No experience creates more emotional, social, political and cultural scars than the moment that betrayal is manifest and realized by the trusting.
Betrayal has implications that range from the individual to the whole of humanity; from the past through the present and well into our future.
Here the betrayal is of a scope and source that some least expect: the Vatican. It is said that this anguish reaches Heaven itself.
Personally I am convinced that the brethren that darkened the skies over Golgotha are the same source of the ongoing betrayal against the Mother of God.
By virtue of denying Her simple request of 1917, the human world is falling into a dark ditch. Read more …
Note: the author of the above article quotes Father Gruner on the meaning of “diabolical disorientation”. Any sign of it where YOU live?
-
On the way home from choir practice last night, I noticed a very large yard sign put up by someone as a comment on the ongoing American “elections,” (really, in the mainstream, nothing more than a popularity contest among Wall St. puppets to see who has the most convincing sound bytes and the best hair spray and make-up job) which serves as a pertinent comment, not only on the election,” but on the general state of America/the world as well. The sign said this:
“In the empire of lies, truth is treason.” (a Ron Paul quote, apparently)
I’ve posted before that the Vatican, by refusing to release the Third Secret and perform the Consecration, has become a house of lies and liars. As part of this refusal, the entire vatican ii revolution is also an immense structure of lies, e.g. that the new mass is still Catholic, the new approach to the world is still Catholic, false ecumenism is still Catholic, religious liberty is still Catholic, collegiality is still Catholic, etc.
I believe the entire conciliar crypto-Catholic Church is a grievous insult to Heaven, since it is based on a refusal to obey Heaven and to propose, instead, as an alleged solution to the world’s problems, a made-over Church.
The most telling clue we have as to the absurdity and origin of this conciliar structure of lies is the testimony of Bella Dodd, which is referenced in this incredible article (where did you dig this guy up, Editor? I never heard of him before. He’s a keeper….): i.e. the denunciation of everything having to do with Tradition and the history of the Church.
Catholic Tradition is a permanent and unchanging testament to Truth. It is an embarrassment to the liberals, modernists, communists and freemasons who have overrun the Church, and who therefore attempt to persecute it into extinction.
That alone makes it very easy to distinguish the liars from the faithful. Those who cannot make that distinction, the third-party disoriented (i.e. most of the clergy and laity), are merely the Church’s equivalent of the “useful idiots” who are the hands and fingers of the revolution.
-
An excellent article! I am amazed that someone had the courage to say outright that the Jews are anything but an ‘endangered’ species. It makes perfect sense that the enemies of the Son of God haven’t changed. To think that Cardinal Bea consulted with the B’nai Brith before the Council- to make sure their expectations of the Council would be met!!!
Much as I agree with the article, I could not help wishing it was not so visible to the many detractors of the Church. May have been necessary but all the same it felt a little bit like washing our dirty linen in public.
-
“Washing our dirty linen in public” is, sadly, essential Crusader. Pope Gregory the Great acknowledged this when he said: “It is better that scandal should arise, than that the truth be suppressed.”
Ask yourself this: would you not prefer that the scandal of child abusing priests b acknowledged as part of the diabolical crisis in the Church, rather than par of the course in the Catholic priesthood?
Wash, iron, you name it – we need to get the poison out, and since our private efforts were either ignored or derided when we wrote to bishops and Vatican, we have to go public.
-
Also important to remember, I think, is that getting the poison out is part of the purification process. If Our Lord was a union of Sacred Humanity and Divinity, then His Mystical Body also is a union of humanity and divinity, and the human aspect must be purified as if in Purgatory.
I’ve heard several SSPX clergy, including Bishop Fellay, refer to this diabolical disorientation as the Passion of the Church. Which makes one wonder whether the “Vision of the Bishop Dressed in White” is the Church’s Calvary. We certainly know who the Pharisees are…
-
The documented story of the involvement of B’nai Brith ( a Jewish Masonic organization) at Vatican II, mentioned by Crusader, is contained in the book ‘Judaism and the Vatican’ by Count Leon de Poncins.
It is available from Carmel Books, as are other titles authored by Count de Poncins, such as ‘Freemasonry and the Vatican’.
Whilst on the subject of Judaism, Freemasonry and the Vatican is everyone yet aware of the great victory won by Bishop Williamson on Ash Wednesday at an Appeal Court in Germany?
His conviction and fine has been annulled because the prosecution did not show that he had actually broken any law. Although the prosecutors immediately announced that they intend to prepare the case again this is surely just a face-saving exercise. The reason that they did not show that German law had been broken is simply because they can not do so because it was not broken.
The new SSPX newsletter for March explains further:
“As we have been honoured to have Bishop Richard Williamson in residence at St. George’s House since February 2009, (following a certain interview accorded to Swedish TV in Germany), it will be of interest to our faithful and readers to note that the court case against him has been dropped by a court of appeal in Bavaria. Following His Lordship’s second appeal, ‘the First Appeals Bench of the Provincial Court of Nuremberg ruled on 22nd February 2012 that:
1. Upon appeal of the accused, the 11th July 2011 judgement of the Regional Court in Regensburg is annulled.
2. The legal proceedings are stopped because of a procedural obstacle to their continuing.
3. The costs of the legal proceedings and the expenses necessarily incurred by the accused are to be paid by the State.’
The 22nd February ruling went on to say that:
‘The summons as we have it, not providing details sufficient to present the required result of the investigation, does not contain enough facts to constitute a punishable offence. Passages are quoted from the interview given by the accused with the indication that the accused must have reckoned with the content of the interview also becoming known in Germany. What is not shown is that the content of the interview was in fact made public and became known also in Germany. There are to be found no explanations of the time and place of any such publication, nor of any means neither of publication nor of any channels of communication.
