COP26: Climate Change Zealots Doubling As Christians in Name Only, Cancel The Gospel…

COP26: Climate Change Zealots Doubling As Christians in Name Only, Cancel The Gospel…

A few days ago, I received the above image of a banner outside a Protestant church in Kelvingrove, Glasgow from Dr William J U Philip, the Senior Minister of the Tron church, as part of an email exchange about Pope Francis and COP26.  Dr Philip serves three locations in Glasgow: Bath Street, Kelvingrove and Queen’s Park. Then this morning, he writes:

“Apparently many have attacked our banner on Twitter – not non-Christians (those I sent it to simply said they would of course expect, and want, a church to talk about Christianity if they went to it, not climate change – why go to a church for lectures on that when it’s all over the media?) – but by Christians embarrassed to be associated with such a clear statement which is contrary to the apparent cry of the whole world just now.  

In fact the banner had been stolen and taken down by Sunday morning, so only lasted a day.  Cancel culture!  But, the real Christian gospel will not be chained.” Ends.

In response, Dr Philip issued the following statement, published here with permission, for which much gratitude:

The fact that a Christian Church placards publicly that the mission of the Church is to preach Christ crucified and not something else should hardly be controversial. But it seems that saying, when the COP is happening right on our doorstep, that there is something more important (far more important) the church must speak about is embarrassing for some Christians.

I think that betrays a dangerous misunderstanding of the real urgency of the message we have been charged with taking to the world: an eternal, supernatural gospel.

The challenging word in our banner (which lasted less than 48 hours before being vandalised and torn down) was the ‘not’. No-one would bat an eyelid if we said the church should preach Christ crucified AND climate change. But the Christian gospel contains many necessary negatives, and it only these make the true gospel true–but offensive.

No-one is offended by Jesus when he says ‘whoever believes in the Son has eternal life…’ But Jesus continues with the necessary negative: ‘…whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.’ (John 3:36). There is the offence, for which our Lord was crucified, and all his true apostles martyred because they witnessed publicly to the truth of that offensive gospel.  It is no accident that our word ‘witness’ is the word ‘martyreo’: a good witness to Christ will provoke the hatred of the world, according to Jesus (John 15:19) not its adulation (Luke 6:26).

We must not shy away from necessary negatives if the challenge of the true Christian gospel is to be heard – especially when virtually every public Christian voice being heard in the media simply chimes with the united voice of the world: that climate change is the issue above all others. Not so. That is a lie of Satan. The bible tells us that this whole world lies in the power of the evil one and we are not to be conformed to this world in our thinking. The message of hope we proclaim is not a hope in human endeavour, not a hope in this world, but the hope of the world to come, and there is salvation ‘in no one else’, ‘no other name under heaven’ which will save from the wrath to come, and what Jesus calls the ‘unquenchable fire’ of hell.

We are not denying that Christians should care for creation – in the way God commands, of course, and for his purposes (which may be very different from what some climate activists want).  But we are saying that if the world stands at ‘one minute to midnight’ (to use the Prime Minister’s phrase) the real urgency is for people to know what that means. And the unique charge of the Christian church is to herald that truth, and the consequent essential warning to mankind.

According to Jesus, you can know everything about the weather and the climate, but nothing at all about the real and pressing need of the day.  Our Lord’s own banner for COP26 might well have been his words in Luke 12:56, which begins very offensively

“You hypocrites! You know how to interpret the appearance of earth and sky, but why do you not know how to interpret the present time?…”  

And his answer?  The most urgent need is for the world to realize its priorities are all wrong. The time, he says, is time to repent:  “…unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.” (Luke 13:3)

Offensive then, and offensive today.  But this was the priority message of our Lord Jesus Christ, and it must be the absolute priority of his Church’s message today. Ends.

Editor writes: 

Er… is this not precisely what the Pope should be saying? Of course it is, but he fits into this righteous condemnation in the above excellent statement: “…every public Christian voice being heard in the media simply chimes with the united voice of the world…”  Precisely.  And this terrible pontiff, Francis, is among those worldly – anti-Christian – voices.  He, like all of the Climate Crazies needs urgent prayers… like now!

Comments (42)

  • westminsterfly Reply

    The following is crucial reading and is a comment placed on the Breitbart website by someone called ‘DiogenesDespairs’. It’s a handy little ‘go to’ when in arguments with climate change fanatics:-

    We know the Queen is able to read. Perhaps Prince Charles is too? If so, then he COULD consider this:

    The fact is, there has been global warming, but the contribution of human-generated carbon dioxide is necessarily so small as to be all but undetectable. Here’s why:

    Carbon dioxide, considered the main vector for human-caused global warming, is some 0.04% of the atmosphere by volume, or some 400 parts per million (ppm)[1]. Water vapor varies from 0% to 4% by volume[2], and so should easily average above 1%[3] near the Earth’s surface, where the greenhouse effect would be most important, and is about three times more effective[4] a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. So water vapor is some 25 times more prevalent and three times more effective; that makes it some 75 times more important to the greenhouse effect than carbon dioxide[5]. The TOTAL contribution of carbon dioxide to the greenhouse effect is therefore 0.013 or less.

    Since the start of the industrial revolution, carbon dioxide is estimated to have risen from 280 ppm to the current approximately 400 ppm. Even if the entire increase were the result of human emissions – which is by no means certain, given uncertainty about how much CO2 is produced by natural sources such as decomposition of biomass and carbonate rock, volcanism and the little-understood ocean-atmosphere exchange – the total human contribution to atmospheric carbon dioxide would be about 0.3 of the total. Therefore human carbon dioxide adds at most only 0.0039 of the greenhouse effect, and may well be less.

    Total warming of the Earth by the greenhouse effect is widely accepted as about 33 degrees Centigrade (which is equal to 59 degrees Fahrenheit), raising average temperature to 15 degrees Centigrade, or 59 degrees above zero Fahrenheit. So the contribution of anthropogenic carbon dioxide is at most 0.23 degrees Fahrenheit, or at most 0.13 degree Centigrade, and perhaps considerably less. Global warming since the beginning of the industrial revolution is thought by many to be perhaps 0.8 to1.0 degree Centigrade.

