St Aloysius has organised a special study day on 20th April with the world (in)famous dissenter, Professor Thomas Groome from the Jesuit University, Boston College, U.S.A.
The study day is titled, “To Teach as Jesus Did: Handing on the Faith in the 21st Century”. This day is for priests, teachers and catechists and is being “supported” by the Archdiocese of Glasgow and the Scottish Catholic Education Service, which, we presume, means they’re paying for it using your money. Else, who’s paying for Professor Groome’s flights and accommodation? And the rest?
The cost is £75 so it’s not inexpensive to hand your Faith away – still, the clergy and teachers can afford it.
In the evening Professor Groome will talk in St. Aloysius’ Church at 7.30pm on “What Keeps Us Catholic?”. This lecture is free. At least they’re not charging the rest of us, to rob us of our beloved Catholic Faith. Something, I suppose…
The irony of the title of Professor Groome’s evening lecture will not be lost on those who understand his systematic and very public dissent from many Church teachings. A dissent which you can read about if you click here
As you’ll have noted, in the link above, Archbishop Pell banned Groome’s books from being used in Catholics schools over there in Aussie-land, and forbade their sale in his churches. No such concerns here, though, since Groome’s books, we’re reliably informed, have been on the shelves of our teacher training college in Glasgow for quite some time.
We urge you to write to Archbishop Conti to complain about this misuse of funds, not to mention his abuse of your trust. The buck stops with him. It’s his archdiocese. He has approved this scandal which no doubt includes the use of Church funds to pay for it. We need to probe that (and we will) but there seems little, if any doubt, that “supporting” these scandalous lectures on how to lose the Catholic Faith (or what’s left of it in Glasgow) means that the archdiocese is coughing up the cash.
There are still, incredibly, some parents who send their children to Catholic schools in the expectation that they will be taught the Faith or, minimally, not be given a distorted version of it. To pay for a man to come from the other end of the world to preach heresy and dissent, or to, in any way whatsoever, “support” his efforts, is to quite deliberately betray that trust. Let us be clear. The ridiculous claim that the archbishop probably doesn’t know about Groome’s dissent, just doesn’t stand up to examination – in that case, he’s in the wrong job: it’s his duty to know. Everybody else knows. Nobody else is that ignorant. Thank goodness for “everybody” and “nobody” – don’t know where we’d be without them. Whatever which way you look at it, Archbishop Conti is slap, bang, wollop in the middle of the circle where it says “blame”.
Without delay, please write to:
Archbishop Mario Conti, 40 Newlands Road, Glasgow, G43 2JD
And don’t forget to tell him that you will not put another penny in any collection plate in the archdiocese, until you have his personal assurance that this proposed lecture(s) will not take place. The sheer cheek of it. The brass neck!
-
I find this truly amazing. It never ceases to surprise me when dissenters are rewarded for their dissent. It’s like choosing a teacher who has been suspended for unprofessionalism to give an inservice on….professionalism! Then again, this scenario is almost becoming predictable, especially in the Archdiocese of Glasgow. Traditional priests, loyal to Sacred Tradition are at best ignored and at worse, bullied. It reminds me of the situation in which a priest who was shamed on the front page of The Sun was chosen to give a spiritual retreat. It is just beyond belief.
When I was at St. Andrew’s College, Thomas Groome’s books were “all the rage”. The Theology Department couldn’t praise him highly enough. We had one trouser suit wearing, bowl cut blow dry hair-do, nun who referred to him as “darling Tom”. Bonkers. Then again this was the woman who told 120 pupils in a lecture that Archbishop Romero was shot in a Cathedral and was only one of thousands of people killed. Utter tripe. Anyway, ‘darling Tom’ was the “in thing” at the time and apparently still is.
What an absolute kick in the teeth to Cardinal Pell. He bans ‘darling Tom’s’ books Down Under and Archbishop Conti rolls out the tartan carpet in Bonnie Scotland. I’m afraid this is yet another justification for homeschooling. Anyone looking for more reasons won’t have to wait too long, let me assure you. The bottom line is, I wouldn’t send my black lab to a Catholic school, nevermind my children.
-
This can’t be right. Is there not something in Canon Law, surely, to prevent ex-priests from giving talks or being employed by the Church?
I am also a bit bothered by the fact that student teachers have been getting Groome’s stuff thrown at them but they seem to take it lying down. Why don’t they ever complain? Don’t they say something in lectures?
To be honest, between the report into the standards of education of teachers in maths that was on TV news bulletins last week and now this, I really do wonder about the intelligence level of the very people supposed to be educating our children. Petrus, when you were a student teacher in the Catholic training college, did nobody say anything when they saw this dissenter’s books on the book list?
-
Rebel
I think your post is a bit strong. I’m someone who constantly had fights with anyone and everyone who undermined the Catholic Faith when I was at Saint Andrew’s College. In fact, I once turned up at a lecture given by a Jewish Rabbi and the Dominican priest who organised the lecture said when I walked into the lecture hall, “Oh no, here comes the Inquisition”. So I’m the first person who would have screamed from the rooftops if I had known Groome’s background.
Now, undoubtedly there were stupid people on my course, as well as Modernists who would have been delighted for someone like Groome to be lecturing them. You must, however, remember this. The majority of students were straight from school 17/18 year olds. Products of a failed Catholic education system, we really didn’t know any better. We didn’t have such a thing as a “Catholic sense”. It wasn’t trumpeted that Groome was a laicised priest and heretic. So, i think it’s a bit unfair to call into question our intelligence.