But according to Article 130 it is a prerequisite that the action involved should have been performed in public or at a meeting, so some act of communication with a number of people also comes into it. Giving an interview to a journalist inside an SSPX seminary with no public present represents on the contrary no prior punishable act, because the legislator did not include amongst the acts forbidden by Article 130 any attempt to reach the public. Accordingly the summons mentions no punishable behaviour (as yet): essential characteristics required by the law to constitute the inner and outer facts of the criminal deed are not present.’ “
-
I have to admit that this was a great article to read until the real meat of the matter began to show through i.e. Jew Hating! What was that video about Patton all about? How is something as repugnant as that allowed on youtube? (Maybe it was the Jews who made it)
The article mentioned the words “diabolical disorientation” a number of times, but if you ask me, this article was diabolical. It implicated good men like the priests on the video with this crackpots hate filled nonesense (The real agenda)
Btw, I had to laugh at seeing ol Gerry Matatics on the video talking about “obedience” when he doesn’t believe there is a validly ordained priest on the face of the planet. He has a service in his house every Sunday because he can’t attend Mass as there is no Mass. Got to love the irony.
Truth mixed with lies and hatred= confusion = diabolical! What this article did was sow the seed of confusion in peoples minds because knowing what he wrote about Our Lady was true and then to notice that the author infected it with his own bile (although, rather sneekily) about the Jews, it might cause people who would otherwise accept that message of Our Lady to pooh pooh it. Only a crackpot (wackos as the author calls them) could accept this article, as whole, to be truthful.
To be honest, I found it both insulting and disgusting and hate the fact that people like the author of the article throw garbage like this out under the banner of Traditional Catholicism and use Our Lady to get his “real” message across. Satan is real and thriving.
-
PerthshireTroublemaker,
I haven’t, to be truthful, watched any of the videos on the article (I haven’t even finished the article yet) but I am always wary of this charge of “anti-semitism”. There are Jews who are also wary of it. You can find out about them here at this link http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/
I don’t know and have never met any Catholics who hate anybody, Jews included. I would want to consider the video you mention in the context of the whole article to see what its purpose was.
What was interesting about the article (again I didn’t read the whole thing but will do) was that it comes from a non-religious journal, in fact a military journal. I think that is very very interesting indeed.
What I have read so far is excellent. I look forward to finishing it hopefully tomorrow.
-
Carmel Books, I forgot to say that I didn’t know about Bishop Williamson’s case being dropped. Notice that the anti-Catholic and anti-SSPX media here didn’t report that although they were quick to report and keep reporting the fact that he was being taken to court. They really are a bunch of hypocrites and I think it will take more than Leveson to sort them out.
-
I thought that was a very informative article. IT really is quite simple: if you accept Fatima (remember Pope John Paul II said that the message of Fatima placed an “obligation” on the Church) then you must reject the Vatican II sham. Similarly, if you accept the sham, you must reject Fatima. I don’t elieve the two can co-exist.
What must we do? We all know the answer. Cling to the true Faith. Defend the true Faith! Reject the New Mass and the New Catechism (along with every other “new”). Only attend the Traditional Mass, pray the Rosary, offer sacrifices, make the First Sautrdays, wear the Brown Scapular and keep the Commandments.
A final message for the “we must pray and pray only” brigade. Pope Saint Pius X said that Catholic Action should consist of prayer, piety and works. Sanctify your own soul, but don’t forget that the best way to sanctify other people is to defend the Truth.
-
IMPORTANT NOTICE….
The Judgment has gone against the two midwives – I’ve posted a link to the SPUC report on the original topic thread
click here to comment on the original thread -
Editor,
Yes, it is better that the child abuse scandal be acknowledged as part of the diabolical crisis within the Church than be considered par of the course in the Catholic priesthood! And who knows,maybe we can get the non Catholics to believe the message of Fatima and through them get the Vatican to act!
PerthshireTroublemaker,
I am curious, how did you arrive at the conclusion that the ‘meat of the matter was Jew-hating’?
-
I was just about to ask PerthshireTroublemaker the same thing. I will be interested to hear his reply.
-
Dear Monica,
I couldn’t agree more. In fact it is not just the secular and anti-SSPX media that are refusing to report it but even some of what is considered to be traditionally-minded Catholic media.
That I cannot understand. Perhaps it is a further example of the diabolical disorientation that Editor asks about.
Re: the child abuse scandal, awful as it is, some interesting figures emerge from official investigative statistics. When comparing the prevalence of child abuse in secular society to its prevalence in Church structures it is found to be hundreds of times more prevalent in secular society.
Carmel Books has stock of some handy leaflets if anyone is interested.
-
It is well known that Blessed John Paul consecrated russia in 1984. Everything else is conspiracy.
-
Oh and the sspx arent in full communion so Williamson’s case should be of no interest to a real Catholic,
-
Montini – your last 2 posts are very wide of the mark.
Pope John Paul II admitted that his ’84 consecration did not meet Our Lady’s requirements and the SSPX ARE in communion although their situation is irregular. This is all so widely publicised on the ‘net that I’m surprised you dont know this.
-
margaret I have heard all the theorie on the internet that the consecration didnt take place because Blessed JP added a prayer at the end. The simple fact is that Russia is in the world. Anyway, Sr Lucie admitted that consecration was done…”We now wait for the miracle”
Who said the sspx were in full communion?
-
Montini, you are talking nonsense.
-
I suspect Perthshire Troublemaker’s response may be due to either diabolical, disorientation or perhaps he is actually a Freemason troll who jumps to the defence of Zionism. He summarily dismissed The Protocols which I mentioned in an earlier post, and refused to discuss his reason for branding them a forgery.
There are many many publications drawing on first sources in history that clearly prove that Political Zionism and Communism were created by men who claim to be Jews, although that claim is a false claim for 90% of those who term themselves as such are decended from the Khazar kingdom having no ethnic links with the Holy Land. The Zionists present themselves as representative of the Jewish people yet they were rejected by the overwhelming majority of European Jews between the two World Wars.
The editor can easily discover exactly who I am, as she has my email address and is free to make any enquiries she may wish to determine if I am a faithful Catholic who favours Tradition. Can you, Perthshire Troublemaker, present credentials that you are what you claim to be?
-
Montini,
I guess Our Lady knew that Russia was in the world when she asked for it, by name, specifically, to be consecrated to her Immaculate Heart. So why didn’t she just ask for the consecration of the world? And if you know anything about the Fatima situation you will know that the only authentic, reliable source from priests who knew her personally, you will know that Sr Lucy did NOT agree that the consecration was done as Our Lady requested. The enemies of Fatima made that up and continue to propagate the lies.
As for the SSPX, Montini, if you look up the meaning of “excommunicated” and you then reverse that, since the SSPX excommunications of the four bishops were lifted, they must be in full communion but in an irregular situation. Again, all this is well covered out there – are you having a laugh?