    But that’s only the beginning. We’ve had global warming for more than 10,000 years, since the end of the last Ice Age, and there is evidence temperatures were actually somewhat warmer 9,000 years ago and again 4,500 to 8,000 years ago than they are today[6]. Whatever caused that, it was not human activity. It was not all those power plants and factories and SUVs being operated by Stone Age cavemen while chipping arrowheads out of bits of flint. Whatever the cause was, it melted the glaciers that in North America once extended south to Long Island and parts of New York City[7] into virtually complete disappearance (except for a few mountain remnants). That’s one big greenhouse effect! If we are still having global warming – and I suppose we could presume we are, given this more than 10,000 year history – it seems highly likely that it is still the overwhelmingly primary cause of continued warming, rather than our piddling 0.0039 contribution to the greenhouse effect.

    Yet even that trend-continuation today needs to be proved. Evidence is that the Medieval Warm Period centered on the 1200s was somewhat warmer than we are now[8], and the climate was clearly colder in the Little Ice Age in the 1600s than it is now[9]. (Whether the earlier Roman Warm Period around the time of Christ was as warm or was warmer than present is less clear.) So we are within the geologically recent range of normal up-and-down fluctuations without human greenhouse contributions that could be significant, or even measurable.

    Principal scientists arguing for human-caused global warming have been demonstrably disingenuous[10], and now you can see why. They have proved they should not be trusted.

    The idea that we should be spending trillions of dollars and hamstringing the economy of the entire world to reduce carbon dioxide emissions is beyond ludicrous in light of the facts above; it is insane. Furthermore, it sucks attention and resources from seeking the other sources of warming and from coping with climate change and its effects in realistic ways. The true motivation underlying the global warming movement is almost certainly ideological and political in nature, and I predict that Anthropogenic Global Warming, as currently presented, will go down as the greatest fraud of all time. It makes Ponzi and Madoff look like pikers by comparison.

    [1] Mauna Loa Observatory https://www.co2.earth/daily

    [2] Fundamentals of Physical Geography, 2nd Edition

    by Micheal Pidwirney Concentration varies slightly with the growing season in the northern hemisphere. HYPERLINK http://www.physicalgeograph

    [3] The Earth’s tropics, the so-called “Torrid Zone,” where temperatures and therefore the capacity of the atmosphere to hold water vapor are at their highest, and where the 4% maximum is found, comprise a far greater portion of the Earth’s surface – 40% – than do the areas where water vapor content is at its lowest, the polar areas (8%), and the world’s deserts (10%). Moreover, the troposphere, which contains 99% of the world’s water vapor, is far deeper at the equator (10-12 miles) than near the poles (4 to 6 miles), enabling substantially more water vapor retention in the tropics even if other factors were equal rather than favoring more water retention rather than less. I have chosen an arbitrarily low working figure of 1% to give the AGW argument the benefit of any doubt. The higher the actual figure is above that, the lower must be the actual contribution of carbon dioxide, and therefore of anthropogenic carbon dioxide. If the true figure is 2%, the contribution of human-generated carbon dioxide is half that shown.

    [4 NIST Chemistry Webbook, Please compare the IR absorption spectra of water and carbon dioxide. ] HYPERLINK “http://webbook.nist.gov/” http://webbook.nist.gov/

    [5] Three quarters of the atmosphere and virtually all water vapor are in the troposphere. Including all the atmosphere would change the ratios to about 20 times more prevalent and 60 times more effective. However, the greenhouse effect of high-altitude carbon dioxide on lower-altitude weather and the earth’s surface seems likely to be extremely small if not nil, given that heat rises and high-altitude gases would also intercept relevant frequencies of solar radiation before they reach the earth.

    [6] Encyclopedia Britannica – Holocene Environment and Biota, et al. https://www.britannica.com/… for early holocene. See also History of Earth’s Climate, Ch. 7, Brett Hansen http://www.dandebat.dk/eng-… The citation here is of the English translation, which contains minor grammatical errors that do not materially affect content.

    [7]The Narrows Flood – Post-Woodfordian Meltwater Breach of the Narrows Channel, NYC Charles Merguerian https://www.geo.sunysb.edu/… p. 2, et al.

    [8] Britannica, same section https://www.britannica.com/… for historical period: Roman and Medieval Warm Periods also History of Earth’s Climate, Ch. 7, Brett Hansen http://www.dandebat.dk/eng-

    [9] University of Arizona http://www.atmo.arizona.edu

    [10] Wikileaks: Climatic Research Unit emails, data, models, 1996-2009 HYPERLINK “http://wikileaks.org/wiki/C…” http://wikileaks.org/wiki/C….

    See also HYPERLINK “http://www.dailymail.co.uk/…” http://www.dailymail.co.uk/… and

    HYPERLINK “http://online.wsj.com/artic…” http://online.wsj.com/artic… and, more diplomatically: HYPERLINK “http://www.nytimes.com/2009…” http://www.nytimes.com/2009…. Et al.

    ADDENDUM

    What initially troubled me, years ago, was the aberrant behavior of the climate research unit at East Anglia University, which had been the main data source for AGW arguments. They initially refused(!) to reveal their algorithms and data on the grounds that they were proprietary(!!). They responded to critics with ad hominem attacks and efforts to block their publication in scientific journals. Now, as I am sure you know, this is not how one does honest science, in which you PUBLISH your data and methodology and invite critical comment to ferret out error or oversights. It took the now-famous Wikileaks “Climategate” to pry loose the data and expose their machinations. Yet despite the devastating blow these revelations should have to their credibility, the AGW “cause” has taken on a life of its own.

    Fundamentally, the argument seems to rest on a logical fallacy, post hoc ergo propter hoc – after this, therefore because of this. We see a rise in temperature and a rise in (principally) carbon dioxide, and therefore conclude one must have caused the other. It does not necessarily follow at all. There can be other causes entirely behind both phenomena, and as you see above, almost certainly there are. Beyond that, I have encountered numerous assertions of fact that cannot add up given the physical properties of water vapor and carbon dioxide that go unchallenged. One-sided arguments proliferate and people arguing the other side are frequently denounced as being employed by business interests rather than rebutted on the merits.

