Thu 30th Oct 2014 | Last updated: Thu 30th Oct 2014 at 16:43pm

Facebook Logo Twitter Logo RSS Logo

Comment & Blogs

Should there be a Guild of Catholic Bloggers? And would it be dominated by ‘Taliban Catholics’?

Yes, there should: but let’s knock this ‘Taliban’ stuff on the head

By on Wednesday, 13 April 2011

Blogger Michael Voris is the keynote speaker at The*Other* Rome Blognic

Blogger Michael Voris is the keynote speaker at The*Other* Rome Blognic

Two website pieces on “Catholic must-reads” caught my attention yesterday: they are not entirely unconnected, I think. The first was the suggestion by “a reluctant sinner” (I couldn’t find the author’s name on his blog) that there should be a guild of Catholic bloggers.

The first question that occurs to me is this: what would be such a blog’s general complexion? There have been, from “liberal” quarters (note the inverted commas) dark grumblings about the “Catholic blogosphere” as being irredeemably reactionary (incidentally, there’s a word that could do with a bit of reclaiming: what’s wrong with reacting against undesirable developments?).

The other piece (on the website Thoughts from an Oasis in French Catholicism) is a protest by its writer, Jane Mossendew, against such reactionaries calling themselves by the liberal insult “Taliban Catholic” (an illiberal term invented by the normally moderate and genuinely liberal commentator John L Allen of the National Catholic Distorter – sorry, Reporter).

This is how Miss or Mrs Mossendew (how I wish I were called “Mossendew” rather than “Oddie”) puts it: “Now stop it you lot! A joke’s a joke among friends, but you are using the phrase more than the people who coined it as a tasteless, even spiteful insult to orthodox Catholics. If we’re not careful ‘Taliban Catholic’ risks entry in a future Oxford Dictionary as follows: ‘American journalistic phrase coined circa 2010, descriptive of orthodox Catholics (defunct). One who supported the papacy of Benedict XVI. Accepted by traditional Catholics as an estimate of their rigid, repressive and inhumane position’.”

John Allen, to be fair, isn’t himself entirely happy about having invented the term. This is how he explains himself. At a university meeting in Dallas, he spoke of the existence of two polarities in Catholic opinion: “On the one extreme lies what my friend and colleague George Weigel correctly terms ‘Catholicism Lite,’ meaning a watered-down, sold-out form of secularised religiosity, Catholic in name only. On the other is what I call ‘Taliban Catholicism’, meaning a distorted, angry form of the faith that knows only how to excoriate, condemn, and smash the TV sets of the modern world.’

“Some in the audience chuckled, but others weren’t so amused. One younger faculty member rose during the Q&A period to offer a thoughtful, and heartfelt, challenge:

” ‘To say things with clarity is not to be the Catholic Taliban,’ she said, adding that she found the phrase ‘profoundly offensive.’

” ‘There are no suicide bombers in the Catholic church,’ she said, ‘but we have had an epidemic of Catholicism Lite for the last 30 years.’ Younger Catholics, she insisted, should not be dismissed as fanatics simply because they seek ‘fidelity and clarity’.”

Quite right, in my opinion. But how come the term became so quickly accepted as an apt and permissible jibe by anti-orthodox Catholics? I suspect that, ironically, it’s a kind of back-handed tribute; the Taliban, after all, is turning out to be pretty effective: all the military might of the American-led operation in Afghanistan hasn’t smashed it yet. The Taliban has kept up with modern tactics and armaments, just as it’s the orthodox counter-revolution in the Church, rather than its enemies, who have most effectively seized the opportunities of the blogosphere.

Which brings me back to the two pieces I began by discussing.

I was right about the probable complexion of the proposed new guild of Catholic bloggers: Thoughts from an Oasis in French Catholicism, which has now declared itself in support of the guild, describes itself as “An Oasis in French, English and Welsh Catholicism.… dedicated to the support of His Holiness Benedict XVI through prayer-based apostolic action. Traditional Roman Catholic and loyally obedient to his authority as Successor of Peter”; and according to “reluctant sinner” himself (or herself), the proposed guild now has the support of Fr Tim Finigan: enough said.

Now: back to this apparently strange phenomenon, of some Catholic counter revolutionaries adopting the insult “Taliban Catholic” as a badge of honour. The trouble is that that would be taken as implying that we actually agree with the Taliban on some very nasty ideas, like forbidding the education of girls and the employment (and general liberation) of women. There are far too many aggressive secularist slurs against the Catholic Church for its supposed suppression of women for the joke to be even remotely funny: too many idiotic suggestions within the Church, too, that this is precisely what’s implied by an all-male priesthood.