-
Robhaidheuch
With respect, there’s not much point in telling Montini that he’s talking nonsense without giving some evidence. I, too, find it really hard to take when the same old same old arguments come up but that’s what is going on today – modern Catholics really need re-educating from zero (no offence, Montini, but that’s a fact.)
-
Margaret Mary,
I agree with you completely. Education is the key. It’s not easy for a Catholic to accept that his clergy have led him astray and distorted the message of Our Lady. We should avoid name calling and aim to help others.
Montini,
Take a look at http://www.fatima.org. I’m sure you can read a book called “The Devil’s Final Battle” free online. That would be a very good place to start. Do a google search for “Heaven’s Key To Peace” and watch that video. Another good video is “The Secret Still Hidden”.
-
The subject of the Jews is an endless labyrinth….but I wonder if Perthshire is aware, for example, that the 8 Class A stockholders of our Federal Reserve Bank are all “Jewish” banking dynasties and their American agents? Rothschild, Warburg, Lazard Freres, Israel Moses Seif: the 4 houses. Their American agents: Rockefeller, Morgan, Kuhn Loeb (Jewish), Goldman Sachs (Jewish).
I also wonder whether he is aware of the almost uniform Jewish ethnicity of the Bolsheviks, trained on the Lower East Side of Manhattan by Trotsky (Jewish). Not to mention the $12 million provided by Jacob Schiff (Jewish) of Kuhn Loeb, to fund the “revolution.”
I wonder if he is aware that it was “Jewish” bankers who were responsible for the mass murder of their Jewish brethren during WWII? Who funded Hitler, Perthshire?
Speaking of Hitler, it was his hatred of those “Jewish” bankers that led him, I believe, into a hatred of the entire race. He blamed the bankers for the despoliation of Germany after WWI, a direct result of the Versailles Treaty.
I also wonder whether Perthshire is familiar with this article:
http://www.fisheaters.com/jewsvaticanii.html
(“How the Jews Changed Catholic Thinking”)
-
Perthshire, however, appears to be correct about Gerry Matatics. It seems Mr. M. is a sedevacantist. See this article, esp. about 2/3 of the way down, with his 3 syllogisms:
-
Editor
Fr Rodriguez repeats the heretofore apocryphal story of Pope Leo XIII’s vision of satan’s boast of destroying the Church in 100 years:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2Wcgc-Rj1M
about 8:50 ff.
-
Petrus I had a look at the link you gave and did a search. It seems this Fr Gruner is suspended and not in good standing. Why should I believe the word of a crackpot priest and not my bishops, cardinals and Pope??
-
Montini, if you read this book online, you can decide for yourself if Fr Gruner is a “crackpot priest” or not. http://www.fatimapriest.com/content.html
Don’t fall for the propaganda about him, please. Check the facts. He is, I am certain, a holy priest.
-
Montini
It is most unfortunate that you thus far have done nothing but repeat the party line about the SSPX and Father Gruner. Please cite the sources of your information – which is completely and utterly wrong – when you make your posts, so that we can correct them.
I also ask you to think before you say things like “The simple fact is that Russia is in the world.” If Russia is in the world, then why did Our Lady specifically ask for the consecration of Russia? Why did she not ask for the consecration of the world?
You are either being evasive, or not thinking clearly. You are also apparently not aware of the internal war against the Church/Tradition that has been going on since at least 1960, when John 23 refused to perform the consecration as requested.
BTW, if the Consecration is completed as you state, then where is the evidence of the conversion of Russia? On the contrary, all the evidence points clearly to a lack of conversion of Russia, and the continued spread of her errors throughout the world.
Are you also going to tell us that the “new springtime” of Vatican II has been a resounding success?
-
The church is smaller since vatican 2 because it was purged of its old fashioned pharisism. My parish is vibrant and alive. Youth group, folk group, taize group, rosary group, healing group etc. We are alive! This is all down to V2.
-
What does a “youth group” or “folk group” or “taize group” or “healing group” have to do with Catholicism? I bet even the rosary group says the luminous mysteries.
A better test would be how many of your parishioners are using contraceptives or approve or tolerate the gay lifestyle?
-
You have no way to make such judgements. I’ve never mentioned my parish. I don’t stick my nose in so why should you? Have you always been moral? You need to be more pastoral.
-
Montini
You have “stuck your nose” in our blog, so naturally, you might expect that we would ask questions of you.
I am glad that you have a “vibrant” parish, but let’s see if all those vibrations are Catholic or not. Here are some indicators that the Catholic Faith is being practiced:
-Are there long lines for Confession every week?
-Does your PP preach on the Four Last Things?
-Is there Adoration and Benediction?.
-Do people kneel to receive the Blessed Sacrament, and on the tongue?
-Do people believe in the Real Presence?
-Do they kneel before sitting in the pew?
-Is there a Rosary before Mass?
-Are there only boys serving at the altar?
-Do the women cover their heads for Mass?
-Do the people observe days of fasting and abstinence?I’m sure others could add numerous indicators, but I’m curious as to your response to these. And please respond without name-calling. So far you have called Father Gruner a crackpot, and by inference, called us “pharisees.” You call that being “pastoral”?
-
Torkey I didn’t realise this was a closed, private club! I’m sorry! Should I have asked permission to post on your blog? Is there no free speech?
There’s a modest queue for confession.
We have adoration and kneelers.
There’s a rosary before Mass.
People stand, as the Bishops have decreed.
Ladies don’t cover their heads generally as this requirement is removed from the new canon law.
Girls serve because it is allowed.
Do people believe in the Real Presence? Do you want me to stop and ask everyone?
Do people fast and abstain? Will I ask them how much they’ve eaten and what they had for their dinner?Your list is very silly and most of the things you can’t measure stop being a pharisee and take the plank out your own eye. Can you only be a good Catholic in the SSPX?
-
Montini,
I’ve read all your posts and I want you to know that you are very welcome here. Your questions have made us all think and some very educational responses have been posted as a result. Thanks to all who have responded, very patiently, to Montini.