    In sum, I have not come lightly to the conclusion that the AGW argument as it applies to carbon dioxide is largely untrue and certainly does not account for more than a very small, nearly negligible part of the phenomena we are seeing. The implications of widespread assertions of and belief in such an untruth are staggering, and potentially enormously destructive. It is unwise indeed to let oneself be stampeded in this matter, and stampede is clearly what many have been and are trying to induce.

    I can understand politicians behaving this way; a carbon tax or carbon trading regime would allow enormous revenues to fall into their hands. I can understand “Progressive” ideologues; it logically leads to enormous expansion of government power over industry, the economy, and the daily life of individuals, which they regard as a good thing. I understand the environmentalists; they want to shrink the size and impact on the environment of modern civilization. But responsible citizens need to put aside such considerations when drawing conclusions.

    Please feel free to copy this essay and post it wherever you think it may do some good. The more people who understand this the better.

    November 2, 2021 at 2:49 pm
    • Michaela Reply

      Westminster Fly,

      I remember that scandal at the climate research unit at East Anglia University – wasn’t that where there were emails actually debunking the whole global warming argument?

      November 3, 2021 at 2:42 pm
  • Margaret Mary Reply

    I am impressed with Dr Philip’s statement which, as editor suggests, should have been what the Pope was/is saying but it’s not. He’s part of the problem, not the solution. The only thing about his pontificate that isn’t forcing Catholics to leave the Church, is that he made it plain from the get-go that he wasn’t going to act like a pope. He didn’t even wear the papal stole on the balcony at his first appearance and that’s the only time it’s ever worn! So we weren’t being introduced to the new pope we were being introduced to Cardinal Bergoglio which is why most people these days are calling him Bergoglio.

    That minister has three churches, and no wonder. People flock to where they hear Christ preached. They’re not getting it in Catholic parishes, unfortunately. We have to stick with it and suffer until, by the grace of God, we get a new, true pope who will restore discipline to the Church.

    November 2, 2021 at 3:18 pm
    • Lily Reply

      Margaret Mary,

      I agree about the minister’s statement, which is first class. I think it’s very sad to say that there isn’t a single Catholic priest in Glasgow who would issue such a public statement – I wonder if any of them would say the same, even, or are they all fooled by the climate propaganda?

      November 2, 2021 at 3:23 pm
  • westminsterfly Reply

    Isn’t this true in so many areas of life today? The Catholic clergy preach everything but what they’re meant to, and it’s either left to laypeople to quash the errors and support truth, or you often find that non-Catholic ministers have a better grasp of the truth than our priests have. Tragic.

    November 2, 2021 at 3:44 pm
    • Nicky Reply

      Westminster Fly,

      You took the words out of my mouth. It should utterly shame any priest reading this blog that it takes a Protestant minister to say what the Pope and they should be saying. This is All Souls but I’m thinking that, frankly, these bad priests (and Pope) will be lucky to make it into Purgatory, even if they had to stay there until the end of the world, the damage and scandal they are causing.

      November 2, 2021 at 4:07 pm
      • westminsterfly

        Nicky,
        Exactly. Take another example – when do you ever hear Catholic clergy speak out against ‘same-sex marriage’ or defend traditional marriage? They either support ‘same-sex marriage’ or keep quiet and leave it to secular organisations like the (very good) Coalition for Marriage http://www.c4m.org.uk to defend traditional marriage. I am also aware that Protestant organisations, like Christian Concern do a lot to defend people who have been accused of ‘homophobia’ (e.g. Christian bed and breakfast owners who won’t let out double beds to same-sex couples or bakers who won’t bake cakes for ‘gay weddings’ etc) when the Catholic clergy do precious little, if anything. I suppose the devil is going to go for the Catholic clergy more than anyone else, as they are a bigger prize, and as Sister Lucia of Fatima once said back in 1957: “Thus, the devil does everything to overcome souls consecrated to God, because in this way, the devil will succeed in leaving the souls of the faithful abandoned by their leaders, thereby the more easily will he seize them.”

        November 3, 2021 at 12:33 pm
      • editor

        WF and Nicky,

        Agree. WF, I share your admiration for Christian Concern (and the Christian Institute) and once had the pleasure of meeting Andrea Williams (Christian Concern) when I lived south of the border. She’s always very good in interviews – on the few occasions when she is given air time – and every time I see these wonderful people I think of that dissenting priest back in the middle ages and think Look at the damage you’ve done, “Father” Luther!

        November 3, 2021 at 12:49 pm
  • RCAVictor Reply

    This Pope is preaching Christ denied, not Christ crucified.
    Christ ignored, not Christ followed.
    Christ spat upon, not Christ loved.
    Christ disobeyed, not Christ obeyed.

    “Every one that is of the truth, heareth my voice.”

    Clearly, that group of hearers does not include either our present Vicar, or the corrupt degenerates with whom he has surrounded himself. Their Scriptural reference point might be something like this:

    “Against every one that speaketh the truth, I will stop up my ears.”

    November 2, 2021 at 4:25 pm
    • editor Reply

      RCA Victor,

      Sad, but true. Well said – or should that be well poeticised!

      November 2, 2021 at 10:06 pm
  • Faith of Our Fathers Reply

    First off it is not Embarrassing for Our Catholic Bishops ( or so called Catholic Bishops) to not want to Preach Christs Gospel, after all the Secret Word Here is Catholic and How many of them who are supposed to serve the Church ,could we really say have the Catholic Faith.
    As for Bergoglio. There is NO chance of Him now becoming a Catholic and not many of us on Here now even want to know what the Man says . St Paul sums Bergoglio up when He calls Bergoglio an Anathema to The One True Faith.

    The Banner above displayed on a Protestant Church sadly shows who we now Have in Charge of The Catholic Church ,but thank God will never be in charge of The Catholic Faith.
    I know that I am slipping again off Topic and I have asked this Question before concerning Our Useless Bishops following Bergoglios Order to Ban The Latin Mass . The True Mass of Ages .
    Question is this . Is it not a Grave Sin against The Holy Spirit to Ban Worship to Almighty God ?
    Just as a Little Side Show from Almighty God . Would it not just Be Possible that an Icelandic Volcano should Erupt ,and all the Great and The Good be grounded in Glasgow.
    After all Stranger things have Happened.