If a liberal insult is to be adopted, I wouldn’t mind being called a “reactionary” because of its widespread use against people who, in Jane Mossendew’s formulation, are “loyally obedient to [Pope Benedict’s] authority as Successor of Peter” (it’s necessary to add that last pro-papal qualification, since not all those who would describe themselves as “traditional Roman Catholics” actually believe in being “loyally obedient to his authority”. And the trouble with that, I suppose, is that they’re more reactionary than I am: I just react against so-called liberals (and particularly against their illiberality); but some reactionaries react against papal authority as well. It’s all very confusing. What about distinguishing between single and double reactionaries? Alternatively, let’s call the whole thing off.

Meanwhile, the guild appears to be gathering support. It certainly has mine: there are great possibilities here. It’s already come up, I suggest, against one possible snag: that as so far conceived it seems, on the face of, it to go against the very nature of the blogosphere.

It all seems to be being conceived as a distinctly earth-bound and national rather than, like the blogosphere, operating supra-nationally in cyberspace: “The proposed Guild for Catholic Bloggers,” says “reluctant sinner”, “would need active members and a few officers – chair, secretary and treasurer – so would have to be limited to those bloggers from this country (UK), or those able to travel to Britain … The Guild might also wish to find a president, and a chaplain to celebrate its annual Mass”.

All that “chair, secretary and treasurer” stuff (not “chair”, please) seems a bit bureaucratic, maybe. Maybe not. I really don’t want to be unhelpful, I write tentatively: but couldn’t something be thought up so that the whole thing would operate essentially in cyberspace? Masses could be said internationally, in different countries: there could even be online meetings of a sort. As for officers, they could – if still thought necessary – be suggested and voted for online.

Don’t ask me how, I’m no nerd: but there must be Catholic nerds out there who could make sensible suggestions about how, technically, it might all be organised. I end uncertainly: this needs more thought, from as many people as possible. Thus, inconclusively, ends this post; not with a bang but with queries to which I have no answers.

  • Petrus

    “and I think you’ll find Modernism takes two forms”

    I disagree. There is the definition and description given in Pascendi.

    ” rewrite Catholic teaching to conform to their donatistic jansenistic narrow viewpoint and attack anyone who disagrees ; with little consideration to the truth in their eviscerating hatchet-jobs or the consequences of the sins of calumny and detraction.”

    Concrete examples, please and thank you.

    “Please provide some evidence to substantiate your claim that the UK Catholic blogosphere is modernist ?”

    Have a look at the majority of blog articles on this size and Father Z’s site. Modernist. Beautiful Catholic dcotrine in one paragraph and utter poison in the next. William Oddie’s article on Pius IX is a classic example.

    ” I can honestly say I have never found anything remotely akin to it in either tone or venom among the UK Catholic bloggers… ”

    Examples, please and thank you.

    Is Pope Pius IX’s Syllabus of Errors pure venom? Is St Pius X’s “Pascendi” venom?

  • Petrus


    Your blog articles are Modernist. I have no authority to declare you an outright Modernist, but your blog articles certainly are. None of us are immune to this crisis. I urge you to examine your positions,

    There is only one reaosn why you are now refusing to answer our posts – you can’t. You have no argument, so you choose the easy way out. Shame,

  • Petrus

    An astonishing post! No answers, so he resorts to personal insults. Again, the tactics of Modernism.

    ” IT’s NOT YOUR JOB to be “correcting errors and defending authentic Catholic teaching”.”

    Wrong, William. It is our duty as Confirmed Catholics to defend Church teaching. The Catechism of Christian Doctrine states:

    ” 262. What is Confirmation?

    Confirmation is a Sacrament by which we receive the Holy Spirit, in order to make us strong and perfect Christians and soldiers of Jesus Christ.”

    The Catechism of the Catholic Church states:

    ” For “by the sacrament of Confirmation, [the baptized] are more perfectly bound to the Church and are enriched with a special strength of the Holy Spirit. Hence they are, as true witnesses of Christ, more strictly obliged to spread and defend the faith by word and deed.” (CCC 1285)

  • Petrus

    Oh dear, William. Ignoring the issues again. Get a grip man.