If I may suggest, Montini, it would be helpful to frame your comments just a wee bit “softer” – I’m a very hard-headed gal and I enjoy the cut and thrust of debate and I thrive on the old saying: “sticks and stones…” However, others might not feel the same way, so I would encourage you to take account of that and perhaps ask your questions or make your comments with just a tad more gentleness.
And I’d urge everyone reading this to check out the links that bloggers have been kind enough to post for Montini – they are all excellent.
-
Montini, has your parish priest ever given a homily that deals with the danger of souls being lost and going to hell? Do you think it alright for non-Catholics to receive Holy Communion? Is it appropriate for a parish in England to allow a man wearing a dress and a woman’s wig to read an epistle from the altar sanctuary? Do you believe Bishop Devine is right to impose a ban on Catholic schoolteachers giving a lesson on Purgatory? Leaving aside Baptism of Desire, is it possible for non-Catholics to go to heaven, or is salvation only to be gained in The Holy Catholic Church?
-
Aren’t some of the things you suggest extreme examples? I’ve never seen a man in a wig and dress anywhere let alone in my parish.
As for is it possible for non-Catholics to go to Heaven, of course it is. You cannot put limits on the mercy of God. Can they be saved because of their nonICatholic faith? No. In spite of, yes.
-
Robhaidheuch
You wrote: “Do you believe Bishop Devine is right to impose a ban on Catholic schoolteachers giving a lesson on Purgatory?”
That’s shocking. I think Bishop Devine is President of the Catholic Education Commission which means his ban would affect all Scottish Catholic pupils.
What proof do you have that this is true because it ought to be more widely known. Maybe Catholic Truth would publish it and ask him about it. It is really shocking to suppress an important Catholic doctrine like Purgatory.
-
The problem with purgatory is that its not biblical. Is it revealed as infallible?
-
Montini,
In the Creed at every Mass we say that we believe in the Communion of Saints – that is, the saints in Heaven, the suffering souls in Purgatory, and the Church on earth. So, yes, if it an infallible teaching of the Church.
You can read all about it here
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12575a.htm -
Montini, Purgatory is biblical. The 2nd. Book of Maccabes clearly relates Judas Maccabeus instruction for a collection to be made to be sent as a sin offering to the Temple for those of his army who had died in a state of sin during the battle that had just ended. Making an offering for the departed souls implicitly instructs us with infallible scriptural authority that Purgatory awaits souls that remain in the friendship of God. Our Lord taught that there shall be no release until every debt is paid for.
The information regarding the ban on schoolteachers teaching Purgatory came from a direct source, a teacher from the Motherwell diocese. He informed me that he was admonished by his boss not to teach Purgatory and to abide by the diocesan directive that primary school children were not to be taught lessons on Purgatory.
-
Alert for Robhaidheuch
I’ve emailed you and would appreciate your reply as soon as possible.
Say something – even if it’s only “goodbye”!
-
Robhaidheuch,
Aye, aye, Clouseau, I’m a freemason. Fair cop and all that. You got me good!
You want to change your name to illuminati hunter or to something that suits because Robhaidheuch sounds like an old man who rummages around his pockets all day looking for fag doubts. Its a pants name and won’t do for a super slueth such as yourself. You’re too clever for that. However, I would advise you to fight the urge to wear your skants outside your trousers. Remember, you need to learn to fly first. So don’t be rushing things just because you have super duper powers.
Your the man!
-
Well Troublemaker, give me your reason for defending the Zionist tribe so vociferously when their prints have been found at every major crime scene (e.g.World Wars, Revolutions, and Twin Towers type events) ?
Your recent comments make you appear as if you are quoting from the Lodge Instruction Manual on dealing with those ‘anti-semites’ who attack our founders, those worshipful grand-masters of Zion.
-
I’m interested too in Perthshire Troublemaker’s rationale for his vociferous defence of Zionism – what is going on here?
PT, your remark about “illuminati hunter” suggests you are one of those “conspiracy theory” bashers, ie you have been duped by the propaganda into seeing “theory” where there is, in fact “conspiracy.”
As one top lawyer said, every time there are multiple defendants in a court case, we have a conspiracy theory. The trick is to look at the evidence and work out the truth.
Why not do that, seriously, instead of expending your energy beating up straw men of your own making. No-one here is anti-Semitic, or, more precisely, “anti-Jew”.
Here is a link to a previous blog discussion on the topic of anti-Semitism which I think might help clarify matters.
http://www.catholictruthscotland.com/blog/2009/02/the-truth-about-anti-semitism-an-open-letter-to-the-secretary-of-state-for-scotland/ -
Rob,
I’m quoting from the lodge?
Hmm, I don’t ever have to write another word ever again because this shows you to be a shengus waffler of the highest order. You’ve got delusions of adequacy. But I’ll tell you what, Editor has my email, and she can pass it on to you and we can rectify these delusions. What we can do is arrange to meet somewhere were you can call me a freemason to my face, which you will admit, is the honorable thing to do. I mean, what man wants to call another man a horrible thing such as a freemason but do it from behind a computer screen were it makes him look like a coward? You must have wanted to do that to a Freemason for a long time. So here’s your chance and that way you don’t have to hide behind a computer screen. How does that sound?
Editor,
I don’t see how I’m defending Zionism. I’m simply disagreeing with somebody’s views on a topic. Hardly makes me a zionist/freemason. I mean, c’mon; I was born in Govan. How many Zionist freemason’s do you know that were born in Govan?
PS, thanks for the link: I’ll go have a look see.
-
I’ve been suffering from blogphobia lately so I haven’t been keeping up with threads. But I have just seen this:
Can you, Perthshire Troublemaker, present credentials that you are what you claim to be?
I know Perthshire Troublemaker and know that he is a bloody good man, a fine husband and father, and – yes – a traditional Catholic.
Robhaidheuch, I have to say you’re being ridiculous.
-
I just wanted to comment on the Khazar question.
The “strong Khazar” hypothesis looks less tenable in light of a recent genetic study.
Therefore, the idea that the Ashkenazim are simply Khazars with no Middle Eastern ancestry is untenable.
It is more likely that the diaspora Jews intermarried with the upper class of the Khazars rather than with the general population.
As someone who has Jewish ancestry on both sides of my family (mixed with Scots, Irish, and Swedish), I think it essential that as a Church we start praying fervently for the conversion of the Jews now and evangelising them. But whenever I raise the subject some people’s eyes start to pop. It appears I have mentioned the unmentionable.