-
Well said, Petrus. I don’t think, though, that rebel was being personal to you – I think she made the same observation I’ve made myself, in general terms, when thinking how the older generation are still refusing to face the facts that the Faith has been taken from us: are they all thick? Uncharitable, but a girl can only be a saint on a part-time basis these days. Things to do, people to see…
Petrus has put his finger, rebel, on the heart of the problem and I think I said so on another thread recently. Nobody walks into a lecture saying “this man is an outright heretic – he’s wonderful”. They just say “he’s wonderful” and all the impression given is that he has unique insights into the Faith and will “challenge” your Faith which is, of course, a euphemism for “destroy”.
Like Petrus, I was one of those students who was regarded as a relic from the past. I was variously described as “pre=Trent” and “a typical good Catholic girl” (because I said I would prefer to collect some water and have it blessed, from the River Jordan, on a trip to Israel, after another student had said she wanted to collect some Jewish and Muslim artefacts). It was not an easy time. I remember telling one priest information we’d been given on the Eucharist, at which time I asked him, in all seriousness, if he really and truly believed in the Real Presence to which he replied (to his credit) “Get out of that college pronto!”
We must never lose sight of the fact that the culprits here are the Bishops, priests and alleged “educationalists” like Michael McGrath, because they DO know – exactly – what they are doing. And we must expose them and encourage the next generation of teachers and priests to fight them tooth and nail.
-
Petrus and editor,
I apologise for giving the impression I was saying Petrus was unintelligent. I most definitely did not mean that at all. I just had this image of a whole class of student teachers listening to somebody read from this book full of heresy and nobody questioning it. I am very glad, but not surprised, to learn that Petrus did question things.
Sorry for any offence I caused. I was probably too harsh to say what I said about intelligence but I do wonder if students don’t get a feeling that this or that can’t be right – especially when it is something like women’s ordination. Everyone knows from the TV that women can’t be ordained, so why would they not react to that if they hear it being put forward in their lessons? I mean, more than one student, like Petrus. Why don’t more challenge it?
I wonder if people will go along to hear Groome at St Aloysius and then challenge him when they hear what he says?
-
Rebel
No need to apologise. I know you didn’t mean to be personal. It’s a good point you make about why students don’t get the feeling that something is wrong. I think any Catholic sense they had has probably been eroded by the time they get to higher education. Banal Novus Ordo liturgy and poor Catholic education at primary and secondary school. Products of Alive-O are more likely to become Buddhists than sound Catholics. So, Rebel, you have touched on a very important point.
Editor
You weren’t around at the Council of Trent? hehe. I can imagine you at college. We would have made some team!
-
http://www.jesuit.org.uk/SJ/SJ1002.pdf
L e a d i n g Ame r i c a n t h e o l o g i a n ,
educat ional ist
and author ,
P r o f e s s o r
T h o m a s
Groome will be
giving a public
l e c t u r e i n
Scotland this
April. Professor
Groome will be speaking at St
Aloysius Church, Glasgow, having
addressed a Religious Education
Conference in the city earlier in the
day. The event is being organised by
St Aloysius’ College in Glasgow, in
conjunction with the Archdiocese of
Glasgow and the Scottish Catholic
Education Service.
Thomas Groome (pictured above) is
Professor of Theology and Religious
Education at Boston College in the
USA. His primary area of interest and
research is the history, theory and
practice of Religious Education.
He is the author of Christian
Religious Education, widely
regarded as the most important and
influential contemporary work on
the subject, Educating for Life, A
Spiritual Vision for Every Teacher
and Parent and What Makes Us
Catholic: Eight Gifts for Life. His
talk on 20 April will be a further
development of the theme of his
most recent book, as he asks: What
keeps us Catholic?The British Province’s Assistant for
Education, Michael Edwards, says
Professor Groome is “refreshingly
accessible in both what he writes and
what he says. He is a key
international figure in articulating the
importance of Catholic education in
faith formation. He is practical and
bases what he says on lived
experience together with tradition; he
encourages us to reflect on our
common exper ience; and he
challenges us to action.”(sorry for formatting – that’s how the Jesuits do it…)
-
http://www.catholicmediacoalition.org/groome.htm –
This lengthy essay on Prof Groom has chunky quotes which
might be useful in letters of protest. -
It seems that Groome spoke in January to an Annual Catechist Conference in the Plymouth Diocese as well:- http://www.plymouth-diocese.org.uk/index.php?q=node/474 He’s probably done, or is doing, the rounds of most of the dioceses.
-
Now, now, you are too had on Archbishop Conti. The church is now run by the laity and he has appointed people of great learning to do the work for him. He has a nice cosy life and nothing should be explected of him. It is the same in the parishes. The laity can get on with the work while they meet one another at meetings or on the golf course. None of this visiting the sick or bringing Holy Communion to th dying, their day must not be interrupted. I remeber Bishop Weakland being invited to Britain by the English Council of priests. He like Groom was a hero. Forget all this sex abuse scandals he was wrapped up in, he was forward looking. Groom will now teach Faith Formation, I have been hearing these words for forty years but there has been no sign of anything forming. It is just the usual stupid people calling themselves `thinking catholics`. They never notice the mess they have made of young people, the closing down of churches, the loss of Mass attenders. Well, I must not be negative. There are plenty meeting at least that we can attend. though nothing on these issues. Well it isn
-
Do these people have enough faith left to understand that they will have to give an account of their stewardship.
-
In America, the USCCB is in the process of being exposed as little more than an arm of the Democratic Party (accurately described as the Party of Death by Archbishop Burke), with its pro-abortion and pro-homosexual agenda. Thus its bureaucratic ranks are filled with mouthpieces for the hidden homosexuality of the bishops, trying to change the Church through the back door.