    November 2, 2021 at 6:02 pm
    • editor Reply

      FOOF,

      Stranger things HAVE happened… Sit tight – and pray!

      November 2, 2021 at 10:07 pm
  • Athanasius Reply

    What Dr. Philip has said, in a nutshell, is that the real climate change presently afflicting the world is the carefully planned and executed transition away from Christianity and the Kingship of Christ to a Communist/Masonic utopia inspired by Lucifer.

    It began in earnest with the Scond Vatican Council, during which carefully placed infiltrators in the high clergy, together with others blinded by intellectual pride, set about silencing the voice of the Church, which is the voice of God. The so-called “reform” was in fact the extension of the French and Russian Revolutions of 1789 and 1917 respectively. At all costs the Church had to be silenced and the Catholic religion had to be de-supernaturalised and humanised in order to leave the field clear for the servants of evil to eradicate all true Christianity from the face of the earth, which is what this is really all about.

    Now they have a Pope with the Communist/Masonic mindset, a man apparently void of any supernatural spirit, lending credence to the new Gospel of earth and man worship. Pope Francis, whether knowingly or unknowingly, declares to the world, as did the Pharisees to Pilate, “We will not have this man (Christ) for our king”. He does everything to build the demonic myth of a paradise on earth, of the glorification of man in “our common home”, and nothing to aid souls to reach the true paradise and home of eternal heaven.

    I said way back in 1989 that Gorbachev’s “Glasnost” and “Perestroika” (openness & restructuring) were not about an end to atheistic Communism in Russia and its satellites, but about adapting Communism to capitalist society and spreading its atheistic principles throughout the world. That’s what Our Lady warned about in her Fatima Message and Secret, most especially the blindness that would befall higher Churchmen if they failed to grant her request for a consecration of Russia to her Immaculate Heart by 1960, precisely when Vatican II was being planned. It is no coincidence that the first formal gathering of that Council commenced on October 13, 1962, during which all of the Traditionally prepared schemas for Council deliberation were binned and new, world-friendly ones were decided upon.

    In summation, COVID-19 and COP-26 are the killer moves in a deadly supernatural game that’s been unfolding for decades. Our Lord has been dethroned and Satan is being enthroned in His place. Everywhere we look now, there is lost faith, apostasy and moral corruption as the world increasing returns, like a dog to its own vomit, to pre-Christian paganism and a world run by brutal elitists and the customs of brute beasts. We were well warned by Our Lady that it was coming and that, as she declared more than 400 years ago at Quito, when the universal corruption of morals and innocence arrives, those who should speak out (the Pope, bishops and priests) will remain silent. Well, they’ve gone a bit further than this in that Pope Francis is known to give a silent nod and wink to the corrupters of the world while attacking all who speak the Christian truth against a godless world.

    Having watched news coverage of the COP-26 gathering, it’s plain to see just how tired and perverse this world has become. Almighty God, the Creator and sustainer of all things, is despised and rejected, the supernatural is denied and the Kingship of Christ is actively and vehemently expunged from all minds at the earliest age. Foolish, foolish people! If they only knew what awaits them in eternity when this short life is over!

    November 2, 2021 at 7:25 pm
    • editor Reply

      Athanasius

      There’s nothing left to say to that, except… Amen!

      November 2, 2021 at 10:10 pm
    • Faith of Our Fathers Reply

      Athanasius great Post and great to see that your back at work. I don’t know what age you are but it must have been terrible to be Idle from your Workplace for so long . Of course had you been one of The Globalists you could have spent your time Lazing about on whatever Island Jeffrey Epstein is now Retired to . ( that Guys not dead ) . I most especially liked what you said of Bergoglio. As stated by Our Blessed Lady. The Clergy will stay Silent. If only Bergoglio would stay Silent The World for us Catholics would be a much better place .

      I have at least been fortunate ( so Far ) as I have really only read what the Great and The Good are doing on Sites such as This . I refuse now to watch the B.S. emanating from all of the
      M.S.M. outlets now .I did use to read The Mail Online but we spoke a few Weeks back about the Comments where if you More or Less disagreed with the Marxist Globalists Agenda and commented on it ,then those Comments certainly never got passed the censor.
      So Much For Free Speech.

      November 3, 2021 at 3:36 pm
  • Athanasius Reply

    I forgot to say that my reason for not being on the blog much these days is that I’m back to work after 20 months of furlough and really busy. There are other things going on in the background which are also taking up my time.

    November 2, 2021 at 7:35 pm
    • editor Reply

      Athanasius,

      Back to work? You think having a day job is any excuse not to blog? Listen, I’d like to see a copy of your Confirmation Certificate asap…. If there are any exemptions going, I want one 😀

      Kidding, of course, and thanks for all you do here as and when – much appreciated.

      However, if the “other things going on in the background” which take up your time, are (as I suspect) even more letters to the SSPX clergy, because life in the Glasgow church is about as far from perfect as I am from being the slim, glamorous, witty and highly intelligent gal of my (over-ripe) imagination, then I say give it a rest. Listen, you’ve already written more letters than St Paul and – to be brutally frank – even St Catherine of Siena would have thrown in the towel by now. We can only do what we can do and there comes a point when we have to reflect on Our Lord’s exhortation to shake the dust.

      Hilariously (in a funny kinda way) I was mesmerized watching a young woman just prior to Mass this evening – she had obviously come in early to pray, wearing just a skirt and cardigan, or maybe a dress and cardigan, whatever. Anyway, she was lost in prayer and then suddenly minutes before Mass began she pulled out one jumper/cardigan after another, layer after layer, adding them to her original outfit, until (from her bag which must have been extremely deep) she pulled out a heavy jacket and a thick scarf. Honestly, I struggled not to laugh. I’m guessing she felt the cold – a lot of folks complain about it, but me and moi, with our warm heart, we don’t worry about trifles like feeling the cold. In any case, if I ever DO feel terribly cold I’ll follow the advice of another young woman who told me outside church that she was wearing a really warm thing – like a jacket – under her outdoor coat, something that was battery operated to keep the wearer warm. Let’s just hope and pray we’re not ordered to buy one each after COP26, and dispense with our central heating!