The Catholic Church – the New Israel – is their rightful inheritance, as St Paul said. And since there is positively no salvation outside of the Church, for a Catholic to refuse to pray for the conversion of the Jews – or of anyone – is a terrible sin against charity. How many Jewish souls are lost through ecumenism?
-
Augustine,
“I know Perthshire Troublemaker and know that he is a bloody good man, a fine husband and father, and – yes – a traditional Catholic.”
Thanks for those kind words. And thanks for not mentioning anything about bear wrestling. I’ll post that £5 first thing. Cheers mate!
-
Well, Augustine, if you think the Jews need to convert to Catholicism, stand by for accusations that you are an anti-Semite. You ARE brave!
However, Augustine, I really don’t think there is any need to jump to the defence of Perthshire Troublemaker – the comments that offend him are no big deal as I’ve already said on the lead thread, a little while ago – take a look. I strongly dislike this habit of taking offence – St Paul teaches us that charity does not take offence. I’ve just trawled to see if I could find the “offensive” post from Rob… but it must be way up top, couldn’t find it, can’t be bothered searching any longer – so why hang on to this perceived offence? Nursing a grievance is uncharitable. And plain daft, if you ask me, which you didn’t.
And while I’m in fighting mood, allow me to say that I am always puzzled to hear people claiming the title “traditional Catholic” – I was around when every orthodx Catholics was “traditional” although we’d never have thought of using the term. Sadly, the meaning has been reduced to embrace anyone and everyone who attends a traditional Latin Mass.
But going to a Traditional Mass does not a “traditional Catholic” make, Augustine. Not by a long chalk. Even in SSPX chapels there are attendees who go because they have a liking for Latin, or Gregorian chant, or some other aesthetic reason. Far from being a centre of excellence for zeal and Catholic Action, all too many self-styled “traditional” Catholics, even in SSPX chapels, are Sunday observance types only. Not all – but too many.
Having said that, frankly, at this stage in the crisis in the Church, and notwithstanding that there are some good priests out there (not a lot, very few in Glasgow) I am now firmly of the opinion that people with even a modicum of Catholic sense about them should be signalling their disgust with the widespread apostasy around us by supporting the only group of priests in the world who stood up to be counted at the outset, and refused to subscribe in any way, to the “reforms” of Vatican II – the SSPX. Anyone who seriously wants to safeguard their spiritual wellbeing and protect their children from the poison in the diocesan parishes, and who wishes to consider themselves to be “traditionalists” should be heading for the nearest SSPX chapel. There’s one in the centre of Glasgow (9.45.a.m.) and one in Edinburgh (1pm).
I most certainly would NOT support Una Voce Masses a second longer than need be, for a number of reasons, not least the fact that their own President fulfils his Sunday obligation at the novus ordo Mass in St Aloysius Garnethill, where the chances of encountering an INvalid Mass are very high indeed.
For the record, too, I’m glad to hear your view, Augustine, that PT is a “… good man, fine husband and father and… traditional Catholic”. No disrespect intended, but that is the very LEAST I would expect from any human being (good husband and father) and my comments about the definition of a “traditional Catholic” you and he can take or leave as applies.
But allow me to say this; I do NOT know Robhaidheuch personally. I don’t know whether he is single, married, ordained, nice, not nice, whatever. I don’t know. What I DO know is that the import of his remarks have been greatly exaggerated and nursed to no good end. I think he has remained calm and polite in the face of the written equivalent of the kind of barracking that, had it been directed at me, would have seen me ANYTHING but calm and polite.
I say all of the above in the full and certain knowledge that toys may now be thrown out of prams and pronouncements made that the doorstep of this blog will neve be darkened again etc etc yawn yawn…
Behave yourselves. Stick to the issues and….
Get yourselves to the nearest SSPX chapel asap – you know it makes sense!
-
Mme Editor,
I understand someone who is a traditional Catholic to be a person who gives assent to all of the infallible teachings of the Church and who withholds assent to the recent statements of the ordinary (non-infallible) magisterium where those teachings are in clear conflict with traditional Catholic teaching. Sadly, such statements have been legion over the last 40 years.
That is where the distinction between a ‘conservative’ Catholic and a traditional Catholic appears. The former adheres to every statement that the Holy Father makes even to the point of violating the principle of non-contradiction. The spectacle of ‘conservative’ Catholics performing mental somersaults to justify the Assissi gatherings is highly unedifying to any convert, as I myself am.
It’s simply wrong to say that traditional Catholicism is to be found in the Society and nowhere else. There are many good diocesan priests who love the Traditional Latin Mass, not because of aesthetics but because they believe it to be a far more adequate expression of the Catholic theology of the Mass. They have no illusions that the New Mass is deeply and irrevocably flawed (though in principle entirely valid).
Now, those priests suffer under their local Ordinary for the sake of their flocks. They usually get sent to the crappiest parts of the diocese and are watched with hawk-like eyes. They celebrate the New Mass because that is all that their parishioners know. They start to introduce the Traditional Mass gradually so as to acquaint the people with it and to not scare them away. Remember, most people sitting in the pews (that is, those who are left) in Scotland have been brainwashed into believeing that a Traditional Mass is somewhere between a Neanderthal cave ritual and a Nuremberg Rally.
My own parish priest is a case in point. He is a very good and devout priest who suffers terribly at the spectacle of a Church in self-demolition. He celebrates the Traditional Mass when he can. He preaches the Catholic faith every Sunday has had many complaints to the Bishop, a petition against him, and people getting up and walking out during sermons. I’m not criticising Society priests in any way, but very few of them must face this kind of hostility every week.
Be not over hasty to criticise priests who are not in the Society of St Pius the X. The battle for souls is largely being fought in the diocesan parishes in the face of a terrible apostasy from the faith. Don’t reject out of hand those ordained men who feel that they cannot abandon the souls who have been committed to their care.
Again, there is absolutely no criticism of the Society comtained in what I’ve said here. I’ve spoken to one lady in the Glasgow SSPX chapel who had lost her faith after the ‘changes’ and only returned by finding the Society. She said that people who go to SSPX have often suffered a great deal and I know that’s true.
