Thu 24th Jul 2014 | Last updated: Wed 23rd Jul 2014 at 16:03pm

Facebook Logo Twitter Logo RSS Logo
Hot Topics

Latest News

Bishop Davies says Year of Faith should spur us to profess faith with new conviction

By on Friday, 12 October 2012

Bishop Mark Davies of Shrewsbury (Mazur/catholicchurch.org.uk)

Bishop Mark Davies of Shrewsbury (Mazur/catholicchurch.org.uk)

The Year of Faith offers Catholics the chance to profess “the faith in fullness and with new conviction, confidence and hope”, Bishop Mark Davies of Shrewsbury has said.

The bishop was speaking at a Mass marking the opening of the year at the Cathedral Church of Our Lady, Help of Christians and St Peter of Alcantara, in Shrewsbury yesterday.

He recalled that the Rt Rev William Grasar, the then Bishop of Shrewsbury, set off to the Second Vatican Council in 1962 to join more 2,000 bishops for an event that would last over three years.

“It was a sobering moment,” Bishop Davies said. “The world stood on the brink of nuclear destruction. The Cuban nuclear crisis was described as the most dangerous moment in human history.”

He said the bishops gathered in St Peter’s Basilica under the guidance of the Holy Spirit to “explore the will of Christ in these extremely challenging times”.

Bishop Davies said Pope John XXIII did not ignore or despair at the modern world, like his predecessors, but called the Council to rediscover the faith at that difficult time.

Now, on the 50th anniversary of the opening of the Council, “the Pope wishes to highlight again the Council’s debates and mission, inviting the dioceses to open up the Catechism of the Catholic Church”, the bishop said.

He urged Catholics in his diocese to witness to their faith in daily life.

  • Sweetjae

    That is what we are talking about!!

  • Parasum

    “Bishop Davies said Pope John XXIII did not ignore or despair at the
    modern world, like his predecessors, but called the Council to
    rediscover the faith at that difficult time.”

    ## That is a great insult to some outstanding Popes, who neither ignored it nor despaired of it, but knew how to be in it without making his errors in judgement. Their criticisms of “the modern world” were spot-on; it was John XXIII who was wrong – and just how wrong, the Church has had almost 50 years to rediscover. Ther was no need “to
    rediscover the faith” – the Church had it. Thanks to the idiocies that have happened since then – such as the joys of ARCIC & Assisi & Balamand & “clown Masses” & other horrors -  the Church desperately needs “to
    rediscover the faith”.

  • Charles Martel

    Yes, a fatuous slap in the face for Pope Pius XII, the Pope whose teachings covered every aspect of the modern world, but whose sin, apparently, was that he didn’t kiss modern man’s backside hard enough.

  • Alan

    Oh dear, the usual bleatings about the greatest Pope of the 20th century. Had it not been for Pope John, or somebody like him, the Catholic Church would now be a relic of history. 

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PWZKI7JBARE4DDT3NQ22RWMOJE Benedict Carter

    And that from a Catholic convert?

    You don’t believe or trust Our Lord’s own words?

  • Ssas

     I think the Holy Father is talking up Vatican II so as to position himself to excommunicate SSPX.

  • Alan

    Of course I do, and that’s why we had Pope John.  

  • Sweetjae

    Neither Pope John XXIII nor Bishop Davies ignored or insulted outstanding past Popes rather the “contradiction” you seem to think existed only exist in your analysis and interpretation of the past and present Magisterial documents.

    ARCIC and Assisi are of good intention and acts of the Church which have precedent from the past Councils of Florence and Trent. Inviting non-catholics (Eastern Orthodox churches) to heal the rift and division between the East and Western churches.

    “Clown masses and other horrors” are unfortunate willful acts of some clergy with modernist agendas which ideas are NOWHERE found in the documents of VII. So stop this nonsense of blaming a valid Council.

  • Sweetjae

    I honestly think the whole SSPX as a group can’t be reconciled with the Church however, the Pope is positioning himself to accept those with humility into the Church (like FSSP, Stronsay monastery etc)  and those with recalcitrant behaviour bordering Sedevacantism (Bishop Williamson etc) are to be Anathemized. Sad.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PWZKI7JBARE4DDT3NQ22RWMOJE Benedict Carter

    It’s a great insult too to Our Lady and to the three little children of Fatima. 

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PWZKI7JBARE4DDT3NQ22RWMOJE Benedict Carter

    That’s no answer.

  • Sweetjae

    That is the correct answer, you are just playing deaf and blind. God had sent us holy and good Popes over the last 60 years. Kudos for St. Pope John Paul II the Great!!!

  • JabbaPapa

    I think the Holy Father is talking up Vatican II so as to position himself to excommunicate SSPX

    I don’t — I think you’re engaging in unwonted, baseless speculation.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PWZKI7JBARE4DDT3NQ22RWMOJE Benedict Carter

    The word is “anthematised”.

  • Michelle Egan

    Under John Paul II the Church was in its worst state for a long time. Church discipline was all over the place, renegade bishops were not dealt, child abuse cover up by prelates were not dealt with, Assisi – was a abomination in the sight of God etc. John Paul II is considered great by many due to the ‘cult of personality’ and sentimental emotion, rather then any hard facts. John Paul II was certainly not great when you put things into perspective, even if it is granted that he did some good things.