  • Mike Malone

    I’m from the colonies but I’d like to chime in. What Catholics must believe is captured in Chapter 3, On Faith, paragraph 8 of the Vatican I documents. It is short, sweet and to the point:

    “8. Wherefore, by divine and catholic faith all those things are to be believed
    o which are contained in the word of God as found in scripture and tradition,
    o and which are proposed by the church as matters to be believed as divinely revealed,
    o whether by her solemn judgment
    o or in her ordinary and universal magisterium.”

    The blog is a brilliant idea, overdue and should not be restricted to Britain……

    God Bless,

    Mike Malone

  • Anonymous

    I oppose the idea of a formal guild for bloggers. I don’t see much benefit coming from it, but various needless difficulties coming about.
    I could write several paragraphs on the matter, I think, but I’ll leave it at this: Most concerns regarding the internet behavior could be readily solved if bishops routinely exercised their reasonable and rightful authority as shepherds within the Church. Much of the angst that I’ve seen on the ‘net has come about because bishops don’t insist on fidelity to the Church from politicians, from academics, or from ultra-traditional or ultra-liberal factions within the Church.
    If the bishops would insist that everyone play by the rules, follow canon law, and so forth, there’d be no need for other corrective measures.

  • Petrus

    Just provide some evidence, William. That’s all I’m asking. If you can’t back up what you are saying then it’s a sad state of affairs. Over to thee…

  • Anonymous

    Petrus: No need for examples – the whole publication [apart from extracts from Catholic classics taken out of context to imply that which it generally doesn't] STINKS!

  • Anonymous

    It’s difficult to improve on the response from Petrus below, but, since your remarks are aimed at me, I’ll respond briefly.

    As Petrus notes, you don’t respond to my post, just re-engage in personal insults. After you accused me of being just as nasty as paulpriest, I asked you to quote any of my posts that contain such personal nastiness in order for me to apologise. I said that I had never knowingly been nasty and only make personal remarks in jest, to inject some humour into the discussion. I even pointed out that for you to quote any of my posts that show nastiness would be a charity on your part, towards me. But, presumably since you couldn’t find any such personal nastiness from me, while there is plenty of it aimed at me, some from you, as a matter of fact, you decide to do what? Throw more personal abuse my way. Very disappointing William.

    Two things: firstly, this is a blog, so debating is its raison d’etre. You can’t say, when you are not on the winning team, that it is “and endless Punch and Judy quarrel.” That’s bad form.

    Secondly, to claim that lay people are not supposed to defend the Faith under attack (and to promote it, whether or not it is under attack) has to rank as the gaffe of the blogosphere, at least on 14 April, 2011 – with all due respect, of course. I say “gaffe” because I doubt very much if you really are so ignorant that you don’t know the purpose of Confirmation, to make us Soldiers of Christ (soldiers….battle…) even if you don’t know Canon Law #212 / 3: “(Christ’s faithful) have the right, indeed at times the duty, in keeping with their knowledge, competence and position, to manifest to the sacred Pastors their views on matters which concern the good of the Church (and) to make their views known to others of Christ’s faithful.”

    As for your problem with the fact that I am critical of the modern popes, Pope Benedict included, reflect on another laywoman, St Catherine of Siena, (she was a Third Order Dominican, which, if I took it into my head, I could become as well, but I won’t) who wrote the following in a letter to Pope Gregory IX:
    “Alas, Most Holy Father! At times obedience to you leads to eternal damnation.”

    I’m a real pussy cat when compared to the likes of St Catherine of Siena, but, since being cheeky to popes got her made a Doctor of the Church, I’m not mending my ways any time soon!

    Behave yourself, William.

    Luv ‘n stuff.

  • Anthony Murphy

    I grant you 2002 is earlier than I started using the term. But I have never read that author; I started using it independantly in c.2005.
    Either way, the Catholic taliban love telling everyone how “traditional” it is to whole-sale reject an ecumenical council; and how people like me are “Vatican II Catholics”; whatever that means!
    I have had it up to pussy’s bow, and I am not going to take it anymore. It seems it is now, in their warped mind, cool and proper to criticise their local bishop. Apparently if they put everyone else in the Church down, it is them and the Pope fighting the good fight against the rest of us heathens. It needs to stop. If bloggers cant take the courage to stand up to people calling Vatican II trash, then why should any recognition be given them at all?

  • Anonymous


    I am astonished at this and unfortunately didn’t see it until after I’d posted my other response to you, below, so allow me to apologise for the jesting in that post, which you may well consider to be “taunting.”

    I have responded to your posts in as courteous a manner as I can manage, not always easy when I’m being described as a “silly woman” and other insulting names. So it is rather unfair of you to suggest that I am taunting you.