The thing that the Perthshire Troublemaker is not saying about the bear-wrestling is that the bears in question are koala bears.
-
Augustine, speaking of the SSPX priests you write:
“…very few of them must face this kind of hostility every week.”
You put your finger on a key problem. I know the good priest of whom you speak above – he is outstanding. That is, he (literally) stands alone.
But do you want your children witnessing people walking out during sermons delivered by a sound priest? How to explain that? Can people “disagree” with Father when he is teaching doctrine? Do you want your children having to read bulletins and hear announcements about ecumenical meetings and “services”? Do you want them picking up and persuing the Catholic newspapers, packed with liberal ideas? Etc etc.
My point is that it it not ABOUT individual priests, it is about the entire diocesan ethos. It is about whether or not you wish to support Counterfeit Catholicism or send a clear signal to the powers-that-be that you refuse so to do. LIke it or not, at some point your children will hear the archbishop speaking from your pulpit. He will be delivering a distinctly different sermon or homily from that of your PP. How do you explain that? And what about when your priest is moved to another parish? What then?
It took me long enough to reach this conclusion, Augustine, and I repeat it, having thought about it from every angle. When I meet with lapsed Catholics who are thinking of returning, I do not recommend any parish where the priest is sound – however highly I esteem him – I tell them go to the SSPX where they will find, not perfect priests or perfect laity, but Catholic doctrine and sacraments. We can live with the human shortcomings, but, I tell them, do not risk your spiritual wellbeing by taking in any poison whatsoever. Even a drop of deadly poison can kill.
Even in the parish of the “outstanding” priest mentioned in your post, there is no Sunday Traditional Latin Mass – so parishioners, young and old, are forced to fulfil their Sunday obligation by attending the novus ordo – which, allow me to repeat yet again, no matter how “reverently” it is said, is still “a striking departure from Catholic theology of the Mass” to quote two of the Council Fathers deeply concerned at this innovation, which is, in fact, an attack on the Mass.
As for your definition of a “traditional” Catholic – you omit a key component which is precisely what I have just said: no truly Catholic soul would risk their own or their children’s salvation by placing them in a situation where they will be forced to witness anti-Catholic behaviour and hear black propaganda from other parishioners or visiting clergy. It’s that bigger picture, Augustine. Bigger than even the best sound priest, is the entire ethos in which that sound priest is -sadly – forced to do his best to teach the Faith. I don’t want my peace of soul disturbed at Mass by the protestantised laity walking out in protest at Catholic doctrine and I know that all the young parents who attend the SSPX Mass feel exactly the same.
I’m now off to attend the midday Mass in a Glasgow parish where I know the priest to be very sound. He is, in fact, outstanding!
-
I think you’re right in raising the issue of children since we have a daughter and hope to have more, God willing. In about 5 years she will start understanding what is being said from the pulpit so it is a concern to us what she is taught. Thank God for our priest. In the case of the Archbishop, the fact is that what he says is often so…well…gelatinous that it isn’t clear what he is actually try to say. I remember sitting during a sermon that he gave at St Patrick’s and I found myself desperately fighting sleep. I turned to my neighbour and saw that he was already sound. In the case of priests we know to be brazenly heterodox we just won’t go.
But let’s also accept the fact the Society is not without its problems too. From what I have heard over the years, it seems that often SSPX parishes can be like pressure cookers with any number of personal animosities and arguments going on at one time. There can be a terrible lack of unity between the parishioners. And I think that the Society priests would be first to acknowledge that. I think there’s an explanation in that people tend to find the Society after being badly hurt in their own parish or simply worn down by the terrible things going on in the wider Church. They can take a lot of their hurt in with them and develop the attitude “never again”. And let’s not get on to ‘personal pews’…
Also, it’s true that there are far more children at St Andrews in Glasgow than many diocesan parishes. But it is also true that there a small number of people who attend Society Masses who apparently can’t bear the sight of a child in a way that you simply don’t find in diocesan parishes. Although, I understand that things have got better over the years as more families have come in.
Further, I’m aware that there can often be things done in reaction to the crisis in the Church that have no justification in traditional Catholic teaching. In fact, they seem to be done on the initiative of the laity and not the priests. For example, new mothers abstaining from breast-feeding believing that they are obliged to conceive again as soon as possible. Which brings up the whole question of periodic abstinence which I know some SSPX attendees frown upon but which is entirely Catholic provided it is done for a sufficiently grave reason. I get the impression that there can sometimes be a sense of pressure on women that they should have as many children as possible regardless of health concerns.
Saying all this, I am not criticising the Society and I know that with regards to the last point this a relatively infrequent occurrence and not to be exaggerated. But being an SSPX parishioner isn’t a bed of roses by any means.
-
“SSPX parishes can be like pressure cookers with any number of personal animosities and arguments going on at one time. There can be a terrible lack of unity between the parishioners.”
Augustine
Having been all over the map myself (born Catholic, raised Protestant, returned to the Church in 2000, then to SSPX in 2009), I can state with absolute certainty that Christianity brings out the worst in people, on a personal level. Every Church I’ve ever been in is full of intrigue, dispute, factions, petty nonsense, etc., and the SSPX parishes are no different. But you are being distracted from the main issue, which is: what is being celebrated at the Altar, and what is being said from the pulpit. (After I conclude this long-winded post, I’ll post again the story of how God arranged for me to leave the Protestants – it bears directly on this subject).
We humans will always be human, after all, but there is only one Tradition that can address our weaknesses and “cure” them.
Editor (and Augustine, and whoever else would like to comment)
I have an eminently practical question related to “N.O.” vs real Faith. At choir practice the other night, a woman started chatting with me about a group email I had sent in January. It was a request for a voice teacher for the Academy in our SSPX parish. She was apparently confused about what the SSPX was, thinking it was “conservative,” so I said there was a big difference between “conservative” and Tradition. Her reply took me aback: she was apparently aware of “Tradition,” but said, “But there’s all those RULES…”
At that point we had to take our seats, and it’s a good thing because I really didn’t know how to respond to that. Later on I thought of 2 things: one, the “rules” in the SSPX are actually the same as in the mainstream Church, except that in the SSPX they are actually taught and followed. Two, that since we are all children in the eyes of God, and must even be like little children to enter His Kingdom, we need rules and discipline to guide us to this precious goal.