      Put that pen down! Even St Paul and St Catherine would have given up by now!

      November 2, 2021 at 10:24 pm
      • Athanasius

        Editor

        I knew a long time ago that my letters to certain SSPX priest superiors were a waste of time, humanly speaking, but I continue to write so that they know that I know what they really are behind those clericalist collars.

        “By their fruits ye shall know them”, said Our Lord, an admonition which applies in a very particular way to the fruits of the ordained. Dull, dilapidated and freezing cold churches are bad fruits indicative of an indifferent shepherd. Lengthy intellectual sermons instead of short devotional ones are a bad fruit of pride and self love. St. Francis de Sales said in this regard “The tree that puts forth too much wood, bears no (good) fruit”!

        Splitting a congregation into two separate Masses for no other reason than to indulge a personal fixation with the smells and bells of sung Masses, especially when these run contrary to the very strict rules of the Supreme Pontiffs concerning the formation of choirs, represents the bad fruits of disobedience and causing contentious divisions, not to mention some performances that degrade the integrity of the Holy Sacrifice.

        Lying with ease to the faithful in matters of importance (a personal experience) speaks for itself. Refusing to respond to written concerns indicates contempt and absence of charity. Celebrating low masses in a whisper that the faithful can’t hear and therefore can’t follow, contending against the known truth that this is what the Church intended and why it’s called low mass (insanity!) is wilful, and quite possibly vindictive, attachment to error. At the very least it indicates an absence of humility, another pointer to pride.

        Attempting to abolish the Leonine prayers after mass under specious pretext while slowly eradicating devotional practices, such as sermons on Our Lady and the saints, the annual blessing of St. Blaise and Stations of the Cross, indicates a worrying contempt for simple piety.

        Declaring in verbal and written form a set minimum cash amount that should be paid to the priest as stipend for Mass offerings and funerals is an unheard-of outrage that borders on the forbidden sale of indulgences. It indicates a man more concerned with mammon than grace, more worldly than spiritual.

        Maintaining an evening mass time which is inconvenient for workers and coincides with rush hour traffic, refusing, for no good reason, to move to a later time that would see more people at Mass, is quite inexplicable and yet another bad fruit that gives rise to resentment.

        I could go on but I think you’ll have the gist of what I see and why I am determined never to let up on priests who undermine the apostolate of Archbishop Lefebvre by their indifference and self indulgence. I left my Modernist parish 35 years ago because of the serious spiritual damage indifferent clericalist authorities were doing to the Church. At that time the SSPX, which still has a majority of good and dedicated priests, was like a different world, a truly Catholic world. Now I see indifference, neglect and error creeping into the hierarchy, a result, I greatly suspect, of infiltration.

        If we consider things like the SSPX backing for the COVID vaccines, the deafening silence on this papacy of Francis, arguably the most destructive Pope in Church history, the extremely controversial book of Fr. Paul Robinson, called “The Realist Guide to Science and Religion”, a work which seeks to reconcile Genesis with the atheist doctrine of evolution, the infamous Angelus Conference at which a Novus Ordo priest, dubbed “the porn priest”, a so-called “expert” on JP II’s “Theology of the Body”, who runs therapy sessions for those addicted to pornography and who once wrote that those tempted with impure thoughts should invite Our Lord to enter their minds and view these thoughts with them, shared a podium with Bishop Fellay, they all point towards some degree of clerical infiltration into the higher offices of the SSPX.

        The only other possible explanation is that God is removing His grace and wisdom from those who have come to believe in their pride that clericalist disdain for subordinates is in the spirit of Our Lord, rather than that of the Pharisees.

        Either way, it is simply not in me to let these scandals pass without loud and constant objection, even though I know I am utterly detested by the guilty, whose consciences I irk. These should know that I watch their every move and listen to their every word, judging all against the Traditional faith handed down. I’ve lived long enough now to be able to discern a true servant of God from a clerical destroyer.

        November 3, 2021 at 1:09 am
      • westminsterfly

        Athanasius,
        I agree with Editor’s comment about ‘shaking the dust’. Even Our Lord did it and I think He was giving us an example to follow. Once you’ve done all you reasonably can do to alert someone to their errors – and alert other people if they don’t repent of them – then it really is time to ‘shake the dust’ otherwise it can have an impact on your health and all sorts of things, and can even do harm. On a secular level, I had a massive problem with a local college in my neighbourhood years ago, and no-one – but no-one – wrote more letters of complaint to the college than me, contacted the police more than me (I think they almost suspected me as some kind of nutty nuisance caller), got photographic evidence of crime being committed, organised public meetings and just about tried to tackle the whole thing more or less single handedly, due to general apathy and fear among the neighbours. One murder had already happened over a decade ago yards from where live. Last month another one happened, an 18 year old boy, right outside my home. Of course, all the police and neighbours have flown into temporary overdrive now, and meetings have been arranged to pacify and ‘reassure’ everyone, and it was noted that I was conspicuous by my absence at these meetings. I explained that I’ve just had enough of banging my head against a brick wall with the police, the college and everyone else, and that they can just get on with it – and if they follow the same ruinous policies – more murders will follow. Everyone can see the elephant in the room in this particular case, but just won’t address it for fear of political correctness (I won’t go into the issue). Sometimes, when people refuse to see the truth, you have to cut your losses and get out and find find something else useful to do’

        November 3, 2021 at 9:39 am
      • Laura

        Athanasius,

        Lengthy intellectual sermons instead of short devotional ones are a bad fruit of pride and self love.”

        Apart from what you point out there, lengthy intellectual sermons that don’t help us to live as Christians in our everyday living, are useless. Nobody listens to intellectual stuff, I know I don’t. I put them on the same level as jokes. If I want jokes I’ll watch a comedy or go to the theatre!