    My only interest in any of these blogs is to put the Church’s teaching as clearly as I can, its history and culture, according to the topic. I only do this, because it is important to exercise my baptismal and confirmation duty. At one time, this duty was largely exercised by correcting Protestants when they expressed erroneous views about the Church and its teaching, but due to the current crisis, we are having to do this with fellow Catholics as well.

    Pope Benedict said on election that “Having a clear faith, based on the Creed of the Church, is often labelled today as a fundamentalism.” “Fundamentalist” is one of the many titles of abuse that have been hurled at me on these Catholic Herald blogs. Those of us who are guilty of the crime of adhering to the Traditional Catholic Faith and rejecting novelties are treated like, and described as “schismatics.”

    Pope St Pius X said: “Far from from our priests be the love of novelty.” (Pascendi)

    Yet the novelties of the past fifty years have been embraced by Catholics all too willing to cast off our glorious Catholic heritage in the name of opening up to the spirit of the world.

    I do not want to put you in the position of having to ignore my posts and suffering frustration and anger as a result. This is your blog, William, and you have been kind enough not to censor me or insist that I disappear. So, be assured that I will not post comments again on any of your blogs. I apologise, unreservedly, for upsetting you. Not my intention, be assured.

    God bless.

  • Petrus

    Why am I not surprised?

  • Anthony Murphy

    Very droll.

  • Petrus

    Apart from your approval of contraception and gay masses?

  • Carlismo

    Quote any post of mine that comes close to the nastiness….

    “Oh, and, by the way, if there’s one thing I am sick and tired of hearing about it’s the Holocaust.”
    Patricia McKeever’s letter Gerhard Ludwig Mueller

    Saying that to a German Bishop is not exactly full of Catholic grace and dignity is it?

  • Anthony Murphy

    My approval of contraception and gay masses? What are you talking about? I have never made comments supporting either of these. Is this you “lying for Jesus”? Your petty ends justify the means?
    Please show me one statement anywhere on the internet where I show support for these proposals.

  • Anonymous

    I’m sick of this…

    How about being hones about the state of things?
    Now being a Human being – one of my major concerns is Life – being a Catholic I am called to Love The Lord, the Giver of Life and Love my neighbour – a major part of that is trying to ensure that my neighbour is allowed to Live from conception to a natural death.

    …and I expect my National Church to be truly Pro-Life – as Catholicism is ultimately Pro-Life.
    My National Church isn’t!

    Our Conference of Bishops have signed up for the euthanising Liverpool Care Pathway where clinical nutrition and hydration may be removed, via the CES they have allowed abortion-dealers Connexions into Catholic Schools, Conference’s Ethical Spokesman – an Archbishop no less – reneged on his Apostolic, nay his baptismal mandate, by collaborating with the HFEA bill, the mental capacity act, the new guidelines for assisted suicide…rather than fighting the legalised genocide of the voiceless and the vulnerable – they have conspired, compromised and remained silent….The Pro-Life movement in this country is in a state of civil war – it does not matter how or why – it simply is – The Phyllis Bowman Right-to-Lifers will not have anything to do with John Smeaton or SPUC – now whether these bodies feel justified or not in their conflict – there is NO WAY any decent Archbishop of Westminster should have allowed this to continue…but GBH and Cormac & Vin have allowed this farcical situation to continue unabated.

    We have abortion on demand in this country in all but name, euthanasia and assisted suicide happens all around us, eugenic genocide, embryonic experimentation, infanticide – and where are our Church Leaders?
    The last time +Vin spoke on abortion on the radio he spoke of the greater value of a more fully developed foetus than an early embryo – YES – this is the message we get from him!

    …and in other Life issues – like the proposed sterilisation and genocide of millions through population control – is being promoted under the environmental ‘sustainablity’ banner – are we opposing it? NO of course not – we’ve jumped on the green bandwagon – we even had ‘sustainability’ as the theme for our 2009 National Catholic Youth day…

    The blatantly obvious link between contraception and abortion is irrefutable – a proportion of women who engage in sexual activity while ovulating and relying on contraception – will conceive – and KILL…
    But humanae vitae is seen as an embarrassing joke isn’t it ? The Church has moved on from that lost battle – everyone’s using it so what’s the point in banging on about it? Hence either the silence or the defiant promotion of it as being a lesser evil than unwanted pregnancies and abortion [the fact that it causes the continuance of the genocide is too distasteful to even contemplate]