Does anyone know why this Thomas Groome was laicized? Anything to do with Church teaching on the above-mentioned issues? I’m wondering if Groome’s positions on certain issues are closely linked to +Conti’s heretical positions on these same issues, which he was forced to renounce when he was appointed, but which renunciation he has effectively ignored and contradicted ever since.
In other words, Groome is coming to reinforce +Conti’s heresies: the good-old-boy limp-wristed network on full display. When you consider that the Scottish ad limina visit is the current framework within which he is operating, one can only conclude that this prelate is exhibiting not only disobedience, but monumental and brazen arrogance and stupidity.
-
Ad limina – closing speeches:
http://scmo.org/articles/563/1/Pope-Benedict-XVI-confirms-he-will-visit-Scotland/Page1.html
-
Disgraceful!
This is just another reason for me to home school my children. -
I am glad to know of the emphasis you place on continuing formation for your clergy, especially through the initiative “Priests for Scotland”…encourage those entrusted with the formation of seminarians to do all they can to prepare a new generation of committed and zealous priests…”
What priests? You mean the ones who are being trained at Scotus?
If this is all the Pope had to say to these pathetic bishops, I have to wonder if he’s already given up on the Church in Scotland.
-
Maybe the Pope was bowled our by the Cardinal’s sycophancy? In his address on behalf of the Scottish Bishops the Cardinal said:
“Your Holiness, we have been inspired and enriched by the transparency and
the profundity of your teaching, which has in turn inspired us in our duty
as teachers of the faith.We note that many people of other Christian
denominations and representatives of other faith traditions in our country
actually look to our Church for leadership in the great religious, moral
and ethical issues of the time. They too welcome the prospect of a visit
to our land from Your Holiness in the hope that they may gain a deeper
appreciation of Jesus Christ and of the way in which faith and reason come
together to shed God’s light on the questions which both fascinate and
trouble the human spirit.What does it mean to be a human person who is
open to the transcendent mystery of God?
How is this transcendence
mediated definitively by Jesus Christ?
How is human transcendence
expressed in the moral and ethical choices
we make about how we live and
how we die?”The word “profundity” is very often used ironically.
-
Torkay,
I think you’ve confused Archbishop Conti with Cardinal O’Brien – it was the latter who had to make a public profession of faith, extended to include all the teachings from which he had previously publicly dissented. Archbishop Conti is just as bad, but he wasn’t getting the red hat (much to his chagrin, I believe…)
I note your comment “if this is all the Pope had to say…”
But remember, these public statements are all part and parcel of the ritual of diplomacy. It is, of course, essentially dishonest, but that is what they do. They make nice speeches to each other “For the attention of the media” but behind closed doors, the bishops are presented with the letters that the faithful have sent and they are asked to explain themselves if complaints are lodged. At least, that’s the theory. I remember a very reliable source once saying that these ad liminas have become purely routine. If that is so, and they are really nothing mroe than a photoshoot opportunity for the world’s bishops, then roll on the next conclave.
One thing, though. Cardinal O’Brien isn’t the only one turning his attention now to getting organised for the papal visit.
Comprenez?
jkearney,
I was among a group of protesters who picketed outside Newman College in Birmingham when Archbishop Weakland was in attendance at the invitation of the National Conference of what loosely passed for Priests in those days. The big-boss of the NCP was Father Roderick Strange who came out to speak to us, hand in hand (metaphorically speaking, of course) with the big-boss of the National Board of Catholic Women, rampant radical feminist Angela Perkins.
Father Strange was later posted to – you guessed it – Rome. It really must be difficult for faithful priests watching the fall and then rise of these unconscionable, faithless dissenters.
Anyway, read this disgraceful Tablet editorial (they’re always disgraceful but this stands out as one of the very, VERY worst)
http://www.thetablet.co.uk/article/14221Note the sheer contempt, the hatred, of the pre-Vatican II Church that just spills out of this editorial – and if it still isn’t clear to you why there are bishops like Archbishop Conti and the Bishop of Plymouth (thanks kevin1) who are only too happy to have heretics like Groome malforming their priests, teachers, dogs and cats, then – frankly – this is not the blog for you…
Clue: The Tablet is sold in cathedrals and parish churches up and down the land. It is on the shelves of Catholic bookshops, teacher training colleges, seminaries and convents.
If you still don’t get it, rearrange these words into a well know phrase or saying…
the hate Church pre-Vatican II the bishopsBenet,
I profoundly agree! Notice, there’s no mention of the protests being organised by the humanists et al.
-
Editor
Thanks for the correction – that’s the second time I made that mistake. I must be a slow learner!
My point in writing “if this is all the Pope had to say” was that this speech is in marked contrast to the tongue-lashing he gave the British bishops, whose schismatic behavior is not as overt as the Scottish group, though bad enough on its own terms.
Benet
I think you’re right – “transparency” and “profundity” are not often found working together….
-
Editor
The universal venue supplied to The Bitter Pill reminds me of a conversation I heard on EWTN radio a couple of days ago. A caller told the host she had purchased a book at a parish bookstore in Chicago, but had returned it to get her money back upon finding, on page 4, a reference to the Holy Spirit in feminine terms. She also asked that the book be removed from the shelves, but the cashier refused, citing the lengthy academic credentials of the author. The caller then cited Fr. Mitch Pacwa’s refutation of this error (Fr. Pacwa, SJ is one of the hosts of the “Open Line” radio show), to which the cashier replied “Oh, he’s just a troublemaker!”