        Priests used to point to practical things, they would speak about (if they were here today) not joining in with the climate religion, for that is what it is. They would be reminding us that Jesus taught us not to worry about tomorrow or what we are to wear, eat etc. God provides. All the points made in Rev Philips’ statement is what they would be preaching right now. They’d also be warning us to be avoiding bad reading and films, not just say “ditch the TV”! Most people won’t do that. I could go on and on, but that jumped out at me from your comment, and although the priests I quote here were not SSPX (this was early days after the Council when there was still some sanity in the Church) it has to apply to them, also – aren’t they called the “lifeboat” during this crisis?

        What you report is very disappointing but I did hear someone say a while back that in time there would be the same scandals etc in the SSPX as in the wider Church. It’s very sad, though.

        November 3, 2021 at 11:05 am
      • Josephine

        Athanasius,

        I sympathise – and I think the SSPX is going off the rails quite a bit. I wonder if you agree with them in this video where the priest seems to be looking down on the other traditional groups offering the TLM – is this wise?

        November 3, 2021 at 12:29 pm
      • Athanasius

        Westminsterfly

        I perfectly understand what you’re saying about shaking the dust – if only for my own personal health and state of soul. If it were a secular matter, such as the tragic one you recount from your own experience, then I would most assuredly have moved on by now. But this is different because it affects the supernatural faith of so many souls besides myself.

        The destruction visited upon the Church after Vatican II was largely accomplished because the clergy played on the natural trust and respect of the faithful in their regard in order to command utter obedience, the old “pray, pay and obey” tactic, which effectively left the field clear for their treachery. That respectful deference of the non-ordained resulted in silent compliance with anything and everything Father said and done, the end of which, as we all now see, is mass apostasy and rampant heresy.

        We Traditional Catholics cannot allow the same to happen to the SSPX, no matter how much it costs us personally. No one detests challenging the errors of priests more than I, it’s something subordinates should never have to do and it’s extremely damaging to both peace of soul and mind. However, that kind of personal damage is as nothing in comparison with the spiritual devastation a lax, heterodox or heretical priest can visit upon a parish if he’s allowed to continue unchecked.

        I can’t remember the saint who said the following, which I now paraphrase, but the wisdom of his words is indisputable and should be a reminder to all Catholics of the power a priest has over the souls under his care, for good or for ill: “The saintly parish priest will have a parish full of saints. The indifferent parish priest will have a parish full of lukewarm souls. The bad parish priest will have a parish full of demons”. As I say, I paraphrase the original statement, but you’ll get the general drift and the reason why no Catholic should ever back off from correcting and/or upbraiding a priest, especially when said priest(s) demonstrate bad will and intent by ignoring all private correspondence while continuing in their destructive habits. There’s too much at stake to worry about personal impact when other souls are at risk of having their faith and zeal gradually eroded away by a smiling assassin in a cassock and dog collar.

        My only regret is that, apart from one other brave soul who comes to mind, most people murmur under their breath about bad or negligent priests yet never come forward, as duty demands, to speak plainly to those priests. The downside of that is that the two or three who do speak out are easily labelled “troublemakers” and effectively sidelined with the most incredible contempt whlle the whisperers remain in good favour. It’s a problem as old as fallen human nature itself, one that Our Lord personally experienced when the crowd who welcomed Him into Jerusalem as “The Son of David” on Palm Sunday, became the mob baying for His crucifixion one week later under the satisfied gaze of the Pharisees, their priests!

        As long as there’s breath in my body, I will not fail in my duty. As a Traditional Catholic I want priests with holy zeal and piety to take care of my soul, priests who believe in beautifying the House of God and sanctifying the faithful in accordance with what we knew and practiced before that ill fated Council.

        Priests who are satisfied with dirty and dilapidated old churches, who divide the faithful, teach error, kill devotion, indulge themselves in damaging pet projects and liturgical oddities by abuse of authority, gradually destroying a once-lively apostolate, are of no use to me or the Church. In cases like this the stakes are far too high to even contemplate ceasing and desisting.

        November 3, 2021 at 2:04 pm
      • Athanasius

        Laura

        You’re absolutely right about the sermons we used to have preached to us – about everyday practical things and how we, as Catholics, should conduct ourselves. There were also those wonderful sermons on devotion to Our Lady and the saints, inspiring and uplifting sermons that set you up for the week ahead. Now all we get are sermons on how high above sea level Nazareth is, how the faithful shouldn’t waggle their tongues around like lizards when receiving Holy Communion, and how those who queue for Confession just before Mass on a Sunday morning show themselves to be of questionable preparation and disposition to receive the Sacrament properly. Either that or we get a 25-minute incomprehensible monologue in broken English, which may actually be quite devotional if we were fortunate enough to have the services of an interpreter to interpret them. Happy days (not)!

        November 3, 2021 at 2:18 pm
      • Michaela

        Athanasius,

        Any priest who said that in my hearing about “waggling tongues” wouldn’t see me again. That’s a very worldly and self-centred priest who would say that, whoever he is. In fact, I’d call that real evil. That could put someone completely off receiving Holy Communion. What a clot.

        You are right about the havoc wreaked after Vatican II being down to a dumb laity, who had put priests and bishops on pedestals, not something that we should be doing. There are still some with that attitude and IMHO the traditional groups like the FSSP, ICK and FSSPX are particularly prone to do this.

        You are also right about not keeping silent, although I would worry about your health if you continue too much – your letters on here to politicians have been first class, so why not write one stormer of a letter to your priests/superiors and just keep sending that one, with possibly a minor adjustment or two if you need to add something? That would be showing them that you’re not accepting their wrongdoing without having to spend ages writing fresh letters.

        I do miss the sermons that priests used to give, which were off the cuff and full of conviction. Now they all take the time to pull out their notebooks or scraps of paper and it really kills the message before they even speak. This is not something he believes, it’s something he’s reading, and I’d prefer just to be handed a sheet of paper with “Today’s Sermon” on it, LOL! As you say, “happy days (not)”!

        November 3, 2021 at 2:53 pm
      • Faith of Our Fathers

        My God Athanasius I actually didn’t think it was that Bad, it really makes me feel grateful that we here have a Good Priest and when He says the Weekly TLMASS it’s easy to follow Him .
        As for those Priests declaring what they should be paid Anything For it is surely Scandalous, and I personally would run a mile From them . Write Them a Letter NEVER they don’t even deserve the Price of a Stamp.
        Also we are Catholics who know that The Piper Has to be Paid but if those Listening to the Piper couldn’t afford it am sure most of them would still play.