    So what about hiv/AIDS ?
    CAFOD and other charities and purportedly catholic quangos already promote and advocate the use of and widespread provision of condoms – irrespective of the simple fact that condoms give licence to continue in deathly risky sexual activity – and they fail! Check the 2007 Cochrane report which reveals the reduction is only 80% – because those who are told they are safe while using a condom should be told if they are hiv+ they must NEVER have sex again.
    Austen Ivereigh hired Opus Dei ‘moral’ theologian Martin Rhonheimer to write a Tablet article advocating the ‘prophylactic intention’ superseding any awkward inadvertent contraceptive considerations in contraception – thus to all intents and purposes justifying the use of the condom [ the conditionals/cop out he used was an appeal to a non-existent 100% effective prophylactic] but in practical terms the tone and intimation of the article was for the reader to presume that the use of the condom was moral among married couples where one partner was hiv+. Austen Ivereigh has continued this campaign – repeatedly mendaciously stating that the Church has made no pronouncement on the issue [it doesn't need to - anyone who is hiv+ who has sex with their spouse contravenes the fifth commandment - with or without a condom - before we even consider the ludicrous diabolical 'prophylactic intention' and the contraception issue] What has our National Church said on this issue? Did they tell Ivereigh to shut up? No – instead they back him to start Catholic Voices where he actually uses Rhonheimer’s arguments and his own articles in the CV training briefing notes!!! So yes we actualy had young Catholics being told that the line they should take in the media is that the church does not condemn [or has not yet condemned] the use of condoms among hiv-serodiscordant married couples – thus a percentage of those who might listen to this ‘advice’ or ‘informed comment on the Church’s position’ might actually engage in such activity, become infected by their partner and potentially DIE!!! And has any Bishop commented on this issue? Oh we can do a bit better than that – we have Cardinal Cormac himself – did he repudiate the position? Did he heck as like – HE ADVOCATED CONDOM USE TOO!!!

    Need I mention the provision of abortifacients and abortion-referrals at the Catholic Hospital St John & St Elizabeth? Cardinal Ratzinger ordered Cormac to stop this – seven years ago – IT’S STILL HAPPENING!!

    So rather than being Pro-Life – Our national church in its hierarchy and administration and its charities and quangoes and education service and official and unofficial [but still approved] spokespeople – even from its own ethical mouthpieces….IS NOT!!!

    Need I remind anyone what our illustrious Archbishop Nichols did to Edmund Adamus when the young man had the audacity to state the reality of the nightmare of the culture of death in this land?

    Now think this over…
    This is before we consider the state of our parishes, our liturgies, our childrens’ supposed Catholic education, priestly training , catechesis , evangelisation, morality, doctrine, spirituality, provision of the sacraments etc… before we consider all the things we’d think our life as a Catholic would involve…

    Our National Church won’t even defend the life of their neighbour – let alone how they should live their lives…

    …Now how did I learn any of the above?
    Through official sources? through the CCN? through diocesan websites?
    I got all these details from the blogs…from people desperately concerned about our hierarchy’s [and their vast array of lackeys] conspiracy [by omission and commission] with the culture of death – AND THEIR SILENCE ON THE ISSUES!!!

    …now this is a drop in the ocean of all the information and concerns and issues involved within the Catholic blogs – but think about it – who are these people ? single lone voices crying in the wilderness – no cohesion, no unity – certainly a coalescing concern and purpose – but these people need to get together and become a unified physically manifest entity – to mutually support, advise, inform, guide and direct…

    We have desperately needed a new Catholic group to Challenge our leaders who have so fallen by the wayside in even the basics – and if a Guild of Catholic bloggers can help in any way to bring about a counter-revolution in this land – a restoration of Catholicism within the National Catholic Church?


    Do I need to start on the hundreds of other issues and grave concerns among Catholics – or are we beginning to get the picture that the TIME IS NOW – we MUST decide whose side we’re on – and act accordingly…How can we look ourselves in the mirror while this scandal, this travesty continues, while our neighbour needs us?
    Mtt25 informs us that when we die Our Lord and Saviour will ask us a simple question:
    “Where were you?”

    Well? Where are we? Where should we be? When are we going to get there?

  • Anonymous

    …and what are you doing Quaeritur? Knocking a woman who loves God , her Church and her family and wants the world to know it too?

  • Anonymous

    So your argument is that the Bishops should start sorting out the problems? Well what about the situation where our Bishops [especially via their executive power and the professional clergy and laity they appoint to exact that power] are one of the major problems ?