So this poison being dripped steadily into the Church’s veins is well-prepared with and well-greased by prestigious theological credentials, which make it not only completely acceptable, but de rigueur. It’s an institutional culture of faithlessness and desacralization.
-
Er… hate to mention this… but isn’t St. Aloysius a Jesuit church? The Jesuits, unless I am very much mistaken, belong to the category of ‘exempt’ religious, meaning that Archbishop Conti’s authority over them is extremely limited.
But I am worried about Catholic Truth. Regardless of the individual topics, this blog is fast becoming totally predictable and utterly insular, if not downright incestuous. It is the same old people saying the same old things, with too much space taken up with spats among the contributors.
Part of the problem is surely that the blog is hideously overmoderated, with the ‘Editor’ intervening in tones worthy of a school teacher addressing the back row of a not very bright Primary 3 (cf. the rules ‘not up for discussion’ announced to pupils at the beginning of the year).
Another part of the problem is that ‘Catholic Truth’ does not seem to aspire to going beyond a knee-jerk reaction of anger and indignation in the face of the unfolding of events. Alas, by doing so it consigns itself to the margins of any meaningful debate.
-
Lizzy
Welcome to the blog, although I’m not too sure if you’ll be happy here given your first, very combative post.
The buck always stops with the archbishop. It doesn’t matter if St. Aloysius is currently entrusted to the Jesuits, they only operate with the archbishop’s permission. He can banish them from the archdiocese at any time.
Anyway, any talk aimed at priests and Catholic teachers is most certainly the archbishop’s business. He is the (supposed)Shepherd and guardian of the
Faith. To allow a known heretic and dissenter to address the Catholic priests and teachers is most definitely an act of negligence on His Grace’s behalf. -
Petrus,
I don’t think that you are right on this one. The Jesuits are exempt religious and work with the permission of the Holy Father. A diocesan bishop cannot interfere with them unless within very strict limitations.
Of course, you are right when you infer tha the Archbishop’s silence on this issue cannot be taken as a sign of neutrality.
Oh and Petrus, I don’t aspire to be happy here… it’s just not my sort of club.
-
Lizzy
I dont think you are right here. Are you suggesting that the archbishop can’t stop a heretic from addressing the priests and teachers of the Archdiocese of Glasgow? Get real, as they say.
-
Petrus,
Get factual, as they say.
-
Lizzy
If you can provide factual evidence that the archbishop can do nothing about this please post it here. Let’s get factual
-
As we are discussing a Bishop’s authority over Jesuits it may be useful to recall St Ignatius’ Rules for thinking with the Church:
1. With all judgment of our own put aside, we ought to keep our minds disposed and ready to be obedient in everything to the true Spouse of Christ our Lord, which is our Holy Mother, the hierarchical Church.
for the others see this Philipino website:
PS: No. 6 is
We should praise relics of saints, by venerating the relics and praying to the saints. We should extol visits to stational churches, pilgrimages, indulgences for jubilees and crusades, and the lighting of candles in churches.
-
Lizzy, I’ve just asked a priest on the phone about this and he says that the bishop has authority over everyone in his diocese, that is can sometimes be a bit complicated but since St Aloysius is a parish church there is no question about it that everything that happens in that parish has to conform to the diocese.
-
rebel
Well done and Amen to you.
-
And then there is the question: if this “theologian” is laicized, how can he still be a Jesuit?
There is a nice article about the Pope’s ad limina message to the Scottish lower-archy in last night’s LifeSite News issue, which also mentions this Groome disaster:
-
Now children, let’s not be falling out amongst ourselves.
Whilst the leader of the Jesuits and the diocesan Ordinary each have a responsibility for what is presented to the faithful, and will be judged on how well they discharged their responsibilities, let us not forget that the dissenter him/herself will also have to answer for his or her actions.
Furthermore, it is incumbent upon the individual in the pews to keep abreast of what is happening in the Church, without which they are neglecting their responsibility for the care of their own souls.
As to Lizzy’s comments alluding to the same old people saying the same old things – well, this blog is called Catholic Truth, and the Truth cannot change, so it is not surprising that “the same old things” are continually reiterated. It is an educational blog after all, and we are fortunate in having bloggers of sound formation who work towards upholding that intent.
The use of the word “incestuous” is rather harsh. I know of at least 4 stalwart bloggers from earlier days who have been stricken with serious illnesses that have prevented them maintaining their contributions, and it is possible that Madame Editor knows of others too.
As for being overmoderated, I know not how long Lizzy has been lurking before registering, but if it is for any length of time, she must surely have seen some of the highly uncharitable things that have been said to believers by those who have either lost or never had the faith.
Lizzy, if you are amongst those who have not fallen for the Vatican II propaganda, and who know which way is up, please stay with us and add to the educational value of this blog. But if not, why not stay anyway and see if the penny eventually drops?
Luv’n’stuff.
-
Rebel,
I think you will find that the 1983 code of Canon Law limits a bishop’s intervention pretty much to liturgical matters in the houses of exempt religious. To this extent, the real guilty man is the Jesuit Provincial in London.
However, that is not to say that Archbishop Conti does not have a duty to censure this iniziative. If His Grace does not follow in the footsteps of Cardinal Pell, he is sending the wrong message to both his clergy and his flock.
Leprechaun,
It is precisely because I am so worried about the state of he Church in Scotland post-Vatican II that I find this blog so disappointing. Of course the Truth cannot change, otherwise it would not be Truth. However, the challenge to the Church in every age is articulating the truth for the present generation. It seems to me that very many of the contributors to this blog seem to have no awareness of this.