        Also am quite sure as it is to my TLMass that not very many coins ( if any ) from the Congregation go into the Collection it’s all Notes ,which means that the least Mass Donation is of course £5 .
        Not once has Our Priest asked us for Money but He has on Many, Very Many occasions thanked us for our Contributions.
        Of course the Contributions are now down because The Bishop Cancelled the Sunday TLMass which was well attended mostly by Catholics out with Our Own Parish. I hope when the good Bishop comes for HIS monthly cut , so to speak,our Good Priest gives him in accordance with His Instructions.
        Just as a P.S . It makes you wonder if some of these Priests have heard of The Corporal Works of Mercy.

        November 3, 2021 at 4:02 pm
      • editor

        FOOF,

        Just to correct one thing regarding Mass stipends – although the SSPX bulletin notice, which the priest then repeated from the pulpit, did specify a suggested minimum Mass stipend, shocking as that is, he did add the (expected) get-out clause that money should not prevent anyone from asking for a Mass. As if. Although, thanks to my lottery win some years ago, I always gave more than the mentioned minimum, I’ve never asked for a Mass to be offered since and won’t do so again. I ask priest-friends instead. Technically, then, we can’t say they set a minimum… it was a suggested with, as I say, the addition of the expected get-out-of-jail-free card. That, I dare say, is what prevented the matter falling into the category of the sin of simony.

        November 3, 2021 at 5:01 pm
      • editor

        Michaela,

        Where I attend Mass, the clergy routinely read their sermon from sheets of paper. It utterly enrages me, almost more than anything else. There is absolutely NO conviction, entirely the opposite from the sermons I heard in my youth. I remember during all the publicity storm surrounding Humanae Vitae, one of our priests thundered “Sin if you want to, but don’t try to justify it!” He explained the natural law, and spoke about the way we are supposed to sanctify ourselves by keeping it, going against the wisdom of the world, as well as everything else, praying etc. Now, we do hear “you must sanctify yourselves…” but the practical application of the Gospel and the teachings of the Church to which the readings of the day refer, is usually sadly absent. Strangely, I think it’s probably for the same reason that the modernists priests avoid tying together the Faith and Scripture readings of the day – to paraphrase an old saying, they’re possibly thinking “if we treat them mean, they won’t be keen”… Whereas, the very opposite is true. Not being mean, of course, but preaching the Faith entire and true, morals entire and true, loud and clear. That attracts souls; Our Lord Himself proved that…

        November 3, 2021 at 5:12 pm
      • Bernie

        Editor,

        I am throwing this into the mix because I don’t like to see injustice – it must be difficult for priests if people are asking for Masses to be offered (look at his month, Holy Souls, must be asked for a lot) if the people don’t give much of a stipend. Obviously, it is unsavoury if a priest has to set a minimum amount, even if it’s just a suggested amount, but what else can they do? People can be very thoughtless.

        November 3, 2021 at 6:25 pm
      • editor

        Bernie,

        I don’t like injustice either, and I fully appreciate that priests need to be supported. It’s certainly a delicate matter if people are not offering reasonable stipends – that is, reasonable within their means, which is different from “generous” which perhaps few can afford – when they ask for Masses to be offered.

        A couple of things: (1) it seems to me that priests must assume that what the people are giving is all that they can reasonably afford. (2) they might make a point of thanking the congregation for their offerings, including Mass stipends, and do that while, at the same time, encouraging us all to reflect on the power of the Mass and the desirability, according to many great saints, of having Masses offered for both the living and the dead. (3) last but certainly not least, they might apply to themselves the Gospel exhortation to trust in Divine Providence. I say this – in this context – because…

        When we first launched our newsletter, with a very small readership, we were really paying for it out of our own pockets, hoping that donations would start to roll in and they did; however, our then Treasurer decided to place a Notice into one edition, asking for donations. When that edition went out, he had a telephone call from a reader, at that time a leading light in the Catholic community, suggesting he not do that again – said reader would underwrite the newsletter. Soon after, he (our Treasurer RIP) had to stand down for health reasons and our next Treasurer – not knowing about the promised underwriter – stated a policy of never asking for donations but, instead, thanking those who donate. To this day, that is what we do. When, however, she first made the suggestion, I asked for her thinking, wondering what would happen if we came to a point where we didn’t have sufficient money coming in, to which she gave the classic Catholic response: then we will know that God doesn’t want us doing this any more. She went on to say that we had to give Him the opportunity to show his approval or disapproval of our work and this was a very concrete way so to do.

        While it might sound high and mighty, it’s really very basic, and while, of course, not exactly analogous to Mass stipends, it makes, does it not, theological sense. Indeed, I read, more or less the same thinking in an article written by a priest who was encouraging other priests to stop offering the novus ordo and stick with the TLM. In answer to the problem of a bishop disciplining such priests, he encouraged trust in Divine Providence, that the lay faithful would see to it that they always had a roof over their heads and food on the table. Someone would be sure to provide the table!

        Not sure if this response will ease your fears of injustice – I hope so.

        November 3, 2021 at 10:18 pm
      • Athanasius

        Michaela

        Thank you for your kind comments and for the good suggestion re a template letter that can be adapted to circumstances, which is a good idea worthy of some thought. Everything else you wrote was a reminder of the good Catholic sense the pre-Vatican II priests had. The difference between then and now with the SSPX is that the priests back in the day were pastorally astute as well as spiritually attuned. Most of them rose from young curates under the guidance of an old parish priest and other senior priests of the parish to eventually become well-experienced in dealing with the faithful. They also had a harder life in the days before cars when priests had to walk the city streets to visit their flock, going up and down flights of stairs in tenement buildings all day long. The modern priest with his mod cons and car probably wouldn’t have lasted five minutes in tough cities like Glasgow back in the days of hardship and poverty. Problem today is they have it too easy and are consequently soft in comparison with clergy of the past.