But not sure either of those would have been effective. What say you?
-
Long-Winded Post #2
aka How God Kicked Me Out of the Protestant ChurchIn 1996, my family was a member of a small Protestant Church – the same denomination, in fact, I had grown up in. That year, my eldest son was dating the eldest daughter of a “prominent” (take with a grain of salt) family in the church, both of them in high school. After a year or so, he apparently dumped her, as we say in America.
Well, the following year, she decided to have her revenge. My son had started going to our local university, but had dropped out. The young lady, however, told her parents that (a) he had been kicked out for doing drugs, and (b) that he had no place to live and that we refused to let him back in the house.
Neither of these stories was true, but the parents, who didn’t like us, began to spread this rumor around the church – and people actually believed them! I found out about it in the fall of 1998, wrote a nasty letter to the Board, and exited stage left. This was actually a last straw situation, since I had already long grown tired of the minister’s pleading for those of “different sexual orientations.”
Moral of the story: don’t worry about what goes on before and after Mass. It’s what happens during Mass that counts. The real Mass, that is…
-
Well said, Torkay.
Augustine, I’ve never hear all that before about pressure to have as many children as possible to the extent of discouraging breast feeding. That is ridiculous and I know for a fact that it does not come from the clergy. That’s some daft layperson with half a brain and there is, I admit no shortage of them up at St Andrew’s. We used to be able to say “more Catholic than the Pope” but unfotunately we ALL have to be more Catholic than the Pope these days, if we are to cling on to the Faith!
As for your claim about some older people disliking children or some such remark, it’s more a case of some of them disliking the distraction that can be caused by crying etc. Sensible mothers take their babies/toddlers out if they get too noisy but, anyway, that is not something that is unique to the SSPX chapel in Glasgow – don’t the modernist parishes build “crying rooms” to exclude noisy children altogether? I’m told that those are nothing more than playrooms, where children eat, play and are merry, instead of learning from a very early age how to behave in Mass. One of my own Great Nephews was extremely distracting as a toddler, wriggling about, although never noisy – it was my sworn duty to keep taking him out to settle him down. Gradually he (and his younger brother) learned how to behave in Mass and he is now an altar server, fully recollected and has become – in the best sense – a pious little boy.
Overall, on balance, if we were weighing up the pros and cons, Augustine, assuming that we both agree that protecting the faith and morals of children is a primary duty, the SSPX chapel is the place to be. Nobody has to mix with the few nutters up there and, in fact, the priests have made practial changes in the tearoom after Mass precisely (I imagine) to cut down on the danger of uncharitable encounters. So, there really is no excuse at all for anyone not attending the SSPX Masses – and sending an unmistakeable signal to the hierarchy of Scotland that they’ve had enough of their Modernist experiment.
Final word on the business of animosity in parishes – even around the Lenten Lunch table today in the Glasgow parish where I attended the TLM the discussion became rather fraught as some parishioners defended the new Mass, the minute they heard some of us expressing delight that the old rite has returned. That’s the nature of the crisis, Augustine – the Faith has been attacked and undermined and the faithful divided. Luther said “Destroy the Mass and you destroy the Church” – and boy did it work (humanly speaking!)
C O R R E C T I O N …
In one of my lengthy posts above I described the Chairman of Una Voce (Scotland) as the “President” – I met him this morning and he tells me that his title is “Chairman”. He considers the fact that he fulfils his Sunday Obligation at the novus ordo Mass in St Aloysius Jesuit Church in Garnethill as his business, nobody else’s, so he may well come on here to call me names.
Bring it on! (ps Eileenanne, be polite to him… that’s a joke…)
-
Very interesting, Editor. It may be his personal business to attend the pseudo-mass, but as “Chairman” of Una Voce, shouldn’t he be seen publicly attending and supporting the TLM?
Which is a nice way of saying, if this fellow heading up Una Voce doesn’t know better, then what the heck is the point of his organization?
PS: Since he supports the pseudo-mass, shouldn’t his title be “Table” instead of “Chair”?
-
I have followed the last few posts on this thread with great interest. As a father of young children who has attended the SSPX Chapel in Glasgow exclusively for the last three years, I think I should speak.
My children were both raised in the SSPX Chapel. Both were noisy at times, but my wife has the common sense to take them out – not at the sound of the first scream, but only if it continues with no sign of stopping. Thankfully, my two boys have learnt that Mass is a time to be quiet and pray. However, when they were younger (and noisier) I never, ever had anyone complain to me about the noise. I’ve heard this accusation flying many times and I’d be interested to know where it comes from.
Similarly, I’ve never heard a priest of the SSPX or any layperson claim that women shouldn’t breastfeed. That is crackpot stuff. Again, I’ve heard this accusation, but I’ve never seen any evidence that it’s true. I wish people would stop repeating these silly rumours and making it sound like the whole chapel is barking mad.
We have only ever had positive experiences. I’ve no idea who is fighting, who is talking to whom etc (although I’m usually fighting with the Editor!). Most of time, it’s all pretty normal. I think some people like to dramatise the whole thing and make it sound a lot more glamorous than it actually it is!
Torkay is absolutely right – focus of the Sacraments. There is just nowhere else safe. It’s not about individual priests. It’s about raising children in thoroughly Catholic environments. If we are blessed with a daughter, she will cover her head at Mass. She won’t be receiving Holy Communion in the hand and we won’t be serving on the altar. If we attended a Novus Ordo parish she would see all of these things. No matter how good your PP is, he’s only ever one directive from the bishop away from being moved.
The only thing a Catholic parent can do is attend the SSPX. There simply isn’t any other way. It would be infinitely easier for me to attend my parish. My parish priest is a nice guy. But we are talking about Heaven and Hell! Why take the chance?
-
Petrus, were you realy saying thatt taking your children out of Mass if they are disruptive is your WIFE’S job!! Shouldn’t you at least take it in turns to miss part of the Mass?
I think parents face a dilemma over this business of taking children out when they are noisy at Mass. Mine weren’t great in church at a certain stage of their lives, and while I was anxious that they did not upset fellow parishioners, I also felt that taking them out might be exactly what they wanted, and that doing so might simply be reinforcing the unacceptable behaviour. Thankfully, however, that phase of their life passed, despite the way we handled it, or because of it, or just because they grew up! Parents at that stage should take comfort from the fact that it is temporary. My little grandson, now four, has improved by leaps and bounds since the birth of his wee sister.
-
Eileenanne,
I think most mothers would want to attend to babies or toddlers themselves in that sort of situation. I really can’t stand this male/female “equality” in everything philosophy that has taken root, thanks to the feminist movement. I’m sure if Petrus’s wife wanted him to take his turn, he would take his turn.
-
Well said, Monica. And, not to gloat, but the new SSPX churches like ours have “cry rooms” where the parent (usually the mother, ahem) can go with a fussy child. The room has a large glass window facing into the sanctuary, and a speaker, so there is no separation from Mass.
-
I would never have dreamt of using a “cry room”. If anyone is to be separated from the rest of the congregation it should be those who are intolerant of young children. Let them be the ones to be separated from the Mass by the glass window, not the parents and children.
-
Sorry, Eileenanne, but I think that is highly unreasonable.
Noisy children ARE distracting during Mass. That is understandable. They’re only little and need to be trained. But a silly attitude from parents doesn’t help. The idea that their child is to be allowed free rein to behave as they wish and the rest of us have to put up with it is a darned cheek, frankly.
I’ve sat behind or next to parents who indulge their offspring and who make very little effort to keep them quiet and it is not easy to stop myself, sometimes, from saying something. I have, a couple of times (not for a good while right enough) got up and moved seats to try to get some peace. I’ve even had children from behind playing and touching my feet, bag etc. and the parents do sweet nothing about it! What chance to the kids have with parents who do not set an example of consideration and courtesy towards others? The priests are scared to say a word for fear of being bad mouthed and no matter how nicely I would say something (I never have) I’m sure I’d be accused of being uncharitable or a child-hater. It’s really ridiculous.
I am all for bringing children to Mass from the earliest possible age. I just would ask parents to show some consideration for the rest of the congregation – and anyway, they need to train their children from the start.
I’m not saying you are one of those parents but, to be perfectly honest, you sound like one.
-
Eileenanne,
With respect, once again you are looking for faults in another’s posts. It’s not very charitable to always assume the worst! As people have said earlier, these are the actions of a troll; always waiting to pounce on the smallest thing. Not very charitable!
Of course I wasn’t suggesting that I should never take a turn of taking my children out. The simple fact is, the children were very young when they cried during Mass and nine times out of ten it was because they weree hungry and needed breastfed (take note!). Now, only my wife can do that. Not very equal is it? Maybe you should take that up with God, Eileenanne.
I think the suggestion that everyone else should leave if a baby is crying is absolutely insane. Get a grip! If the priest is trying to deliver his sermon and he is distracted by a screaming baby, surely he will be distracted too. Should he leave? If a baby is screaming it usually needs something. It’s not good for him or her to be left screaming either.
Parents need to use their common sense. I don’t believe they should be taken out at the first whimper, but if they are screaming then yes.
-
It’s funny how the business of breast feeding babies has changed. I fed mine for nearly a year each and never once had to leave Mass to do it, or to do it on a bus, or in the library or in the shops or any of the other places where modern mothers feed their babies. I have no objection to babies being fed in public – it is possible to do it very modestly and discreetly – but it’s interesting how something like that can change over time, isn’t it?
I was not suggesting an exodus of worshppers to the cry room when a baby made a noise. That would just be silly. I was suggesting that parents and children should routinely be in the church and that if a cry room already exists (I would not include one if I had a say in planning a new church) it could be used by those who don’t want to risk having their worship disrupted by a child making a noise.
-
Eileenanne,
Sorry – but I don’t see how the breastfeeding point is relevant. Mothers do different things today, I don’t think there’s one way of doing things. However, I don’t see how that links to our discussion, unless it’s a roundabout way of criticising mothers who breastfeed during Mass…I’m sure that’s not what you were doing.
-
Eileenanne,
One thing that is VERY different from when you were a young mother is that those of us who wish to attend the Traditional Latin Mass and cannot in conscience attend the new one, have to travel for miles – we have families come from various parts of Ayrshire, from Perth and Aberdeen (some on the bus) so that is one thing. Secondly, there were several Masses from which to choose – we have one in Glasgow, one in Edinburgh. The Glasgow Mass is at 9.45. which means mothers and babies on public transport (and Petrus’s wife is one of those) have to travel from very early in the morning.
Thus, sometimes mothers may have to leave for a short time and miss part of Mass. Things are not at all the same as when you were a young mother, Eileennanne – not the same at all.
-
I intended no criticism of Petrus’s wife. My comment was genuinely an observation and not a criticism, and, of course, off topic.
-
Eileenanne,
Certainly no offence taken here. I didn’t think you were criticising anyone.
-
Torkay,
I completely agree about the Chair of Una Voce. If he doesn’t think the Latin Mass is important enough to attend on Sundays, why should anybody else?
The story is that he is in the choir at St Aloysius, so it isn’t even that he is choosing the new Mass over the old – he just thinks singing is more important. It is really disgraceful and I won’t support UV any more. -
Just thought I’d report something that happened yesterday in the SSPX tearoom, for the benefit of Augustine who raised the issue of unpleasantness even among the SSPX congregation. I pointed out that all parishes have their problems, and here’s a fresh piece of evidence.
Yesterday in the tearoom after Mass, chatting to a group of parishioners, I suddenly became aware of a young man sitting alone right beside where we were standing.
I leaned over to ask if he was new. He snapped (albeit with a “smile”) – “no – are you?”
Taken aback, I apologised and said “my fault – I just don’t recall ever seeing you before. How long have you been attending?”
He looked away for a few seconds, then said that he only came now and then to bring an elderly relative. Most of the time he went to his parish. He then enthused about the new Mass which he “understood, not like this morning…” and made some very disparaging remarks about the traditional Mass until his elderly relative approached and I was able to make my escape.
A rather unpleasant young man. His parish is welcome to him!
-
Odd ball
-
“Odd ball” – definitely, and a very bad mannered odd ball at that.
-
Patricia,
The comment “odd ball” was aimed at the editor! Joke!
-
Oh dear, Petrus – start running now!
-
That’s very good advice, Monica.
Petrus – watch it!
Comments are now closed.
75 comments