Time, dear friends, is getting very short indeed. The Archdiocese of Scotland said very recently, in the context of the Old Mass, that only about twenty-six of the 52,000 Catholics at Mass on a Sunday prefer the so-called ‘Extraordinary Form’. The real scandal here is not the 26, but the 52,000.
The population of Scotland in 2008 (the latest figures I can find) is estimated to have stood at 5,168,000, of which 15.9 % are estimated to be Roman Catholics. Ergo, the Catholic population stands nominally at about 822,000. (I understand that the Bishops put it at somewhere in the 600,000s, but I don’t think that really matters.) Most of the Catholic population lives in the West of Scotland, especially in the Archdiocese of Scotland. Now, you don’t have to be a mathemtical genius to figure out that the Church is dying on her feet.
So what has to be done. Catholic Truth is right about one thing. If we don’t engage in an honest analysis of how we ended up in this mess, we will never find a way out of it. But, on the other hand, the mess exists and it is no use pretending it does not.
So, it must be back to re-educating and reinforcing the faith of those Catholics who still practise their faith. And, at the same time, we have to begin explaining that faith in a reasonable and convincing manner for those who have lost it or never had it.
It is easy, all too easy, to handbag dissenters, especially when they are bishops. It is much more difficult to give a reasoned account of the faith.
-
Lizzy
A warm welcome in spite of your cold comments.
We are far from insular. One of the things the populace such as you need to gain knowledge of, is that traditionalists are not just some kooky fringe group, we are growing and are present in EVERY PARISH(conciliar and SSPX) and there is no place to run. Sooner or later the liberals WILL have to minister to us, as well.
Labeling us incestuous is desperate on your part.
-
Lizzy
I see from your latest post that you are a person who takes her faith seriously, so I applaud you for that. I think that if you stick around, with an open mind, you’ll realise that we are not such a bad bunch. Indeed, this blog brought my family and I to the traditional Faith. I stuck around for long enough and realised just how essential blogs like this are. So please stick around.
You wrote:
“However, the challenge to the Church in every age is articulating the truth for the present generation. It seems to me that very many of the contributors to this blog seem to have no awareness of this.”
You’d be surprised at the various age ranges here. I think our youngest blogger is a girl of 13 who regularly makes very profound posts. She takes her Faith seriously and regularly comes to the blog asking questions. My wife and I are in our 20s and I know there are various bloggers in their 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s, and, in the case of the editor, 70s! So I think we are doing very well articulating the Truth for the present generation. The Fatima Conference in September was filled with young people and there will soon be a meeting for young parents who are considering homeschooling their children.
As I said, please stick around. I’m sure you’ll eventually see the great work that Catholic Truth does.
-
Lizzy,
those statistics you quoted from the archdiocese of Glasgow are a total lie. They were in the Herald report the day after a Herald journalist reported her attendance at her very first traditional Mass which was in Sacred Heart, Glasgow, and she said that there were around 30 in that Church at that Mass alone. So that is a lie, for starters.
Also, Gerald Warner wrote about this only last week in the Scottish Catholic Observer. He quoted Mgr Smith saying the “despite generous provision of the traditional Mass, precisely 0.05 per cent of Catholics of the Archdiocese of Glasgow choose it” – that’s more or less exactly what he said, because Gerald Warner said “Generous provision”? and went on to show that it was anything but generous.
I was really pleased to see Gerald demolish the lies. He pointed out that out of all the, around 100 odd parishes in Glasgow, only one gives the option of the traditional Mass and out of almost 500 or so parishes across Scotland there are only 4 traditional Masses offered.
No matter, how can people attend a Mass that they don’t know they are entitled to attend and have been told is no longer allowed.
I also take issue with your criticisms of this blog and of Catholic Truth.
Nobody else is doing what Catholic Truth has been doing for many years now and having looked at the criticisms from every angle, I’ve come to the conclusion that they don’t stack up.There are plenty of groups who want to “get along” with the bishops, and to do so they turn a blind eye or water down what is going wrong. Only Catholic Truth says it as it is, and calls a spade a spade.
Letters to the bishops sent by Catholic Truth have been published in the newsletter (there was one last issue or the one before that, can’t remember which, but it was about Summorum Pontificum) and it was very courteous and positive. Still they didn’t reply to her except the Bishop of Galloway to say he had not had anyone ask for the Mass in his diocese.
You say, “it must bwe b ack to re-educating and reinforcing the faith of those Catholics who still practise their faith” as if that is a brand new idea. That is exactly what Catholic Truth has been doing for as long as I’ve been a reader – a very long time. That is what they set out to do, and I think they do it very well. If you read this blog on various topics, you will find a lot of really educative stuff on here.
With respect, Lizzy, I think your criticisms are well off the mark and by the way if you were to go onto Fr Z’s blog and criticism him, you’d be banned. That information is also on this blog if you care to look for it, with all the details.
Catholic Truth has been the leader in educating Catholics about the Faith and in leading protests against various abuses (including the Buddhist concert at St Pat’s, Anderston), for as long as I can remember.
By the way, when that priest told me that the Archbishop did have authority over the Jesuits and all the other religious orders, and I told him why I was asking, and told him about this thread, he said “But Professor Groome is a world famous theologian”. He’s a very committed priest so it just shows what a mess we really are in.
-
Petrus,
Do you take one lump or two in your dog house tea?
70 indeed!
-
leprechaun
I suspect Petrus may have been referring to the decade in which Editor was born (just trying to save you a couple of lumps, Petrus!)
lizzy
I can’t argue with anything you say about the state of the Church, but your criticism of this blog is notably lacking in specifics. What is “the present generation” exactly? And how do you suggest we “articulate the truth” to this mysterious group?
You also seem to be surprisingly unaware that this blog has been “articulating the truth” to ALL generations since its inception – and that this articulation has been posted by ALL generations.
So what, according to you, are we missing?
-
I found these figures on the Bishops’ Conference of Scotland website:
http://www.bpsconfscot.com/CatholicScotland/tabid/57/Default.aspx
Some statistics (based on returns published in the Catholic Directory for Scotland 2007):
Estimated Population of Scotland (2003) – 5,057,400
Average weekly Mass attendance – 192,235
——————————————————– -
Isn’t this where Tomas de Torkay asks, yet again, about the population of Glasgow?
-
….or where somebody is brave enough to ask the Editor what age she actually is??? lol.
-
the convert
In the immortal words of Jackie Gleason, “You’re a riot, Alice, a regular riot.”
Benet
How about some statistics on the number of priests in Scotland who accept the doctrine of transubstantiation and who are therefore performing valid Consecrations?
-
Rebel,
What I was getting at is that it is very worrying when, on the Archdiocese’s own admission, there are only 52,000 Catholics in Glasgow going to Mass on a Sunday when the Catholic population is much greater.
Mass attendance, as the Bishop of Motherwell said some years ago, is in freefall. At this rate we may begin to doubt if there will be a signficant Catholic presence in Scotland within a generation.
-
Lizzy,
Welcome to our blog. I fully agree with you that the faith is dying out in Scotland. It is tragic.
I am unable to say much more right now because I can see from a brief skim of the posts that I have to sort out Petrus who is clearly having problems with numbers. So am I. Just how many days/weeks/months should he have to suffer in the doghouse for telling the world that I am 70 – NOT!
Luckily, everyone knows I’m 29 so I’m prepared to overlook it this time…
The only thing I would add to your last post, Lizzy, is that, given the assault on the faith in the past 50 years, it is highly questionable whether we have a significant Catholic presence in Scotland right now.
More and more, we find people are sending us their parish bulletins and it is striking how much content is “ecumenical”. There is virtually no purely Catholic activities – let alone devotions – in parishes any more, if these bulletins are anything to go by.
Anyway, a renewed welcome Lizzy – I see you began with some criticisms, and we welcome constructive criticism here, so thank you for your comments. I probably do interject too much, but, since I’ve had some requests to leave the blog open all week as we used to, and I’ve agreed to do that, I won’t be able to participate so regularly. In any event, keep blogging – you are very welcome indeed.
-
It will be sad day indeed when Professor Groome arrives in Scotland, for this study day ‘To teach as Jesus Did: Handing on the Faith in the 21st Century’. Then his evening lecture ‘What keeps us Catholic’.
This seems to be a double whammy – title wise that is. Should these titles rather be How not to hand on the Faith? And how not to remain Catholic?Was it not Archbishop Lefebvre who said – “Do I have to become Protestant to remain Catholic? For this seems to be the case of ensuring that Catholics lose their Faith completely.
Pre-Vatican II, I think that any writings Professor Groome may have written, would have found their way to the List of Banned Books that prohibited Catholics to read because they were a danger to their Catholic Faith.
-
Editor
Like Torkay said, I meant that you were born in the 70s – late 70s. However, I see that since you are only 29 I was wrong on that one. 1981 was a good year to be born.
Gloria
I agree with everything you say in your post. I bet that a Protestant would be made to feel more welcome in a modern Catholic setting than a traditionally-minded Catholic. Can you imagine suggesting that Fr Morgan or Fr Summers run a conference on Catholic Education? I think we all know what the reaction would be.
What we’ve seen in recent times is the Reformation Part II. What a kick in the teeth to St. John Ogilvie, that’s all I can say. I read through the unCatholic papers, the SCO and Flourish today – not a nice experience. I cannot help but think that what we have is two very different religions.
-
Petrus, I’m glancing through the Scottish Catholic Observer. On pages 8 and 9 it says: And I quote. (unable to get SCO of Friday 5/2/10 online). For it would be then possible for all of you to read the full articles.
‘Call for a return to Faith and spiritual obedience’:
“Bishop Philip Tartaglia of Paisley, president of the Communications Commission, addresses speculative reports over the Papal visit and says that a lack of Faith is of greater concern to the Church than liturgical conflicts”.AND
Our Bishops know their flocks by Msgr Peter Smith,
“To turn the Pope’s generosity on the Tridentine Rite into a stick with which to beat thes rest of us is surely not what the Holy Father intended”.Sorry, but am I missing something here. Is it not that an attack on the Liturgy (Tridentine Rite) by alterations or a new liturgy altogether an attack on the Catholic Faith? Is not not home grown dissent to attempt prevention for Catholics to attend the Tridentine Mass as is in the Holy Father’s Summorum Pontificum?
We do not need Professor Groome in Scotland to rub salt into wounds, with his study day for priests, teachers and catechists, for without a good
education how else do our youngsters learn the Catholic Faith -
I must start to compile a league table of Episcopal own goals. The recent ones have been pretty spectacular.
-
“Was it not Archbishop Lefebvre who said – “Do I have to become Protestant to remain Catholic? ”
Gloria- I love that quote from Archbishop Lefebvre! I had not heard of that before; it speaks volumes!
Editor- Glad to know that you and I are the same age –(29). My oldest son is 23, so I must have had him when I was six.
-
gloria, that is a really important point, that you can’t separate the liturgy, the Mass from the doctrine of the faith.
-
Miles Christi Sum,
Gloria’s quotation about “Must we become Protestant in order to remain a Catholic” features in Fr Paul Kramer’s book: “The suicide of altering the faith in the Liturgy” which is in itself an excellent read. It is on special offer at $9.95 just now.
See this link:
-
leprechaun
Thank you! That was very classy of you to inform me of this great text. And I can’t resist purchasing it for that bargain!
God Bless you!
-
The hypocricy of the Scottish bishops astonds me. He we have Bishop Tartaglia telling us that a loss of Faith would be of more conecern than the Liturgy. Meanwhild on Faith matters Archbishop Conti is planning to withdraw orthodox Catholic teaching form our parishes and schools by inviting Professor Groome to give his heresies to priests, teachers and catechists so that there will be a break from Rome. And if he claims he is not breaking from Rome why is he inviting Professor Groome.
-
jkearney
Actually, if you think about it, there is no break from Rome. Rome is modernist! The break is from the Mystical Body of Christ, from Tradition, and from the truth.
-
I was talking to a mother today who said she’d read this thread and was going to write to the archbishop tomorrow. She was really shocked because she has one child who is still at Catholic school.
-
Miles Christi Sum,
You wrote: Editor- Glad to know that you and I are the same age –(29). My oldest son is 23, so I must have had him when I was six.
Hilarious!rebel,
I hope that mother you spoke to did, in fact, write to the archbishop. The more people who actively respond to these scandals, the better.
Onward Catholic Truth Soldiers!
-
The smoke of Satan is certainly blowing through the Vatican. Bella Dodd the ex-communist told how the Russians had planted 35,000 priets within the Church and some had reached the `highest` places. She as a communist had correspondence with 4 Cardinals. Wht we must remember is as St Paul says we are fighting `principalities and powers` not just men. It is a battle in which we must `put on the armour of Christ`. Yes, there is a battle in the Vatican between good and evil and there were reports once that a Satanic Mass had been celebrated there. Do not be surprised at such things. St John Bosco foretold all these things but also foresaw a Pope who would triumph over the enemies of the Church. That is why we must not turn away from Rome. Benedict is trying to reconcile the lost sheep in the Orthodox Church and the SSPX, (Ed: the SSPX are not “lost”. They would have been “regularised” last year but for their insistence on having talks about the doctrines compromised at Vatican II before reaching any kind of arrangement with the Vatican. It’s Rome that needs to be reconciled with the traditional Catholic Faith!) we must listen in charity so that God can do his work. Archbishop Conti will not destroy the Catholic Faith. Yes, he can huff and puff, but as long as one person is against him and he cannot imprison or silence that person, he will fail, for that person will be wearing the armour of Christ.
-
jkearney
Correction: I think that figure of Communist infiltrators was 1100, not 35,000.
Also, +Conti will not destroy the Catholic Faith – not because he can’t by himself, but because he is merely perpetrating the continuation of a false and desacralized faith, the real Faith having already been destroyed by Vatican II and its aftermath.
He is a Vatican II conformist, doing what all his peers do. See Objective 3 on the other thread, “Has Vatican II Destroyed the Church?”
-
Editor
I agree with everything you say to jkearney. Rome needs regularised. It’s utter madness to compare the schismatic Orthodox churches with the Society of Saint Pius X. Well said.
-
Tomas de Torkey. The questions of what Vatican II did or not do to change the church is being discussed by the meetings of the SSPX and Rome. Where the translations of the documents have confused people and need clarification will be gone into with some depth, I pray. I have read all the documents and please believe my sincerity when I say there is nothing I could not reconcile as orthodox in the texts. Yes, what does `truth is the very substance of the Church` really mean? Does `sharing in the truth` really mean Protestants are part of the Church? Unless we open our minds to the possibility that I am right and you are wrong on such matters and I open my mind to the fact that you may be right then dialogue will go nowhere. The problem is that Bishop Fellay may agree but not take all the members of the SSPX with him into the mainstream Church. Whether it was 35,000 or 111,000 these people seized the initiative when committees were set up and put into place their own agendas. And of course when translating from the Latin many deliberately misleading translations were made which were deliberately meant to be ambiguous.
-
JKearney
I’m sorry but I disagree with you profoundly.
“I have read all the documents and please believe my sincerity when I say there is nothing I could not reconcile as orthodox in the texts. ”
Do you really believe this? There are parts of the documents that are orthodox, certainly, but there are many more parts that are wildly heretical. I suggest you juxtapose Pope Pius IX’s “Syllabus of Errors” with “Nostra Aetate”, “Unitatis Redintegratio” and “Dignitatis Humanae”.
Expressing the traditional Catholic Faith beautifully on one page and then contradicting it on the next, is a common tactic of Modernists. Have a look at what Pope St. Pius X has to say on this matter in his great encyclical “Pascendi Dominici Gregis” (1907):
“The Methods of Modernists
18. This becomes still clearer to anybody who studies the conduct of Modernists, which is in perfect harmony with their teachings. In the writings and addresses they seem not unfrequently to advocate now one doctrine now another so that one would be disposed to regard them as vague and doubtful. But there is a reason for this, and it is to be found in their ideas as to the mutual separation of science and faith. Hence in their books you find some things which might well be expressed by a Catholic, but in the next page you find other things which might have been dictated by a rationalist.”
I think the paragraph above sums up the Second Vatican Council perfectly. If anyone thinks that an ecumenical council of the Church, attended by the majority of the world’s prelates, could be somewhat immune to this infectious disease, paragraph three of Pascendi dispells this myth:
” For as We have said, they put their designs for her ruin into operation not from without but from within; hence, the danger is present almost in the very veins and heart of the Church, whose injury is the more certain, the more intimate is their knowledge of her. Moreover they lay the axe not to the branches and shoots, but to the very root, that is, to the faith and its deepest fires. And having struck at this root of immortality, they proceed to disseminate poison through the whole tree, so that there is no part of Catholic truth from which they hold their hand, none that they do not strive to corrupt.”
-
Editor
Is there any reason why we should not call this Thomas Groome a heretic, rather than a dissenter? It seems to me that since these terms are synonymous, in this case we should use the stronger word.
-
jkearney
I do not doubt your sincerity, but your sincerity doesn’t make you correct. You might find this article of interest:
http://www.sspx.org/miscellaneous/two_interpretations_of_vatican_ii_myth_or_reality.pdf
-
Torkay, I think the difference is that if you call someone a heretic you need to be sure they are deliberately rejecting a teaching, whereas you know for a fact that Groome is dissenting just by reading his comments on women’s ordination which are all over the internet.
-
Petrus,
Yes. I’m new here but on reading your reply to JKearney I see that you do not agree that Vat II follows the hermeneutic of continuity. I ask you therefore if you believe that the Church, instituted by Jesus Christ and guaranteed that the “gates of hell will not prevail against it” has in fact succumbed to the gates of hell? If it has then the only conclusion that you can come to is that the Catholic Church is not the church founded by Jesus Christ. Do you actually believe that? Is the present Pope not the successor of Peter? Even the SSPX, of which you appear to be an adherent, is it in error in praying for the successor of Peter in the person of Pope Benedict XVI ?
I am not an adherent of the SSPX but, from time to time I do go along to Mass in their chapel because I love singing the Mass in its entirety with both Proper as well as Ordinary. If you look back a few posts on the Blog The New Liturgical Movement you will find that the late (and loathed by some) Archbishop Bugnini declared that Catholics should not sing AT Mass but should sing THE Mass with its liturgical Propers not just its Ordinaries!
It is for that reason that I go along to the occasional SSPX Mass. -
JARay,
Welcome to our blog, and thank you for your first, very interesting post.
If you have been following our blog for any length of time, you will know that we have discussed the matters you mention, many times. Here’s one recent thread on Vatican II where I’m sure these issues will be covered.
http://www.catholictruthscotland.com/blog/?p=3727 and this article, by American lawyer and Catholic commentator, Christopher Ferrara, is illuminating
http://www.fatimacrusader.com/cr80/cr80pg08.aspIt is a common error, these days, to think that any criticism of the Pope or of Vatican II means we reject the promises of Christ to the Church. Not so.
Saint (Cardinal) Robert Bellarmine is a must-read if you are not clear about the matter of criticising a Pope. That the Pope can (and indeed should) be corrected by even unworthy laity like ourselves, has been spelt out by the Angelic Doctor, Saint Thomas Aquinas. Robert Bellarmine explains the scenario of a heretic Pope, and his writings are crucial to understanding the extent – and limits – of our right/duty to criticise a pontiff. On earth, St Robert Bellarmine says, there is no higher authority to which we can refer an erring pope but that does not mean we cannot point out his errors.
Christ has not and could not fail in his promise to His Church, that the gates of Hell will never prevail against it. But that doesn’t mean that the Church in Scotland, England or any other place will not disappear or fall into error. That is manifestly not the case. If you try to argue that the current heresies – false ecumenism and inter-religious monologue (which is what it is, there’s no real “dialogue”) – are not errors, then you must logically conclude that the Church has been in error for 2000 years until Vatican II and all the popes who condemned these activities were heretics. You pays your money and you takes your choice, JARay. Since the hallmark of Catholicism, the litmus test for recognising the authenticity of a doctrine, has always been its conformity to the traditional teaching of the Church, then, clearly, when it is impossible to reconcile innovatory teachings with Tradition, the innovations are wrong. Plain and simply wrong.
Christ’s promise that the gates of Hell will not prevail against the Church means simply that the Church – the authentic Catholic Church – will be here on earth until the end of time, even if, at the end of time, it has returned to its original tiny number. In other words, even if we are the biblical remnant – the truth will be preserved, the Church’s orthodoxy will remain intact – “reeling but erect” as G.K. Chesterton put it.
As for your reason for attending the SSPX occasional Masses. Interesting. If I were looking for an excuse NOT to attend, it would be the 4th Sunday of the month sung Mass which (yesterday being exceptionally beautiful) normally makes me think of Pope Saint Pius X’s remark that Mass should only be sung if it can be sung well.
Anyway, a renewed welcome, JARay. Keep blogging!
-
JARay
Welcome to the blog anfd thank you for your very interesting questions. I can’t really add anything else to what the editor has said, so I’ll simply answer the questions that you asked me directly.
I do not believe that the Catholic Church has succombed to the gates of Hell and I do believe that the Church founded by Christ is the Catholic Church. I’m absolutely certain of this.
I do believe that Pope Benedict XVI is the current Successor of Saint Peter. Likewise, I believe Popes John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I and John Paul II were successors of Saint Peter. Again, I’m absolutely certain of this. Quite logically, I don’t believe that SSPX are in error. Absolutely not.
It might be interesting for you to research the Arian Heresy and the role of St. Athanasius. I’m sure you’ll see some similarities with the current crisis, although I believe the current crisis is much, much worse.
Thanks again for asking those important questions, JARay. I hope you keep blogging.
Comments are now closed.
65 comments