        November 3, 2021 at 11:27 pm
  • Laura Reply

    Dr William Philip’s statement is exactly what we need right now. It’s plain speaking at its best. Everything I’ve read from him and heard on videos posted here, makes me ask “why on earth is this great man not a Catholic?” Then I think of Francis and our decadent clergy and there is the answer. He’d be persecuted if he was as good a Catholic priest as he is a Protestant Minister. That’s the reality, at least now, before the Consecration of Russia.

    For his own soul’s sake, though I pray for that final step into the fullness of the Christian faith – he’s full of zeal and obviously sincerely good, so I think that will come in time. Our Lady will win him – this is a favourite conversion story of mine which makes me feel hopeful for the Rev Philip. https://www.olrl.org/stories/prothm.shtml

    I hope every priest and bishop in Scotland reads Rev Philip’s statement. It should shake them up, if nothing else.

    November 3, 2021 at 10:57 am
    • Josephine Reply

      Laura,

      I totally agree with you about the Rev Philip. He is definitely filling a vacuum left by the Catholic clergy, who should be ashamed of themselves.

      His statement is crystal clear and I sincerely hope, BTW, that no Catholics were involved in stealing his excellent banner. That would be disgraceful but I wouldn’t be surprised, not at all. They’re all lost to the climate change propaganda which really is a new religion. You have to believe it all or you’re going to be living in earthly hell without cars, planes and the rest.

      LOL – Boris Johnson took an internal flight to London after COP 26 instead of going on the train! I keep thinking of Neil Oliver’s “it’s not about what they say it’s about” – too true!

      November 3, 2021 at 12:33 pm
      • editor

        Josephine,

        That thought – that (pseudo) Catholics may have participated (or carried out!) the theft of the banner, struck me a while back and I meant to mention it. It would be horrendous, if true, but, as you say, tragically unsurprising.

        November 3, 2021 at 12:52 pm
      • Michaela

        Josephine

        There is definitely a vacuum to be filled in the public preaching area and Rev Philips is filling it impressively. I’m lost for words about the Pope and clergy – with very few exceptions, they are a disgrace, and that’s putting it mildly.

        The minister’s statement is excellent, absolutely excellent.

        November 3, 2021 at 2:45 pm
      • editor

        Michaela,

        I happened to speak with one Scots priest today (I’ll not narrow it down further) who said that there are priests who would love to make such public statements but would soon be looking for a roof over their heads if they did (I paraphrase) because the bishops have well and truly lost it. The Faith, he means. So, we might take some comfort from that and offer twin prayers for the conversion of those bishops and an injection of courage (in the spirit of the martyrs) for good priests.

        November 4, 2021 at 7:22 pm
  • Athanasius Reply

    Josephine,

    I didn’t manage to listen to the entire podcast you posted, but I do know the argument well and I have to say that I’m in full agreement with the SSPX in this matter. I don’t think he came across as in any way looking down on the priests and faithful attached to the so-called Ecclesia Dei communities, he merely reiteratated the clear and inescapable fact that they exist by compromise.

    You’ll know that I have long stated the same myself, which is that these communities, regardless of intent, had to accept (at least publicly) the legitimacy of a conciliar spirit which is destroying the faith in so many areas of the Church in order to be granted approval to have their own preference for Tradition. In other words, they have accepted a principle which is unacceptable, which is the validity of a peaceful coexistence in the Church between truth and error.

    Pope Francis, while not acting with good intent, has finally exposed this fundamental paradox for what it really is by stating unequivocally that there can be no such thing as a Church in which two entirely opposed mindsets exist, one liberal and progressive, the other Traditional and orthodox. That’s why he has now set about the task of eradicating all Latin Mass organisations little by little from the Church. I think many good bishops, priests and faithful attached to the Ecclesia Dei communities are going to realise the perilous situation they placed themselves in at their formation when bishops loyal to Francis begin removing their permissions and freedoms, driving them instead into the arms of full-blown Modernism or out of structures of diocesan and parochial life. On hindsight, the wisdom of Archbishop Lefebvre in maintaining independence from these liberal authorities in the Church was the right choice and the most pleasing to Our Lord. Exisiting on compromise with error and the good will of liberals was doomed from the beginning.

    Having said this, the SSPX itself is now showing signs of dangerous compromise suggestive of a worrying shift in direction away from the Archbishop’s very determined and public stance in Tradition. I mean of course SSPX acceptance, albeit with conditions, of Modernist Rome’s undermining of the eternal moral law by approval of stem cell created/tested vaccines. That was a shock to my system that I still can’t believe; that the SSPX would compromise the moral and eternal law in this way, which is why I suggested in another comment that I believe the SSPX hierarchy is infiltrated. There’s also the question of general silence on the part of the SSPX in relation to this destructive Pontificate of Francis. You had better believe that Archbishop Lefebvre would have been shouting from the rooftops about this Pope, yet hardly a word from the SSPX.

    We live in very confusing and uncertain times, when even those institutions we thought were protected from error are suddenly compromising with error. How can any of them come to believe that Our Lord will bless such hypocrisy, even if it is disguised as expediency and diplomacy? Truth is truth and error is error, there can be no happy outcome for those who think the Church can live with a little bit of both!

    November 3, 2021 at 4:09 pm
  • editor Reply

    Folks,

    I’m pleased that everyone is so full of admiration for Dr William Philip’s statement – may I suggest that you copy it to print off and show it to your priest, family and friends? It would be useful to also copy some choice comments from this thread to add to the statement.

    Just sayin’ 😀

    November 3, 2021 at 5:19 pm
  • Bernie Reply

    The vicar’s statement is truly superb. As others have said, he’s putting the Catholic clergy to shame, pope, bishops and priests alike who have all fallen for the climate change scam.

    November 3, 2021 at 6:27 pm
  • editor Reply

    Maybe the “Christians in name only” who removed the banner should read this report, return the banner and apologise profusely for their dreadful behaviour – not to say stupidity in falling for the climate change scam. https://dailysceptic.org/2021/11/03/dodgy-climate-models-should-be-discarded/

    November 4, 2021 at 8:24 am
    • editor Reply

      Josephine, interesting – and here’s Greta telling us that COP26 is failure.

      November 5, 2021 at 7:50 pm

Join the discussion


%d bloggers like this: