life to placing videos and articles over and over just because a critic chooses to visit us every now and again for the sport of catching us out (or, rather, catching ME out). I know I should be flattered but life’s too short.
Really, this fanciful speculation does the credibility of this blog no good.
Editor: well, I’ve just demonstrated that it’s not “fanciful speculation” – the officials are being trained and they will be given authority to enter our homes. Now, maybe it won’t be as soon as they had originally planned. There are all sorts of things at play here. But, if words mean anything, then that’s what is in the mix right now. WHO officials with authority to track and trace us and remove us if necessary. Who knows, maybe we’ll meet up in one of their re-education camps.
Perhaps this kind of extreme sensationalism is the reason you heard nothing back from the likes of Michael Voris and others in the past? Maybe they seen the tone of the blog following their general inquiry and decided not to bother.
Editor: Michael Voris and his crew were roundly defeated by our beloved RCA Victor some years ago on this blog (or, more accurately, our previous blog: still, the Catholic Truth blog) so I doubt if he was keen for a second round. There’s no “extreme sensationalism” on this blog. Headlines are generally designed to catch the eye and provoke curiosity. The headline to this thread is, I grant you, inaccurate, but that was not deliberate, it was a simple mistake, which I could explain but won’t bother since there really is no excuse for such carelessness on my part. However, I’ve not noticed you coming back to comment on any of the replies to your previous criticisms, which, sadly, are generally unkind and unjust – as is most of this comment from you. Pity. But if our blog troubles you at all, and leaves you uneasy or disturbed, my advice to you is to simply stop reading it. If you visit the website of the Scottish Catholic Observer, they allow comments under each of their articles and reports. Feel free to switch your allegiance to that blog. Whatever, thank you for your initial correction about the headline – much appreciated.
If the churches won’t return to normal until 2021 at the earliest, they are effectively closed. By your own admission, “shielded groups” will remain at home, no access to church, which means, as far as those in most need are concerned, the church is going to be closed until 2021, at the earliest. I can’t see these wimpish priests and bishops taking Holy Communion to the sick and those “shielded groups” forced to stay at home. So, we are denied the Sacraments and God is denied due worship from us.
The bishops should have said we are opening the churches – maybe choosing a major Feast day, like Ascension day, 21 May – and without any restrictions. I’m sick of these restrictions, which I don’t think are at all necessary. I saw the video on here of the two young doctors who work in infectious diseases and they said that if they did what we’re told to do, keep washing our hands and surfaces, they couldn’t do their job. There’s such a thing as natural immunity and we are being shielded from developing that – which is plain stupid.
No, the bishops of Scotland are a disgrace to play along with this scam. I don’t know what the policy of the SSPX is on this but so far they’ve hardly been shouting from the rooftops, so you are probably right about them being no different in this from the Scottish bishops. Hero priests seem to be in very short supply these days.
I totally agree. The churches may as well just be completely closed if those who are in most need can’t use them.
I’m not surprised at this news. IMHO, this period is like a holiday for these clergymen. They are not having to work and so why would they be bothered? There must be a holy priest or two somewhere but, frankly, I don’t think I’ve ever met one. They are always nice enough men, pleasant and often good fun to chat with but I don’t find myself thinking “he’s probably a very holy priest”. It’s a long time since that thought crossed my mind and by now he’s probably a bishop, LOL!
I’m sorry to say that, but the fact that they rushed to close the churches even before official lockdowns came into place, made me think that at the outset, and this only confirms my belief that the priests and bishops are happy enough with this lockdown lasting as long as possible.
There are some exceptions to the lazy priest narrative. I managed to find a local Novus Ordo priest who was willing to hear my confession which was done discreetly on a bench in his garden. We used our common sense to limit infection, for example, I wore a mask, we didn’t shake hands, we kept two metres apart etc.. I don’t think that there is any need to deprive the faithful of confessions if they are conducted in the manner I have described. If the faithful keep their confessions concise and don’t go more than once per month, then I think it is quite possible to continue the ministry of Confession for everyone. Where there is a will there is a way.
I disagree with this approach. Wearing a mask and going to Confessions in a garden are part of the problem. We should be able to go to Confession in the normal way. If we start giving in to the demands of the government then we create a rod for our backs.
I totally agree. I detest these customs of Masses over coffee tables and confessions face to face or in a garden, or walking etc.
And I am also 500% opposed to wearing a mask – I’m just astounded at the way most people, including priests like the one described by Miles Immaculatae, are going along with this propaganda.
Most priests are not offering confession at all. The priest I mention is an exception.
Mass on a coffee table is certainly an abuse. But confession outside of a confessional box is not per se abusive.
I believe that in other countries, such as Italy and Poland, confessional boxes are not the traditional custom.
In the sanctuary of Jasna Gora they had booths, presumably for the benefit of pilgrims, but in many of the old baroque churches in Krakow the old confessionals were very different.
I didn’t say it was abusive. I, personally, don’t like it and I think it demeans the Sacrament. Maybe if I’d been raised in one of the countries you mention, then (if it’s true that they don’t use confessionals – never heard that before) I would think differently, but I wasn’t and I don’t.
When I go to confession I want to be concentrating on my sins and God – I don’t want to be distracted by any priest. I’ve been in that situation and I did find it distracting.
I remember, as a child, being taken as a whole school group to confession and of course there were too many of us for “the box”, so we sometimes had to confess to priests seated in the pews, spaced out. We were told to stand or kneel just behind the priest, but I disliked that intensely at the time. Very distracting. I prefer the grille. End of.
Given the number of scandals involving priests these days, I think the clergy should exercise the greatest caution and not leave themselves open to misinterpretation, or temptation, as well as avoiding the danger of giving the appearance of scandal – but then, I’m the old fashioned type… not “cool” !
I much prefer the grill as well, and I believe it is the superior custom.
I am not sure if I am correct in my comments about confession on the continent. When I was in Poland I did see confessionals that looked like this. And as you will see, both the penitent and priests are rather exposed by our standards.
I heard Father Ripperger in one of his lectures say that in Italy the confessional curtain is opened and a man by custom confesses his sins facing the priest, because apparently by Italian standards that is the manly thing to do. But I have not yet confirmed the truthfulness of his claim.
I meant to say in my original response to you, that I don’t mean to diminish the efforts you have made to get to Confession. My entire commentary on this ought to be read in the most general terms. I’m impressed that you have taken the trouble to find a confessor, and I am also quite sure that the priest in question did what he felt was right in the circumstances.
These are not easy times for any of us, by any standards. I do appreciate that.
In Italy the confessionals are largely ancient little boxes with a door for the priest to enter and sit. They have an exposed kneeler on either side so that the penitent is actually outside. I’ve never been keen on the idea but remember how big most of their churches are, the aisles are so wide that no one could hear what’s being said at the confessional box. Still, I will always prefer a confessional into which penitents can enter and tell their sins to the priest through a grille.
Don’t know anything about the Polish setup, I’m afraid. Maybe someone else will know how the Poles do it and educate us.
I saw some confessionals in Poland similar to the one in the picture I linked, which is like the Italian ones you describe, but both Confessor and penitent can be seen.
Is it better for Traditional Catholics to participate in a modified format of Confession, such as I described, or under such circumstances is it better to not participate in Confession at all?
That’s a false dichotomy. That priest could, I am confident, have found a way to get you into the church and so to the confessional. If it is a traditional confessional with grille and two door entrance – one for the priest and the other for the penitent, there is no problem. In my view, I think it demeans the Sacrament to go in for these informal settings, without true necessity.
If he could get you into his garden – which is presumably attached to the church, then I can’t see why he can’t either take you through the house into the church OR open the church door, allow you in and to wait outside the confessional for the few minutes it ought to take him to enter through the priest’s door. For some reason which I’ve never understood, modern priests seem to dislike the traditional confessional and prefer to give the impression that it’s all “cool” – as if that encourages confession of sins.. The very opposite is more likely, it seems to me. I remember remarking to a Glasgow priest, now deceased, that I was wary of the scenes at a certain unapproved apparition site, where the priests and penitents sat in the open air, priests wearing their stoles and apparently confessions being made. That priest said, and I can remember his words verbatim because they rung true at the time: “Ah, but those confessions won’t be like the confessions you or I would make…” Got it! More like a wee chat, and a pat on the back for a “good confession”.