  • Anthony Murphy

    You are in need of confession now.

  • Anthony Murphy

    You can be damn sure of this….I am not on your side. I wouldnt let you within 100 meters of my students, let alone let you lead a counter-culture like the Catholic Church…Your venom alone would turn them off the Church for years, if not ever. So sit your ignorant ass down and learn that people come here to be amongst Catholic friends. Not to be ranted at by the home for demented priests.

  • Anthony Murphy

    If you cant obey your bishop paul’priest’, why did you sign up for the job? Are you fulfilling your vow of obedience to the local ordinary by railing against the episcopate online? For the record, God bless the episcopate, they do a job which is very difficult.

  • Anthony Murphy

    At least he isnt making this a place of hate like you Father. At least he doesnt criticise the episcopate. What a lonely job that must be when even their own priests come online to bag them. You have to work something out Fr.Paul…you do realise your priesthood makes you a servent of the laity, dont you?

  • Anthony Murphy

    You really are a fool arent you Pet?

  • Petrus

    Just add some substance to your wild assertions, that’s not much to ask, is it?

    Again, the Modernist mentality is coming through quite clearly.

  • Petrus

    Carlismo, your example of EditorCT dishing out personal abuse, is no such thing. She’s merely said that she’s sick of hearing about a particular historical event. She could just as easily say she’sick of hearing about Iraq of the local elections. That is not personal to anyone. Best that you stop clutching at straws since I don’t think she really DOES personal abuse, so let it go.

  • Petrus

    Someone said you are ” all in favour”. So let me ask you directly:

    1. Do you believe that Catholics should be allowed to use artificial contraception?

    2. Do you support the Soho Masses for gay people?

  • Anthony Murphy

    1) Artificial contraception is against he natural law, and therefore wrong for a Catholic to engage in.
    2) Gays, or more specifically, people with SSA, need to be loved and appreciated. Homosexual acts however, are intrinsically disordered.
    You apology to be is less than expected. Someone who loses their head and slanders another, if that person still be a good person, would retract the accusation.
    My estimation of you is that you incapable of fulfilling both clauses of the statement.

  • Anonymous

    Do you have the authority to adjudicate whether one bishop or another constitutes a major problem? I think not.
    Certainly we should know our faith well enough to be able to offer a contrary opinion when a bishop, a group of bishops, or laity tasked to represent them offers a judgement that seems quite imprudent. However, we should always offer these views with humility. If nothing else, pay no more heed than you must to “bad” bishops, seek out the good ones every chance.
    Do make sure they’re in communion with Rome and authorized to act in a bishop’s capacity.
    Let’s not be following the advice of a “shadow magisterium”, especially when they think Rome should be coming to them.

  • Anonymous

    That’s a pretty good question, I think?
    Where ARE you?

    I have much the same problem with your attitude as the attitude I see a lot on the ‘net here in the ‘States about the failings of bishops/clergy and what we need to do about it. Most of what I see declares adamantly that this or that bishop needs to be replaced. I’m not so certain that’ll work, really. Seems to me that if you force out one “dud”, you’ll likely replace him with another, a worse dud.

    By all means, be horrified by bishops when you can demonstrate they err. But don’t stop there. PRAY for them. Do PENANCE for their repentence, if needed. FAST for their whole-hearted conversion.

    And seek out the good examples every chance you get. They are out there.
    Do make certain they’re fully in communion with Rome though. Clergy, bishops especially, without Rome’s approval tend to create their own problems that’re just as nasty.

  • Carlismo

    Nice to see the Scottish SSPX clique sticking together, maybe Crouchback will wade in too. If only they’d show such solidairty towards their own Pope, Priests, brothers and sisters…

    It’s a grave sin when one of your SSPX Bishops denies the Holocaust as he drives many people away from Mother Church and from the God’s Love. When this Woman tells a German citizen that she’s “sick” of this denial then she causes great hurt. (That is what Bishop Mueller was talking about…Holocaust Denial NOT the Holocaust) Would you feel ashamed if a Holocaust survivor read these words? I would. It’s our prayers and compassion genocide victims need from us not dismissive comments or outright denial of their very suffering!!

    Similarly, when people like you make wild claims about WW1 being God’s punishment you bare false witness against the creator. You make a guess about the nature of the God of love and again risk driving Souls away from him and his Church by associating him with your own malice. It is a grave sin and utterly demonic to paint God in this way without any authority or revelation to do so.

    Perhaps give some thought to your own soul instead of damming the rest of us to hell for things like receiving the host in the hand. Only last week I noticed on another thread EditorCT describing the Mass as “Poison”. Is that not nasty? You are al good at guessing what God thinks but are such words not what Satan wants?

    Is anything you people ever say done with gentleness, meekness, love, pity, compassion, mercy? You know the answer is no. If you had truth on your side we’d all be moved by your Holiness not endlessly disgusted by your cruel words.

  • Anthony Murphy

    The Pet, and Fr.Paul are every reason in the world why if you force this issue of a Catholic Bloggers Guild; it will simply not be taken seriously. We need a bishop online. “But Anthony, do you really want a bishop dragged into this crapola?” Yes, I do. This is where we are at. This is where the laity are fighting it out, and we need a manager. So send us your bishops! We need a General like never before.

  • Hilary White

    Man, you English bloggers treat each other like crap.

    Good thing your guild idea won’t work. I’d hate to be the one cleaning up the mess after the meetings.

  • Anonymous

    Jflare did you actually read what I said ?
    Yes some Bishops are a problem: Rarely so much in who they are or what they do – but in either what they delegate to inappropriate persons OR in what they simply do not do or refuse to do!

    I’m not appealing to any holier-than-thou ‘shadow magisterium’ – but the Magisterium itself! – I’m appealing directly to fundamental Catholic teaching on issues which Bishops’ Conference via its pronouncements and executive decisions [generally through its professional laity] have ignored, repudiated and defied.

    Are you forgetting the activities of the past few years?
    Or is yesterday enough for you? The Cardinal Vaughan School – +Vin [through his lackeys] contravening the Universal Declaration of Human rights AND Vatican II’s direct statement on parents having the prime role in their children’s Catholic education, Mgr Curry bulying, bawling out and prodding the acting headmaster in the chest; Bishop Stack rewriting history to the point of being downright larcenous with the truth and justifying the inexcusable – and using the courts to destroy a shining Beacon in Catholic Education – out will go the kids from lower social backgrounds and ethnic minorities, in will come all the local rich kids and out will go a generations-old Catholic and educational ethos which brought out the best in every student and made it the envy of every school in the area. It’s a scandal! +Vin as Archbishop of course bears no responsibility at all for this does he?

    The CES ? Oona Stannard helping to compose [yes she sat on the board] the Labour Government’s proposal for Health and Sexual Education where Catholic schools would have been forced by law to teach about contraception, abortion, homosexual sex and extra marital ‘experimental’ activity – from ‘an objecive, impartial position’ – i.e they had to teach that it was all ok ; with the provision that they could refer to Catholic teaching on the issues solely in religious education classes. Her recently-appointed second-in-command? ex MP Greg Pope who voted for abortion and other aspects of the culture of death in Parliament. The CES’s express permission and welcoming of the Connexions program into Catholic Schools – where the underage can be provided with contraception and sex and relationship advice, and if the contraception fails? Well they can [with neither parents knowledge or consent] be prescribed the morning-after pill or be referred for an abortion] – ALL IN A CATHOLIC SCHOOL!!! +Malcolm MacMahon and every other Bishops in the land bear no responsibility at all for this do they?

    Want me to go on? The shenanigans of Archbishop Smith as the Country’s ‘Voice for Catholic Ethics’? How his letter in the middle of a House of Commons debate stopped a rebellion against the Diabolical Mental Capacity act? or…or…or…I could bombard you with examples where Catholicism and human life itself has not merely been dismissed or abandoned by our hierarchy – it’s been spat upon!

    Supposing you’re in hospital with a terminally ill disease which will probably kill you in a few months and you contract Pneumonia which if untreated could kill you in hours – you’d expect that Our Bishops would teach that you were to be treated against the disease – THINK AGAIN; if you became unable to eat or drink on your own you’d expect our Shepherds would demand from the medical profession that you received nutrition and hydration ? THINK AGAIN!!! Bishops Conference has signed up for the Liverpool Care Pathway as the recommended recourse for allegedly ‘palliative care’…You could be euthanised – murdered in excruciating agony as your internal organs desiccate and necrotise in your hospital bed – and our Bishops Conference – despite their trite sentimentalistic words – think it’s all ok! But they must be adhering to Catholic teaching mustn’t they? Er no! But Since when has Catholic teaching ever prevented them doing exactly what they want, when they want? Tell me one Vatican directive they haven’t either ignored or defied or suppressed in decades?

    This is what I’m talking about…
    For all the posturing – for all +Vin declaring in Westminster Cathedral “We love you Holy Father” – the love doesn’t seem to permeate into the ideology and praxis on a Conference or diocesan level.
    This ‘Love’ for the Holy Father – well it wasn’t in very much evidence a few months previous when the Pope was being stitched up in a media witch-hunt – lying and fabricating that the Pope was guilty of systemic cover-up of clerical abuse – what did our Bishops say? Nothing for months until we had a half-baked weak-willed joint statement – who took on the liars? who took on Tatchell & Hitch & Hari & Dawkins & Geoffrey Robinson and the Protest the Pope mob and the rabid pope-hating secularists? The bloggers!! The Catholic tweeters!! They never stopped for months on end – refuting the lies and proving the falsity of all defamations with the vast evidence – While our Bishops kept schtum!!!

    …and only a few weeks after the Papal visit – when Light of the World was published and the western media lied abot what the Pope said, when Liberal Catholic hacks lied about what the Pope said , when reprobates like the EditorCT LIED about what the Pope said…
    What did our Bishops say?
    But this time they had a justification.
    +Vin TOLD THEM TO KEEP QUIET – The CCN’s Alexander Desforges sent out a directive to all Bishops that they were to keep their mouths shut on the issue – thus leaving that oaf Lombardi of the Vatican Press Office to make things worse….

    Who were the ONLY ones in this country to defend the Pope and report the Truth on the issue?
    The bloggers!!

    I’m not calling for some revolution or some rebellion against our hierarchy – all I’m sayng is that in the past the blogosphere has revealed what our hierarchy are up to and where they fall short in obedience to, and defence of, the Pope, the Church and the very Person of Christ.

    They plead with Bishops conference to get their act together and start acting like they were the Catholic Church – not some autocratic protestantised self-made Churchlet of their own making with its own policies and agenda.

    We respect and love our Bishops – respecting and loving them enough to offer our help and support [and ALWAYS our prayers and fasting for them] to guide them to start being that which they were ordained and consecrated to be…to stop being part of the problem.

  • Anonymous

    sigh….Whoever said being a Bishop wasn’t a tough life?
    But I’ll tell you this: Being a Bishop while not being a Bishop makes it much tougher in the end for everyone…

  • Anonymous

    Come on – I’m serious – why do I need to go to confession? [and sure I know why I need to go - but i'd like to know what I've done here so I can add it to the long list awaiting my poor confessor]

    Have I lied?
    I don’t think I have….

  • Anonymous

    Ma’am – I’m not going to go into this on here – Dr Oddie’s blog has already been confounded enough.

  • Anonymous

    …a Priest is first and foremost a servant of Christ.

  • Anonymous

    You didn’t answer the second question

  • Hilary White

    Don’t edit me! I said you treat each other like crap and that’s what I meant.

    And I can’t believe what a pack of nervous nellies y’all are.

  • Anthony Murphy

    I didnt answer the question?
    You are f%^&#$% delusional.

  • Anthony Murphy

    A priest is first and foremost obedient to the bishop. That would translate in any reasonable person as not coming onto the internet and trashing the episcopate. I seriously question your ability to fulfill your duties, and I wonder why you choose this vocare?

  • Anthony Murphy

    Petrus obviously doesnt understand modernism, yet hates it with a passion !

  • Anonymous

    If paul Priest had a decent bone in his body-which he does not- he would have told you long before now that he is not actually a priest at all! Something that many of us thank God for every day.
    Paul is a bully, plain and simple. Rude, foul mouthed and abusive. He will not tolerate anyone who does not share his view and ha this weird belief that he is loyal to the Magesterium.
    Paul shows loyalty to no one, how he can possibly call himself a Catholic is beyond belief.

  • Anonymous

    As for knocking a woman who loves her church etc….Jackie Parkes did not show much love when she and James Preece made all the trouble at The Oratory and she was effectively banned from worshiping there!

  • Anonymous

    You forgot to add, Fr. Gareth Jones. Medjugorje, Fatima etc

  • Anonymous

    …and for the last time Anthony – I am not a priest!

  • Anonymous

    Paul behaves like this on every blog that he logs into. He certainly gives us Catholics a very bad name!

  • Anonymous

    This guild of Catholic Bloggers will never get off the ground. The likes of the Taliban Catholics such as James Preece, Laurence England, Fr. ray Blake and others will see to that.

  • Anonymous

    Goodness you do witter on…boring…boring..!