By the way, just to repeat what I’ve often said here but have recently given up, I really tend to avoid the term “traditional Catholic” if I can, since that, for centuries, has been the only type of Catholic around. If a Catholic is not traditional, then he or she is not fully Catholic. That, actually, IS the crisis in the Church – the abandonment of Catholic Tradition. I realise it’s now used as a means of referring to those who continue to attend the traditional Mass, but personally I avoid it, if possible; I understand that it’s not always possible, but I just thought I’d mention it. I’m just a Catholic and I never describe myself as a traditional or (worse still) a “trad”. Ugh!
I agree with you about not calling ourselves ‘Traditional Catholics’… it’s a tautology, just as ‘Roman Catholic’ is a tautology. I despise the term ‘extraordinary form’. What ought Catholics call the Mass of Ages? I have always said the ‘Traditional Mass’.
Couldn’t agree more with you on this, the priests could easily use the confessional box with grille (and heavy curtain for added safety) instead of resorting to the informal method. They know human nature balks at open informal confessions an that’s why they’re going for that method, it’s to put people off going to confession. They will all be judged on this abandonment of duty, both Modernist and Traditional priests.
“for added safety”? I thought the curtain was a commentary on my perfumes 😀
Now the veil is beginning to peel away! Yer a deep wummin!
You are so right – I’m such a “deep wummin” I even thought of answering this advert – in my youth, of course (29 is too old to go husband-hunting…)
Somehow I don’t think you would fit well into the life of a fishwife, not even at 29 which is 8 years older than me 😀
Yes disgraceful, but quite believable.
I have been reading several great pieces over at “the opposition” Lifesight news.com this morning.
Archbishop Viganos item “Plans for the NWO must be unmasked, understood and revealed” tells us much about how the great deceiver is progressing in his demonic plans to replace God.
He is supported by Cardinal Muller against much angst by the ‘mainstream’ church about the article.
It is noticeable that our Bishops have joined with the other NWO advocates in pushing for a vaccine (including Bill Gates little tracking device no doubt) to combat this Chinese Wuhan Flu.
The fact that aborted babies will be used to produce a vaccine is not an issue for our Hierarchy. This is despite there being an online petition signed by over 300,000 people opposing vaccinations against this virus.
One other point.
I have recently been looking up the Freemason cult.
One good read is Bishop Schneider “True face of Freemasonary'”
In it is a quote from Bishop Grabers book “Athansious and the church of our time”
The description of Alta Vendita, is a perfect account of what has happened to the One True Church.
Well our PP is a very holy priest and a hero to boot. He said he’ll visit anybody who requires him to and will bring Holy Communion, hear Confessions, anoint the sick etc. I’m sure he’s not alone, but they have to go under cover for fear of the bishops. Remember, Padre Pio said: “Beware of the bishops!”. I think I heard a podcast, which is linked in this blog somewhere, of an interview with Damian Thompson and the ex chaplain to the Queen. It’s commented therein that the Church needs to get rid of the iniquitous Bishops’ Conferences and then clear out the present incumbents!!
It was a good podcast, worth a listen. I linked it on the Cardinal Nichols thread. It’s a shame Thompson doesn’t make the final step to becoming a Traditional Catholic, because he gets a lot of things right, but he’s still on the fence.
There didn’t used to be Bishops Conferences – they are a recent thing, and I have a feeling they are there to stop any individual bishop acting independently of the majority modernist opinion on anything, but they have no authority. Every bishop is responsible for everything that happens in his own diocese.
Lily, however, an individual bishop hardly ever steps out of line and, if one does, he quickly retracts whatever he said after, I assume, being rapped over the knuckles by his fellow bishops. I seem to remember that happening to bishop Egan of Portsmouth.
My 13 children and 50 grandchildren are been denied a sacramental life as Catholics because Priests, even though they are defined as key workers, are not been allowed to do their job.
The government stated that Churches should remain open for worship but the Bishops of England and Wales and primarily Cardinal Nicholls themselves told the government to close all churches. The following letter has been sent to the hierarchy in the Hallam diocese.
One of my daughters points out that many civil servants such has her, doctors, nurses, teachers bin men etc are bravely fighting this war on the front line. In this context our clergy from the Pope down should be military chaplains in the full sense of the word instead of being led by Cardinal Nicholls into “safe” cowardly isolation deserting their flock in their hour of need. We are told to remember our war heroes by repeating “we will remember them”, however, during the time whilst this crisis persists and thereafter the phrase “we will remember them” will apply to the clergy from the Pope down in a way they don’t expect ie we will remember them for their culpable negligence and desertion in what is primarily a spiritual war concerning primarily the four sins crying to heaven for vengeance where they left the faithful without the mass and especially confession and the anointing for those who are seriously ill/dying may God forgive them. We are called hate the sin and love the sinner and to pray for our enemies and it’s quite clear who they are.
I refer also to the issue raised some time ago about my brother in law being refused admission for essential treatment at the Hallamshire Hospital because of the virus etc. This issue is now in the public domain in a wider context. A young man with terminal cancer has been stopped from receiving his treatment even though he insists he would like it to continue so that he could have some more time with his young child. Of direct application to my wife and I and our generation the mirror newspaper reports today that doctors are ringing the elderly and telling them that if they get the virus they should not ask for admission to hospital and should in advance sign not for resuscitation forms. Why did our generation therefore pay national insurance contributions for healthcare in our old age only to be told we should now quietly die at home without complaining. A not so subtle form of euthanasia consistent with Hitler’s eugenics policy of eliminating useless mouths. For further information contact me.
This letter has recently been published in The Rotherham Advertiser.
Love and prayers
I’ll need to read your comment properly later as I’m just winding up for a break, but here’s the link to the new thread about your English Bishops, as well – whose key advisor on Health matters, the man who was most influential in having the churches closed, is a convicted thief and a lifelong LGBT activist. Beyond belief.
I copied this from Spiked Oline because I think he’s nailed it:
“So now we know what is motoring the lockdown of British society. It isn’t the need to protect the NHS from being swamped by Covid cases, as we were first told. After all, the NHS has not been remotely overwhelmed and yet the lockdown continues. It isn’t facts and reason. Numerous studies predict economic hardship, ill-health and even excess deaths from the lockdown, yet it carries on. No, the lockdown lives because the elites do not trust us. Whether Boris Johnson or his critics, they view us as reckless creatures, destructive disease-carriers, who require constant instruction and guidance to keep us in order. That’s why there was such a meltdown when Boris hinted at a very mild easing of the lockdown: because the great and the good think we will become animalistic in the absence of severe curtailments on our liberty. The lockdown increasingly looks political, not scientific, and therefore it deserves a political pushback. The case for liberty must be made – now”.
However, I read somewhere that the police are going to crack down on protests, so it’s not easy to see how the case for liberty can be made. The media is only reporting what the “experts” say, no dissenters allowed. Interesting times!
That’s a good excerpt, but I think saying that the elites do not trust us is barely the tip of the iceberg. In fact, the elites want to do away with us because (a) there are allegedly too many of us on the planet; (b) we are Catholic; (c) we are a drain on the allegedly scarce resources of Earth.
This is about universal vaccination (leading to sterilization and fewer people) and controlling people’s movements to a much more oppressive degree than before. In fact, what it amounts to is that if you are force-tested positive, you will be removed from your home because you are an enemy of the state, and force-vaccinated.
Some of this Scots bishops’ scandal reminds me of Vatican II: that is, bishops relying on peritii to evaluate the faulty Vatican II drafts rather than taking the trouble to examine them themselves. Their reliance on liberal (or worse) peritii fits the dismal picture which was painted to me years ago: that most of them didn’t know why they were there and just wanted to get it over with and go home.
So the question in this case is, who are the Scots’ bishops’ peritii? The answer is obvious: the talking heads spouting the government/media narrative. If they were paying attention to the information we have identified here, I might begin to be .005% optimistic that they would reach different conclusions and act accordingly. But perhaps I am giving them too much of the benefit of the doubt.
The other thing I wonder is whether these bishops will actually have a flock to shepherd when they are finished making fools of themselves for obeying the State. I’d be willing to wager that the number of practicing [Novus Ordo] Catholics in Scotland takes a precipitous dive in the near future.
And like the bishops at Vatican II, one gets the impression that the Scots bishops just want to collect their paychecks and be left alone.
Don’t kid yourself. The Scots Bishops’ spokesmen do, indeed, keep an eye on this blog. Like there’s no tomorrow. Trouble is, when one begins from the wrong premise, one reaches the wrong conclusion. They begin from the false belief that we are nuts, and so, not having been taught the Faith properly in the beginning, they are unable to recognise the truth in what they read here.
Whereas, I think we’re all united in this: that the only nuts we like are those covered in chocolate 😀 See below, moi at 18 or thereabouts…
Ah yes, the old “garbage in, garbage out” equation. Maybe you should have new business cards with new mottoes made up for yourself in the spirit of Vatican II, to increase your credibility. For example:
“Have dialogue, will travel”
“Peritus to the stars”
“Faith contact tracing for apostatized Catholics”
“Sacred face mask design”
“Maximizing active participation”
“Farewell to rigidity”
I agree with you observation, after all the Catholic hierarchy have been passing those cards out for decades, quite successfully.
“Scared face mask design” reminds me of one person wearing a mask who had it decorated to be “fun” – complete with plastic red nose.
What was that about they whom the gods would destroy they first make mad (or should that be “they first make wear masks”! )
An utter, utter disgrace.
If they were working in industry they would be told to get themselves mobilised immediately when restrictions were lifted or their P45s would be in the post.
I always assumed that the Catholic FAITH referred to faith in God but I suppose if you don`t actually believe in God it has another meaning altogether.
Pope Francis is encouraging an interfaith day of prayer, to end coronavirus.
He seems to suggest we are all brothers and God will hear our prayers. This all points toward a one world religion.
I suggest that there is One True God and One True Church.
My baptist friends, who I am trying to bring into the Church, are rightly appalled by this interfaith event. Why couldn’t Pope Francis call for a Catholic day of prayer and fasting?
How do I try to repair the damage done?
I would simply direct them to St. Peter’s denial of Our Lord, reminding them that even Popes are human and can give great personal scandal, as one or two have in history. The Church teaches that the Pope is sometimes infallible (rare occasions), he is not at all times impeccable! What you could also add is that while Pope Francis does all these things on a personal level to harm the faith, they should note that he never makes them official teaching of the Church, a definite proof that God, according to His promise, protects the Church from teaching formal error or heresy. Francis acts solely as an individual when he arranges these scandalous events or makes scandalous remarks that undermine morality, he never does it in his capacity as Successor of St. Peter.
Jane, I have Protestant friends who likewise are thinking to convert and who are appalled at Pope Francis. I simply tell that the Pope is not Catholic even though he is legitimate. They accept that this is the work of satan and does not in any way minimise the truth of our Catholic faith. I usually tie it in with the Fatima message.
Thank you for your responses.
We live in dark times
Yes, indeed we do.
The Bishops of Scotland remind me of Pope Francis, who is under the control of the New World Order, in other words the UN/WHO (run by China & Bill Gates).
Likewise the Mayor of Chicago has shut down the city of Chicago and will keep it in lockdown for the foreseeable. The Mayor of Chicago is under the control of the ‘New World Order’ and she, The Mayor Of Chicago, accidentally admitted her allegiance to the New World Order in an interview yesterday. FACEBOOK, YOUTUBE and GOOGLE quickly censored videos that went viral showing this interview after she let it slip. However if you click YOUTUBE link below, you will find another thread of the interview that has got by the censors. See what she says and spread it to your contacts before this too is censored by China and Bill Gates (sorry I mean the YOUTUBE).
Lori Lightfoot is also a lesbian, which may explain a few things, and Chicago is possibly the most corrupt leftist-controlled city in America, not excepting New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco.
Also former home of Barack Hussein Obama, home of Cdl. Cupich, former seat of Cdl. Bernardin. Need I say more?
I think she’s the mayor who castigated others for going to the hairdresser, and then went herself, and defended herself on TV when asked about it by journalists, saying she was the public face of the place and had to have her hair done. What a nerve!
Thanks for this, I’ve just posted it on Twitter. We’ll see if my account now gets suspended.
This is a very good interview with Dr. David Starkey, although there are one or two picture/sound breakups in it. Though not a Catholic, I have always admired this history professor’s honesty and objectivity. He has a sharp mind and fears not to speak it.
His historiography has an anti-Catholic bent, but his politics are aligned against the metro liberals. He’s a Red-Tory/Blue-Labour type, similar to Rod Liddle. He’s a good speaker, and a Leaver.
I am a bit shocked this man is praised considering he’s gay and anti-Catholic.
Although the man is sadly a homosexual, he is one of the most vehemently outspoken in favour of Christians being allowed to air their moral opposition if they so choose, which makes him at least honest. Remember, we hate the sin but not the sinner. If Dr. Sharkey has good qualities that chime with sound human reason, and even Christian social justice, though he wouldn’t admit to that, then we have to praise those good qualities.
Being a sinner myself, I try not to speak in a derogatory manner about other sinners, no matter how sinful they are. I always keep St. Mary Magdalene in mind, she who had seven devils driven from her by Our Lord’s mercy and was saved while the self-righteous Pharisees perished.
I think prayers for such as Dr. Sharkey is a far better idea than condemnation. If a man like him came back to God then just think of the good he could do.
I think all of that is true when dealing with people face to face but I don’t think we should ever promote public sinners.
I think we’ll have to agree to disagree on that one, but I should point out that Dr. Starkey is not a “public sinner”. He admitted to being homosexual as part of a debate in which he challenged the liberal mafia’s attempts to silence Christian opposition to the vice, that hardly makes him a public sinner.
At any rate, sinner or not, when someone speaks truthfully we are obliged in charity and justice to acknowledge that truth, which doesn’t become less the truth because a sinner spoke it.
Dr. Starkey has evaluated this Covid-19 insanity very well in my opinion and I think his assessment should be heard by others. I’m not thereby promoting his anti-Catholic sentiments or his immoral inclinations, which, incidentally, he doesn’t go around screaming through a megaphone. As Catholics we have to exercise wisdom in these matters or we will never win souls to God.
Neither of us knows if Dr. Starkey might yet convert by the grace of God and be saved, while we might lose the faith before death and be lost. That’s why I am always reluctant to take the Puritan view. Oscar Wilde converted to the faith after a life more publicly homosexual than Dr. Starkey. We need to be very careful.
I’m afraid he lived with his homosexual partner, James Brown, for many years. They owned two houses together. If this doesn’t make him a public sinner I don’t know what does. I’m not saying he isn’t deserving of our prayers or charity If we meet him, but it should mean we don’t promote him.
Using the same rule of judgment then, would you agree that President Trump should not be promoted here? He, after all, is living in an adulterous relationship and has no problem with homosexuals. Indeed, one group that follows him around at his rallies is called “Gays for Trump”. He even brought them up onto the stage one day and promised protections for them against homophobic attacks.
Now here is a President who, for the first time in U.S. history, is publicly pro-life and pro-Christian. Are we to dismiss this because he’s not a Catholic and therefore doesn’t hold in all things to the moral law of God? If so, then I’m afraid we’ll probably have to stop promoting any truths here that are spoken by anyone other than a devout Catholic of known moral rectitude. That would limit the conversation somewhat!
Good points I have to admit.
So do you accept the premise that all people who speak or act to promote truth, regardless of what we think of their personal lives, should be respected for that element of good they do rather than be written off completely because of their sins?
Can’t reply below for some reason. Yes that’s a good point Ath.
Well I’m glad we reached agreement on this, though just for your comfort I can confirm now that I will not be posting Elton John or Stephen Fry videos anytime soon, unless they say something for once that’s actually true and good.
I agree with your sentiments. Traditional Catholics are prone to falling into error just as easily as the modernists. Many Traditional Catholics are rigorist, legalist, clericalist, Pelagian, Jansenist etc. without even realising it.
It’s always important to remember, as Belloc remarked, that the Anglican church is a church for respectable people. Whereas the Catholic Church is a Church for saints and sinners. It’s clear from reading the Gospel what type of church Christ intended to establish.
It was actually Oscar Wilde who said that. Still as relevant though. I must say you are not encouraging me to become Traditional if that’s what you think of your fellow Catholics!!!!!
On the contrary, it is better to know what Catholics are really like, then you will not become disillusioned. Our Lord calls many sinners to himself, the Gospels make this clear (Lk 5:32). Matthew was a tax collector, Mary Magdalene a prostitute, and both are saints. Judas was a thief and a betrayer, and Our Lord chose him out of love, and would have made him a saint had only Judas chosen Christ. Out of great wickedness comes great sanctity, and this is the glory of the mystery of redemption. Judas could have been one of the greatest saints who lived, had only he chosen Christ.
This great biblical truth brings me great consolation, because it means there is absolutely nothing we can do, no matter how evil, that will lose us the love of God our Father. Deo gratias.
I have been a Traditional Catholic for more than 30 years, during which time I have met some people who are of the dispositions you mention. Thankfully, they are a small minority who, not remembering what the Church was like before Vatican II, have interpreted Tradition in a kind of Puritanical way. The French are particularly prone to this.
I remember a priest of the SSPX saying once that whenever someone declares to him that the Church is full of hypocrites, his response is “well, there’s always room for one more”. In a sense every sinner is a hypocrite, claiming to love God while offending Him, some more seriously than others. But it’s that hope we have that no matter how many or evil our sins the mercy of God is always ready to forgive when there is true sorrow. That’s what makes the Catholic Church unique, reminding sinners of the horror of sin while offering the mercy of the confessional who want to change their lives.
It is interesting that you mention the tendency of some French Tradition Catholics who are known, are they not, to harbour an attachment to certain unfashionable forms of authoritarian government prevalent in the early 20th century? Am I right to believe that this was the reason Pius XI condemned Action Française.
We no longer live in a Christian society, and the vast majority of people in society are what you describe as public sinners. Even several members of my family sharing a bedroom with their concubines. It’s the modern way. Rather than shun sinners us Catholics must reach out to them and evangelise the culture.
You are absolutely right. We must be counter cultural which means operating at a higher level. This means helping others. Connecting with those who reach out. Accepting apologies. Working through misunderstandings and disagreements and setting a good example. Don’t you think so?
I’m always cautious about this notion of “accepting apologies” which seems to be taken to mean that no matter what damage someone has done to another, that other has to accept “I’m sorry” and let everything go. Wrong.
And it’s wrong because “operating on a higher level” also means not trying to destroy a person’s life and livelihood, not expecting to have a silly “I’m sorry” token apology make everything right again, and not expecting there to be no consequences for one’s action. It’s about realising that, sadly, you have thus forfeited a friendship or a relationship and accepting that “new normal” (!) in reparation for all the damage caused to the individuals and family concerned.
Don’t you think so?
There are obviously different kinds of apology, some genuine and some not so genuine. True sorrow for harm done to another is easily discernible in the person offering apology, it’s always accompanied by a desire to put things right by reparation, or, as your example would have it, accepting the consequences that have arisen as a result of the offence.
God, in His divine justice, expects us to make proper restitution for the damage caused by our sins, hence our penance in Confession. The same obviously applies to natural justice, by which we must repair suitably for damage done by our offences against another.
If I broke someone’s window, for example, it wouldn’t be much good to the person whose window I broke if I simply said sorry and moved on. No, my apology would have to include an offer to fix the window if I wanted it to be taken seriously.
True sorrow must always be accompanied by an offer to repair for harm done and should be marked by a determination not ot offend in the same way again. I’m sure the person in my example would eventually get a little cynical in my regard if I broke his window, apologised and repaired the damage on a regular basis.
I agree – absolutely. And as Miles Immaculatae says below (fancy that, he’s beneath me!) we are not obliged to be carpets under the feet of those who want to bully us. So, without genuine reparation, and no repetition, the old tried and tested “I’m sorry” or even “I’m SO sorry” is meaningless. Especially when it is but the latest in a string of similar “apologies”. Meaningless.
And yet, even ONE teensy weensy apology from the faithless bishops who are the subject of this thread would be welcome. They haven’t even acknowledged the fact that the dire state of the Church in Scotland today is due to their loss of divine and Catholic Faith over decades now, let alone apologised to the Catholic community for their neglect. One lives and one hopes…
I agree completely.
If you mean by “counter-cultural” that we do our bit to re-establish the true Christian culture usurped by atheism in our time, then yes, all the various sentiments and activities you cite would be virtuous indeed. Most of them relate to divine charity anyway.
Yes, I do think so. However, we can’t be carpets for people to walk over. I have had people try to destroy my life and reputation in the past. I can and must forgive them, and pray for them, but I am not required to ‘connect’ with them if they ‘reach out’ no matter how much they apologise. Some people are devious and untrustworthy and we have to protect ourselves from them. Charity doesn’t require us to be pushovers who allow ourselves to be hurt and abused again and again. There is a Texan saying, “fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.”
Ultimately, none of us is owed a friendship by anyone. I have had friends cut me off. But that is their prerogative, because they don’t owe me anything. I just accept it. When someone cuts us off, it is wise to consider how one’s own actions and behaviour may have pushed them away, to ask oneself, what is lacking in my character that has lost me this friendship? For example, am I perhaps too gossipy, sycophantic, duplicitous? Am I bully? etc.
Sometimes, the person who shuns is too vulnerable to take the risk to reconnect with an old friend. For example, the shunner may not trust them for fear of being subject traumas and hurts they have experienced in the past. It’s best to give such people a wide berth, as they say in nautical circles.
I agree. Some people may also be very soft and overly anxious. These folks are easily offended and go off at the deep end and there’s little point in making effort with these people. Btw what does pelagian mean?
If someone is overly soft, anxious, easily offended, and goes off at the deep end, then as you yourself say, there is little point in making an effort with such people. There’s no point in trying to be friends with them…
Shake off the dust from your feet, turn away and leave them be (Mt 10:14). And don’t look back as Lot’s wife did, lest you become a pillar of salt (Gn 19:26). One should leave them alone to deal with their own character defects and get on with one’s own life and attend to one’s own defects.
Pelagian, someone who believes they can save themselves through their own effort. Whereas we can only be saved through Divine grace. It’s a mentality that afflicts many Catholics. It’s pride.
I would be appalled if anyone tried to blame their own bad behaviour on another person due to them being considered to be “very soft and overly anxious, easily offended…” etc.
If that is what they think, then that should, if anything, make a true friend very careful, entirely solicitous for that person’s well being, avoiding, for example, being a nasty bully to that person. Don’t you think so?
PS “solicitous” means showing concern…
Once again I couldn’t respond to comments as there was no button. Yes I agree with everything that’s been said so far.
Editor: to reply when there is no button at the comment to which you seek to respond, simply scroll back up to the first available “reply” button and that will appear in the correct place. Or, at least, that’s what usually happens. If there’s a new normal over at WordPress, it just can’t be helped…
By “reach out to them”, I assume you mean remind them of the Commandments of God and the teaching of the Church. I’m all for that and I think it can be done with charitable frankness, although I draw the line after some time if I see that my words are falling on deaf ears.
There must come a point when we simply have to shake the dust from our feet, to quote the Gospels. This is particularly true in cases where our religious advice is mocked and/or scorned. Living in a post-Christian age is no excuse for those with average intelligence, since the means of learning the truth are more available now than at any time in the past, while the grace of God is always available to people of genuine good will.
So yes, I agree in principle that we should do all we can to help those living apart from God, in whatever context, but only insofar as they are receptive to what we have to say. Otherwise, private prayer for their conversion is the best, sometimes the only, course of action open to charity.
We should give them the entire Gospel, not just the Ten Commandments.
I don’t think it’s accurate to say anyone here is “promoting” a public sinner.
Boris Johnson is a public sinner as is just about everyone else on the planet, these days.
It seems to me that to quote someone in their professional capacity – whether to praise or protest what they are saying/doing – is not to “promote” them.
After all, if we were living in anything remotely resembling a moral society, we wouldn’t know anything about any unmarried person’s sexual behaviour. At one time, believe it or not, such talk was (literally) unheard!
Yes I see exactly what you mean.
Now why couldn’t I have given such a concise explanation to Graham. Maybe it’s because I am intoxicated with the exubernace of my own verbosity!
I wouldn’t say you talk too much… I’ve always thought this photo doesn’t do you justice…
I like the white teeth, not so keen on the size of the gob!
We’re not making judgements about the state of his soul, we’re just observing that some of his cultural and political commentary is on occasions truthful.
Yes, in a nutshell. I think Graham sees that now and agrees.
On the subject of truths being spoken by persons with various severe moral failings, I’m reminded of the high priest Caiphas’ prophecy, from St. John’s Gospel:
“But one of them, named Caiphas, being the high priest that year, said to them: You know nothing.  Neither do you consider that it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.
 And this he spoke not of himself: but being the high priest of that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for the nation.  And not only for the nation, but to gather together in one the children of God, that were dispersed.”
A most unlikely source – one of Our Lord’s most virulent and wicked enemies – for the truth.
WOW! That’s what they call, a point !
I agree with editor. The truth sometimes has a habit of coming from the most unlikely sources.
I agree with you agreeing with Editor…
Let me take that one step further by agreeing with you agreeing with me agreeing with Editor… I’ve gone all Groucho Marx.
Here’s another example of truth coming from an unworthy source – Joseph Goebbels:
“If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, and you will even come to believe it yourself.”
Now if that doesn’t describe the current situation regarding this scam-demic, I don’t know what does…
I know he wouldn’t thank me for saying this, but this man bears a remarkable resemblance to a younger Tom Hanks.
That is one of Hanks’ most famous characters, Forrest Gump, who plays a mentally retarded man in the movie by that name.
That might explain the uncanny resemblance, though I could be wrong!
“If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, and you will even come to believe it yourself”
A bit like how everyone on this blog entertains the idea of a NWO being set up to subjugate us all before killing us off via a vaccine??
I don’t think much of Herr Goebbels as a philosopher (or as a human being) but I think he hit the nail on the head with his assertion that most people are gullible enough to believe anything, regardless of how idiotic it may be, if it is repeated often enough.
“A bit like how everyone on this blog entertains the idea of a NWO being set up to subjugate us all before killing us off via a vaccine??”
Could you elaborate – who mentioned “setting up a NWO” and how would that NWO “kill us off via a vaccine”?
It may have escaped your attention, but there have been an abundance of posts on this blog concerning a NWO and a one-government world. Some dystopian future state that we are all headed towards, courtesy of Freemasonic idealism, apparently.
There, likewise, have been posts about Bill Gates and The Duke of Edinburgh etc and their supposed comments re: de-population by way of an induced virus/vaccine which, in kind, is directly correlated to aforesaid NWO.
I really am surprised that this inferred denouement has bypassed your attention. Either that, or you’re “playing the blushing bride”, as it were.
When I Googled NWO to see if I could find an article that helped me, the first several things that came up where about the NWO as a “conspiracy theory”. However, it’s not a theory. I couldn’t find the article I was looking for but I read another one and it is very good at explaining the NWO as an ideology and it gives important quotes (some I had never read before) to show how it is a reality, supported by important people and newspapers). I think you will find it helpful.
About the vaccine question – Bill Gates is well on record as saying vaccines can be used to depopulate the world. There’s loads of videos on that if you go to YouTube.
Once you’ve investigated a bit you will see that the gullible people are those who think the NWO is just a conspiracy theory – that’s what they want people to think!
Thank you for that. I’m afraid my patience is now wearing very thin with people who talk about “conspiracy theories” in relation to the NWO when the Great and the Good make frequent references to it. I’ll read your link later but thank you for your trouble. I was prepared to offer nothing more than a “take a hike” response.
Thanks for your reply.
I’m sorry, but I’m not buying it.
The article which you have linked – in the same manner as every other NWO related links that I have read – provides answers to most questions concerning “who”, “when”, “where”, “what”, and “how” but it does not give an answer to the most pertinent question of them all: “why?” Cui bono? To what end?
It’s absolute havers, Lily. It’s nothing more than a spook story but, as Goebbels correctly pointed out, people will believe anything if you feed them the same information repeatedly and present it as a fact with a straight face.
Do yourself a favour and forget all of this Armageddon nonsense and, instead, follow what your Bible tells you and be at peace. I’d suggest Philippians 4:8 and Colossians 3:2.
You mean you can’t work out the why?
You must have a very hard time reading history! Why on EARTH do men (to date, it’s usually men) decide to invade other nations? Why do Communists want to rule the world?
Clue: answer beings with letter “P”…
There are very many problems with conspiratorial views that don’t fit together very well with what we know about power structures. Firstly, it presumes that a small handful of highly educated and wealthy people somehow develop an abnormal psychological desire for power that leads them to do things that don’t fit with the roles they seem to possess. For example, that wealthy capitalists are no longer out to make a profit, but to construct a one-world government. Or that elected politicians are trying to amend Acts of Parliament so that they can assume dictatorial powers.
These kinds of claims go back many centuries now, and it’s always said that it is really going to happen this time, but it never does! Since these claims have proved wrong hundreds of times by now, it surely makes more sense to assume that leaders act for their usual reasons, such as seeking to make a profit or become elected to institutional position.
Of course they want to be elected (and re-elected) or make huge margins of profit, and that can sometimes lead them to carrying out unpalatable actions but that doesn’t necessitate instituting a one-world government. They can still make a lot of coin or have power without it.
Moreover, look at how – in many countries around the world – we are beginning to see a rise in nationalism (the natural counter to global governance). Most countries leaders can’t agree on the colour of an orange and yet you expect them to all somehow unite under one leader, one party, one government. I don’t think so.
The UN was unable to stop America going to war with Iraq, prevent Iran’s policy of continued uranium enrichment or do anything about Israel building on internationally recognised parts of Palestine. I don’t say that to denigrate the work of the UN (some of which, is very commendable) but rather to point to the kind of bureaucracy and inefficiency that supranational governmental structures are noted for. Think also of Kyoto, Doha etc.
It’s a myth which has been propagated for centuries with no real, definable evidence and would be unsustainable for any period of time. Honestly, give it a rest.
Yep, a myth.
And yet the entire word has been closed down on the say-so of a few “experts”…
Truth can sometimes be stranger than…er… myths.
Listen, as I’ve said a few times now and I repeat it here; if people choose to go along with what is happening now and ignore all the warnings and signs (Event 201 springs to mind) then that’s fine by me. Just leave me and my independent mind alone, in peace. Thanks. I’m not paid enough to try to convince you or anyone else about the NWO – you’ve obviously not read the article which Lily posted: I have and it’s thoroughly documented, it’s actually one of the best I’ve read in a long time. You, however, always know better than the best evidence so my instinct is to tell you to get …
A nice cup of tea! Byeeeee!
That’s an awfully long-winded way of saying, what could easily be summed up as, “this is my blog and if you don’t agree with me then don’t bother posting here!” How very mature 😉
If you only wish to hear your own echo then that’s your prerogative.
I feel I have to say this – I have tried not to for ages, and I hope I’m not breaching the House Rules, but I have to say this.
I sometimes visit other blog – The Remnant, Eponymous Flower and others. I have never seen anyone insult the blog administrator person by talking about “this blog” in derogatory terms (obviously, when they do that here they mean you, Editor).
The other thing I’ve noticed here that is never seen on other blogs, is to accuse you of favouritism, when you try to correct someone. That could be because other blog admins don’t try to correct, they just block people.
My final comment is about the criticism that you don’t want to hear any other points of view – that’s the one that really flabbergasts me! LOL! I actually get frustrated with you sometimes (sorry!) for going over and over stuff when you are trying to answer questions etc. So, that’s just a lie.
That’s why I am very glad to see your reply to Marc being a simple “whatever…”
That’s long overdue!
Editor, if you think this is a troublemaking comment, please delete it, I just had to say it and ideally I would like it to remain so that the people who make these unfair criticisms get to see them. I think I can speak for us all when I say that the bloggers here are not fooled by them, I think the majority of the bloggers here can see those comments for what they actually are, jealous childishness.
Thank you for that supportive comment. Others have said to me (in person or by text/email) more or less exactly what you have said so, no, that’s not troublemaking.
I would simply ask others not to add anything to what Lily has said. It will do my personal and blog enemies no harm to realise that others (apart from my unworthy self) can see the truth behind their daft behaviour, but there is no need to risk creating an unpleasant atmosphere by adding anything.
Thanks to Lily, though, for her public expression of support. I know it reflects the minds of the rest of the bloggers, more or less, so let’s leave it there.
The problem with your post is that it excludes Lucifer. If you include this very important fundamental, it is then quite easy to conclude how and why things are happening as they are. Indeed, they are so clever as to have originated in a demonic mind. People do actually sell their souls to the devil for wealth and power, you know. But if you are irreligious you won’t ever believe this and go off looking for rational explanation, which you will never find apart from the eradication of Christianity from the face of the earth.
Thanks for your response.
If I were irreligious, I would not have advised Lily to take to reading the Word of God. This is how we defeat the Devil, by doing the work of God which includes reading His Word. I have also encouraged elsewhere on this blog for people to fast and pray. (Disclaimer: by “fasting”, I mean actually fasting by foregoing food, not simply swopping meat for fish on a Friday)
Editor: that’s not fasting – that’s abstinence.
Read the Scripture, God always provides for those who love Him and do His will. Read about Esther, or Daniel, or Isaiah, or Barnabas and Paul, or many others whom God helped once they had complied with His commands. Copy the actions of these God-fearing people and watch how God will work for you. It’s really not rocket science. Humble yourselves by fasting and confessing to God, follow His commands, seek His face, petition the Lord and He will oblige you. It really is as simple as that. If you don’t believe me, then why not give it a try and find out for yourself.
“Is not this the fast that I have chosen; to loose the bonds of wickedness, to undo the heavy burdens, to let the oppressed go free, and that you break every yoke?” (Isaiah 58:6-7)
(Isaiah 58:8-9) “Then your light shall break forth like the morning, your healing shall spring forth speedily, and your righteousness shall go before you; the glory of the Lord shall be your rear guard. Then you shall call, and the Lord will answer; you shall cry, and He will say, ‘Here I AM’…”
“Then I proclaimed a fast there at the river of Ahava, that we might humble ourselves before our God, to seek from Him the right way for us and our little ones and all our possessions.
For I was ashamed to request of the king an escort of soldiers and horsemen to help us against the enemy on the road, because we had spoken to the king, saying, ‘The hand of our God is upon all those for good who seek Him, but His power and His wrath are against all those who forsake Him.’
So we fasted and entreated our God for this, and He answered our prayer.”
The above Bible references are only a snapshot of examples which show, quite clearly, how God will help those who do His will and humble themselves before Him.
Editor: You think we don’t know that God will help us? You crazy? That doesn’t mean we don’t do anything ourselves. Crackers! I refer you to the fundamentalist Protestant who rejected the help from land, sea and air when he was stranded in the middle of the ocean, insisting the God would help him! Gerragrip!
I don’t mean to be rude but waiting for some Jesuit Pope to consecrate Russia to the mother of Our Lord is never going to happen – I ken it, you ken it, Patsy Kensit. The sooner you accept this and seek, instead, an alternative method, you will continue down the same path of “woe is me” which helps no one.
Editor: nobody said we were waiting for “some Jesuit Pope” – Our Lady said that the pope would consecrate Russia “but it would be late”. She doesn’t lie.
As an aside, which of the Encyclical Letters of the Pope would you recommend that I read?
Editor: I recommend Athanasius ignore that question because Marc is adept at getting others to do the work for him – you can recommend all the encyclicals in creation and he will either not read them or distort their meaning. There’s a reason why Marc’s posts are in moderation…
[Any chance Catholic Truth could add bib.ly plugin for WordPress? Would make things a lot easier. Just a suggestion]
Editor: Sorry, nope.
If you must reply to my comments can you at least be courteous enough to utilise the Reply button instead of cannibalising my entire post – it’s really rude (as was your entire contribution)!
Editor: please don’t tell me how to run this blog. If I see the need to make corrections in the post of someone who is behaving in a troll-like manner, I will do so. Go elsewhere if you don’t like it, And don’t tell me that I’m rude when all I’m doing is correcting your nonsense. Now I am not going to release any more posts from you. You are one of a very small minority of people who seems to be fixated, if not obsessed, with this blog and with me, in particular. As I keep asking my family and friends: “Why didn’t this happen to me when I was twenty? Men obsessed with me?” I laugh. They laugh. Fun over. I’m not releasing any more of your comments, so don’t waste time writing them. Goodbye, take care. You are in our prayers…
You’ll excuse me if I don’t respond further, I’m really way too busy to keep entering into lengthy exchanges with you again. You clearly do not have the Catholic Faith or the remotest interest in it, hence the wisdom of the Popes is lost to you and that makes further exchanges fruitless.
Read the Encyclical Letters of the Popes before Vatican II, on Freemasonry and Communism, and you’ll have the “why”, although I would have thought the “why” was fairly obvious myself. Anyway, the aforementioned should remove any further doubts you have on that score.
You seem to imply that I’m stupid, but, while I may not be the brightest bulb in the box, I don’t think I’m stupid, which is implied by your comment that “people will believe anything etc”. I don’t believe anything, I check things out the best I can. The article I gave you contains statements from well know people which are easily checked out. I’ve copied them to post here for you because I do wonder if you’ve red the article – you don’t quote anything from it even to prove it wrong or doubtful so I am inclined to think that you haven’t read it. Here are what some very famous people have said about the NWO – are they “havers”?
“The real rulers in Washington are invisible, and exercise power from behind the scenes.” – Felix Frankfurter, Supreme Court Justice, 1952
“Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.” – Woodrow Wilson ,28th President of the United States
“We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by consent or conquest.” – James Paul Warburg [son of Paul Warburg, the author of the Federal Reserve Act] February 7, 1950
“We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.” – David Rockefeller, Baden-Baden, Germany 1991
“I think that his [Obama’s] task will be to develop an overall strategy for America in this period, when really a New World Order can be created.” – Henry Kissinger, CNBC 2008.
There is no contradiction between reading my bible and realising there is something seriously wrong in the world, with people trying to reach for a new world order where the elite can govern us all, and exert a totalitarian/authoritarian power over us. It would be ridiculous to ignore what the above quotes are telling us. The Bible tells us to be “wise as serpents” so, there is no contradiction in believing the Bible and believing that there are people trying to change the world into a new order where we are being ruled in an authoritarian way.
I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this, but I just wanted to point out the above quotes, because I’m guessing you haven’t read them and they may just make you think twice about the issue.
Marc has now been blocked so that he cannot comment here, but he can read the comments, obviously, so I would prefer if nobody else added anything. Let Lily’s reply to him end the conversation there.
I ask this because I’ve just read a string of comments from Marc in my admin folder, which are nothing short of horrendous. My gut sense that he had a hidden reason for being here, was correct, but more than that I cannot say at the moment.
Scripture makes clear that we ought to leave vengeance to God, and so for those readers, like Marc, who believe that I am guilty of great evil, please pray for me but leave my punishment to God. I’m not the only person on this blog – there is great good being effected here, thanks to the hard work of others. My input, if you notice, is, more often than not, thanking others for the information and insight which they provide. So, destroying the blog discussions is not to punish me – it is to hamper God’s work, which He has chosen to do by using human instruments, including our bloggers, who are very generous with their time, information, insights and effort.
Lily, you make very good points and those quotes are excellent. Thank you for that.
I’d be grateful, though, if nobody would reply to this or to Lily’s comment.
I haven’t missed your sarcasm a bit, Marc, or your self-assured ignorance. Just because you have failed to do your homework regarding the establishment of a New World Order doesn’t mean it’s just a conspiracy theory, and it especially doesn’t mean we’re a bunch of gullible fools for pointing out the obvious.
Headline: UK Gov’t confirms Covid19 harmless to VAST MAJORITY of people
I wonder how long Dr. Chris Whitty will have his job….
Many thanks for posting that link. It’s the very first time I’ve seen a journalist asking a question that matters, in these daily briefings. Great that he forced them to admit what we all know anyway, that most people recover from this virus, which is really nothing more than a particularly vicious flu. I think a lot of people watching that will have been shocked, because the hoi polloi is convinced that people are all but dropping dead on the street!
If you see this before my return (and it’s well past my bedtime now) perhaps you would post it again over on the new thread, questioning whether or not we need to obey the lockdown laws/restrictions. If not, I’ll relocate it on my return.
Thanks again – that’s really important information.
Some time later… Next day … Next morning, 11am to be precise… I’ve now posted your link and comment over on the new “morality” thread. I take it that you just couldn’t resist the pubs and clubs (remember those, fellow Scots, and other UK friends?)
He was prompted to ask the question so that Boris and his botching government could respond in a way that might help them out of the mess they’ve gotten themselves and the country in. These are all little messages put out to convince a terrified nation that it is actually alright to start lifting lockdown. Like the lockdown itself, it’s orchestrated messaging!
I read an article in the Remnant which claims the agenda behind the NWO is Transhumanism. Anybody know what that means? Explanation for a dummy, please!
I think transhuman is a science fiction concept, a being that is of higher intelligence than a mere human.
The French Council of State yesterday ordered the French Government to lift its “general and absolute ban” on religious ceremonies, within 8 days. It said the ban was disproportionate and a “serious and manifestly illegal infringement” of religious freedom.
So the French will be able to return to mass very shortly.
My understanding is that this is the result of various legal actions raised by, among others, the SSPX, FSSP and The Fraternity of St Vincent Ferrer (which is a traditional Dominican order, based in France).
I have read elsewhere that Ireland is to be one of the last places to allow public masses to recommence (based on Government statements about dates etc).
That’s really good news but in London, there is one part of London where they are going to allow the Call to Prayer for Muslims during Ramadan (and IMHO that will be allowed to stay after lockdown/Ramadan).
Hearing it on the TV, it sounds very loud, so that is going to go out to make up for them not being able to get together or their breaking of the Ramadan fast.
I couldn’t believe it when I read about the Adhan (call to prayer) being broadcast in London. I found a link to a report on it at Lifesitenews
The report says that broadcasting the Adhan is “an alternative form of connection” for Muslims, with mosques currently closed along with all other places of worship in the U.K. as part of the nationwide coronavirus lockdown..
So why can’t we have the ringing of church bells as “an alternative form of connection” for Christians during lockdown?
Thank you for posting that news – I’ve now received an email from a reader asking us all to sign a petition against this. I’ll sign now, and I recommend that others sign as well.
Hearing it on TV is nothing compared to hearing it first hand. When I was in Israel some years ago, I almost fell out of bed such was the fright I had on hearing it at the crack of dawn. I do NOT envy the residents in those London boroughs!
Here, for ease of reference, is the link to the petition on the subject, which I’ve just posted in answer to Lily, above…
I thought this thread was probably the best one to place this Fox News report on, as it treats of another faithless prelate. Washington’s Archbishop Wilton Gregory has had a go at Donald Trump because police removed some anarchists from a square prior to him taking a photo shoot. The occasion of Trump’s outing was to visit the shrine of Saint (?) John Paul II. Instead of being praised by the Archbishop, however, read what happened.
I should mention that Archbishop Gregory once rejected a petition of the faithful who wanted a certain Monsignor removed from his position as advisor at a shrine of Our Lady in Atlanta for being pro-LGBT. On another occasion, when asked by a transgender man if he was considered outside the Church, the Archbishop immediately castigated all those who would say such a thing, telling the transgender individual that he is at the heart of the Church.
It seems Archbishop Gregory was a convert to the faith, apparently wanting to become a priest even before he was a Catholic. He was ordained in 1959 and I can’t help thinking of Bella Dodd’s revelations about Communist infiltration into the Church in the U.S.
OT but re Bella Dodd’s revelations of Communists infiltration – I’ve always been very, very puzzled as to why ++Sheen forbad her to reveal the names of the Communists she placed in seminaries, the Vatican etc. To my mind (and possibly judgmentally), this puts a big question mark on his up-and-coming cause for canonisation.
Btw a great letter to the Scottish bishops. You write so beautifully!
I know what you mean about ++Fulton Sheen’s “Cause”. I have to say that I loved his talks and sermons, there was a lot of great Catholic teaching in them. Sadly, though, he went along with the Conciliar “reform” and was hostile to Archbishop Lefebvre, the one who should be canonised. I have also read that in the 1960s Bishop Sheen’s diocesan offices had among its lay workers a number of women in mini skirts, the fashion of the time but hardly appropriate for work in a Catholic diocesan office, yet this was permitted. Then there are the stories of ambition and the rivalry between ++Sheen and Cardinal Spellman.
However, I have never read any trustworthy and definitive source proving that ++Sheen silenced Bela Dodd in the way you describe. It would be very controversial if he had given his very public opposition to Communism. Mind you, Bela Dodd must have revealed names to many in the hierarchy at the time and yet nothing was ever done. Maybe they simply didn’t trust her testimony. It’s certainly a bit of a mystery.
Thank you for your very kind comment about my letter. Please God it will make our bishops reflect seriously on what they are doing, or rather not doing!
Mary and Athanasius,
I’ve also read somewhere, years ago (translation: I don’t remember where) that Bella Dodd was advised by Abp. Sheen not to reveal the names of the Communists she had placed in the seminaries. One of the things on my bucket list, in fact, is to visit the Bella Dodd archive in St. Louis and investigate whether some or all of these names are listed somewhere in her archived documents.
I’ve not read many of Abp. Sheen’s books, but I’ve found his writings against Communism to be the most powerful and effective. All the more strange, then, that he accepted the Conciliar “reforms,” which were essentially Marxism applied to the Church.
Yes, it is very strange that Archbishop Sheen (I forgot he’d been elevated from Bishop) would want to silence such names. I think you’ll have to shove that search of the Dodd archives to the top of your list, because now I’m curious!!
Yes, I did a search last night after your comment, Athanasius, as to where I may have seen that bit of information but couldn’t find a direct connection. I seem to remember that it had something to do with Alice Von Hildebrand so will keep looking…
But in my wanderings around the big WWW there were different reasons talked of as to why ++Sheen forbad Dodd such as for her safety etc. But we’ll probably will never know why the ban (if it happened) and have to chalk the supposed incident down to one of life’s little mysteries with possible huge implications for the Church and the world if it did.
Don’t trouble yourself further trying to find original sources, it will take up too much of your time and you’ll probably never get to the original source. RCAVictor is also aware of this story regarding Archbishop Sheen but is likewise unable to find the original source.
I think it’s fairly likely that for some reason Archbishop Sheen did keep those names silent, though I agree with you that it was a mistake. I have no doubt he was well intentioned but I think if he were alive today he would probably agree that his decision at that time was misguided. God alone knows how many of these operatives are now in high clerical office within the Church.
I remember back in the late 1980s (I think) a story broke of two prelates in the Vatican, close to the Pope, who had been unmasked as KGB operatives. It was a massive media story at the time and then it all went quiet. Now I cannot find a single reference to that story, it’s like they’ve wiped it from the record. If only I could remember their names!
FWIW my search found this interesting tidbit of a link… (And I hope dear Editor won’t mind my posting it.)
It seems to be hearsay but very mind blowing if true.
I had a look at those four names and apart from one I recognised three top liberals from Vatican II. However, Cardinal Gregorio Pietro XV Agagianian, although one of the most liberal at the Council and attributed as the main author of the highly dubious Guadium et Spes, also appears to have been quite anti-Communist. It’s really difficult to know for certain what his intentions were but it looks more like he was just another liberal rather than a KGB infiltrator.
I have a confession to make. When I saw your name on the sidebar, I couldn’t think how it got there, because I presumed you were a newcomer. However, on checking my admin folder, there you are, large as life, so to speak, with a number of previous contributions on the record – all of them very good and even very kind and complimentary posts. So, thank you for that.
We’ve had quite a bit of trouble with someone not of your Christian disposition, as you’ve probably discovered on your tour of the blog in recent times, so please pray for that person. He poses under different names in an effort to get onto the blog (won’t work – he’s now blocked completely) but twice he has posted with a username designed to give the impression that he’s a priest. A particularly dark kind of deceit, it seems to me. One view is that he’s obsessed with this blog. Another is that he’s possessed. You pays your money and you takes your pick, as they say south of the border.
Anyway, I’m rambling again…
Thank you once more for your very interesting comments. But before I sign off, I remember you saying that one of the things you like about this blog is the sometime humour, so I think you’ll enjoy this wee joke… (for me, IN that age group, it’s no joke… believe me!)
I may have mentioned this before, but what do you make of an individual (or two) who repeatedly tries to access a blog from which he’s been blacklisted, by submitting comments similar in tone (o worse) than the comments which got him blacklisted!?
Perhaps you ought to offer the services of a psychiatrist as part of this apostolate…
(And an additional welcome to Mary W52 – I don’t remember her appearing here before, but my memory ain’t what it used to be.)
Thank you for your very kind welcome. I don’t blame you for not remembering me appearing before as, in spite of Editor very kindly calling me larger than life (is that a good thing?😀), in reality I have not not posted all that much at all as much I have wanted to.
I commented a little while ago that I very much like and appreciate the very erudite comments (and oftentimes very humorous exchanges) of Mdm Editor, Athanasius and your good self, and of course other commenters, on this my favourite blog. They are a coherent balm to me trying to make sense of this insane world of ours.
I’m actually at something of a loss to know what to make of those two individuals, at least one of whom suffers from MBUD ( Multiple Blog Username Disorder.)
I’ve come to agree more and more, however, with one of our regular bloggers who dismisses the very idea that this is caused by mental health issues; he’s not mad, he’s bad, is the theme.
Certainly, nobody who suffers from, say, depression and/or anxiety would have the energy for this kind of nonsense, so if there’s a mental health issue, it’s got to be something much more serious, something which changes a personality from one type to another. Not being qualified in that field, I’ll withhold my own personal opinion.
Suffice that we pray for this disordered personality, because, as you indicate, to press on submitting the very same kind of ridiculous comments that gets one blacklisted in the first place, is not exactly a sign of the highest intelligence, is it? Rhetorical question, of course…
I do sympathise with your memory problem. My memory isn’t what it used to be. And my memory isn’t what it used to be either 😀
I’ve just discovered this blog and I am reading various blogs with mounting horror. Yes, we are all Catholics, we are devastated by the terrible turn of events with this world-wide virus (did I really see someone call it the Chinese” virus???)… but where is the Christianity in all of this??
What I am reading here is the Catholicism of the Inquisition. Of the days when people were so brainwashed and afraid that they changed religion according to whomever was in power at the time. People who see themselves as judges of everyone else while applauding their own virtue.
Remember the word of Christ. Remember that you are Christians first and foremost.
I’m so sorry to find this blog to be written by fanatics and contributed to by sycophants.
You make me ashamed to be a Catholic.
Before you write in the name of Christ, think of His greatest and most basic message, “TREAT OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE THEM TREAT YOU.”
I find no love or care for others in the blogs that I have read today.
Apart from mentioning your horror that someone called this virus “the Chinese virus”, you give no specific examples of what it is you are criticising. That makes your comment nothing more than a rant.
So, let’s look at the one criticism that you specifically identify. Someone referred to this virus as “the Chinese virus”.
That is the norm – a virus/flu tends to be identified by its source.
Did you, for example, lodge complaints with the Equalities Commission, police or Government, about the fact that the Asian Flu was called the Asian Flu (which also originated in China) or the Spanish Flu, which didn’t actually originate in Spain but was called that all due to a misunderstanding – check it out for yourself, I forget the details. Well? Did you – or will you – complain about those “racist” ways of speaking about a virus?
Listen, I’m not going to claim NOT to be a racist – I’ve already gone into some details about that on the “Racist/Sin” thread but that was before I heard the American liberal (priceless) politician saying that if you hear yourself saying you’re not a racist, that is proof that you are a racist, so it looks like I’m a racist, after all.
I call this latest virus “the virus” because there isn’t any way anyone is not going to understand what I mean. Either that or “the miracle virus” since it has cured everything else – nobody dies of seasonal flu, any more, or heart attacks or strokes or even natural causes. Everyone is dying of “the virus”. What’s not to like?
So, a wee word of advice. If you are going to go onto any blog to complain about the content, then complain about the content, specifically. Don’t offer us sermons on Christian charity. At least, not until you can demonstrate that you are able to practise what you preach. I mean name calling? “Fanatics”? “Sycophants”?
As Our Lord teaches: “Let you yes mean yes, and your no mean no. Everything else comes from the Evil One.”
Your outrage is either feigned or the result of being a poorly formed Catholic with no real knowledge of Church history.
Emotional Catholicism, the “let’s all love each other and forget what is important for the soul” is about as Modernist as it gets, and I’m afraid your belief that this virus, the Chinese virus that came from a lab in Wuhan, is anything more than a bad flu politicised and used against free humanity, suggests that it is you, not we, who are “brainwashed”.
You’re not unique in this stupidity, for many other modern Catholics are equally brainwashed and superficial in their faith.
Can you give even a basic explanation of what the (Holy) Inquisition was about? Can you describe in Catholic terms what the Cardinal virtue of divine charity consists of? No, I guess you probably couldn’t because I suspect you only came here to cause trouble.
You’re own comment to us on this blog can hardly be read as remotely Christ like in its tone. That’s what exposed you immediately as a fake Christian.
I don’t think Clare can give a basic explanation of Catholicism, never mind the Inquisition.
I wonder how Christian is her view of President Trump. Would love to hear from her on this point.
I suspect she views President Trump with “mounting horror.” Imagine the horror of a President trying to extricate America from the tentacles of global socialism! Imagine the horror of a President defending the unborn from the infanticide thugs and profiteers! Imagine the horror of a President who tells the truth about the professional liars in the media, and their fellow travelers in the Democrat Party! Imagine the horror of a President who wants every American to have a good job! Imagine the horror of a President who wants to close the borders to prevent the entry of drug dealers, gangsters, terrorists, welfare frauds and various unsavory characters! Imagine the horror of a President who tells leftist mayors and governors to take back their cities from fascist guerrillas!
My head is spinning from the horror of it all…I’m so triggered by all that microaggression, I need to find a safe space, some hot chocolate, and a stuffed animal…
Somehow I don’t see Claire as having any kind of view on President Trump that would be truly Christian. If she believes the fake media about that virus and takes offence at someone calling it by its proper name, i.e., Chinese virus, then I’m fairly sure she will have swallowed the media propaganda against Trump.
Clare is yet another troll – ignore her. Here’s some news about a previous troll or three – I’ve just posted it on another thread but decided it ought to be here for the record…
Replying to you on this thread
Well, I suspect that, at least in some cases, and for some reason Archbishop Tartaglia springs to mind, there will be a very deep-seated acceptance of the truth of what you have written. A combination of things – the collegiality nonsense, years of decay, the inability to say “I / we got it wrong” – is making it impossible for any of them to offer you the humble response which your letter, by its very nature demands.
However, forget the bishops, for a moment. I paid a visit, as is my wont, to the moderation file a short time ago, and found there yet another “new” blogger, this time called Mario, who, after condemning your letter as much too long and rude, went on to write over 400 words, all very rude! What a nut. But that’s not all. Guess what?
“Mario” is also Dan, and Anthony and… and… and… very loud drum roll….
Margo McGlashan! Remember her?
https://catholictruthblog.com/2020/05/15/faithless-scots-bishops-to-keep-churches-closed-until-at-least-2021/#comments [this thread]
Yip, this is the same troll who very haughtily took me to task for posting an inaccurate headline: “…this blog headline is quite inaccurate, we have to be very careful about exaggerating the words of others. Shucks. Excuse me! Stand by for the end of the world!
In fact, this was nit-picking. Still, being of a humble ilk, I updated the post to confess my sin of not having read the original source properly and getting it wrong, even naming dear old “Margo” in gratitude. Response? There wasn’t one. Disruption work done for the time being, there was no “thank you – I appreciate that…” You kidding? That’s not what trolls do !
I’m now going to … go back to my admin file and block the above nutcases so that they have no chance of making it onto this blog – ever, again.
PS – more than one person has expressed amazement at the obsession of these clowns with this blog, saying they’ve never known anything like it before. Me, neither. I participated in a blog discussion elsewhere a couple of weeks ago and it was made very clear to me that my presence was not welcome. I apologised for upsetting things, and promised not to return. I didn’t return (even though the blog administrator told me in an email that I was welcome to return – still, I didn’t. And haven’t even thought about it until now). So, I just do not understand the obsession with this blog by some bananas who – while desperate to publish here – hate us. I do not get it. Does anybody else? If so, spill…
Comments are closed.