  • Michelle Egan

     FSSP are part of the Church, they are in 110 diocese across the world and in good standing with the bishops of those diocese. Also the then Cardinal Ratzinger was instrumental in getting them in Germany.
    http://www.fssp.org.uk/england/pages/about-the-f.s.s.p.php

  • Sweetjae

    So sorry the negative things you mentioned are not due to JPII but by willful acts of men, the sexual abuse was complicated that started way back to sexual revolution and the policies of the Church that are not updated to the times. Assisi was not an abomination though we admit some mistakes were done yet they are corrected in due time. Assissi is a call to goodwill and peace amongst mankind regardless of religious differences and affiliations, a call to freedom and respect of religious expressions without any duress or violence. That’s it, it doesn’t propose indifferentism nor reject the Truth of Gospel.

    JPII under his watch without firing a single bullet help crumbled the greatest menace mankind had known…communism and nuclear armeggadon. Demolished liberation theology in Latin America, the only Pope who had travelled further than all the popes combined to spread the Good News to every human being of the world up to his last dying breath, exponentially increased converts and new catechumens in Africa, Korea, Vietnam and other parts of Asia etc. etc, etc.

    So you see if you put it in an honest and fair perspective, JPII is going to be proclaimed a Great
    Saint of the Church.

  • Sweetjae

    Yes I know but my point was, FSSP is an offshoot of SSPX prior to their split as many, many groups who went back to the Church and unfortunately as many sects who also went the other direction…to Sedevacantism. Another point, disobedience breeds disobedience. Look at Father Kelley and Bishop Williamson and many more are all sons of the SSPX.

  • Michelle Egan

    I never wrote the sexual abuse was due to John Paul II and I acknowledged that he done good things. But I sorry strongly disagree with you on Assisi, that was an abomination in the sight of God, asking people to pray to their false gods, thus promoting idol worship and giving the message that the Catholic Church condones and encourages idol worship. A pope that promotes the ‘demonic’ cannot be called ‘great’.

  • Michelle Egan

    Well you should have made your point clearer.

  • JabbaPapa

    … and good old Michel ,Egan showed off his amazing skill of “not doing anything when needed”.

  • Sweetjae

    Michelle the intention of Assisi is goodwill and peace amongst mankind that chasing at each other heads since when and we are very successful in doing so, decapitating each other because of differing belief systems.

    The Church nor the Pope is promoting indifferenism or encourages idol worship at Assisi, did you even read the MESSAGE AND CONVICTION of the Pope in it’s opening? His strong words preaching the truth and Gospel of Jesus Christ to all those present at Assisi?

    The idea of “allowing” worship to false gods is the same as you allowing your Muslim or Buddist neighbor to worship at their temples just across your street. Hopefully you understand.

  • Michelle Egan

    There is a stack of red herrings and superfluous comments in your response, lets stay on topic. Answer one simple question, was it ok for John Paul II ‘The Great’ to ask people of demonically influenced religions to pray to their false gods or not? 

  • Sweetjae

    Red herrings? Just can’t refute it, I understand. Anyways, your question is the old Great Lie promulgated by the enemies within the Church-the ultraTrads. JPII did NOT ask non-Catholics to pray for their false gods, he just INVITED them to pray. WHY? Because he wanted to soften their prejudice and dialogue is needed for it. At the same time he will sneak in the Gospel. The Church didn’t condemn this. As Reginald Gerrgiou Langrage once said, “….In order to move forward and work for their conversion (Jews, pagans etc) at least negatively by softening of their prejudice”.

    JPII just permitted them to pray according to their religious conviction to have a dialogue and can preach the Truth. JPII didn’t say “pray to your false gods”, if he did, that would be preaching falsehood. This is because prayer itself is not wrong. No one one knows or can control what a pagan prays to. God might answer him if it please Him. Good example found in the Bible of a Roman officer named Cornellius, a pagan who fear the Lord God.

  • 2_Armpits_4_Sister_Sarah

    Bishop Davies’ comments about pre-J23 Popes are absurd.

  • 2_Armpits_4_Sister_Sarah

    There goes Bishop Davies’ reputation as the leader of the “Trad Pack”. On to Portsmouth we go!

  • 2_Armpits_4_Sister_Sarah

    There goes Bishop Davies as the leader of the “Trads”. Pack your bags boys we’re all off to Portsmouth!

  • Parasum

     TY for the reminder – I forgot that.

  • Parasum

    Admire John XXIII if you think that’s appropriate – no-one else has to.

  • Parasum

     “”Clown masses and other horrors” are unfortunate willful acts of some
    clergy with modernist agendas which ideas are NOWHERE found in the
    documents of VII.”

    ## Including some bishops. Priests might not know the texts of and relating to Vatican II – bishops have to. If bishops tolerate or participate in these abominations, or worse, it is not unfair to suppose thaty they think such abominations are allowed by Vatican II. If OTOH they are breaking the law of the Church, that doesn’t say much for Vatican II either.

    When offering the unrevised Mass, no bishop or priest could possibly have perpetrated a “clown Mass”, or years of “Masses” with invalid matter or the other pseudo-Masses, and abuses like “liturgical dancing”, or abuses like letting the Host be received by Muslims & Anglicans, or other other horrors like that. It is under the Pauline dispensation using the 1970 Missal that these things have happened.  

    “ARCIC and Assisi are of good intention…”

    ## They are still scandalous. Intentions do not make evil-doing right or defencible. Ther was no reason for either. The only question is, which of them is the worse ? The S.C.D.F. had some very accurate criticisms of ARCIC. But in the meantime, grossly unsatifactory “Agreed Statements” (so called) were published to great acclaim, leaving only a few Catholics & a few Evangelicals to point out just how faulty they really were, & still are. Evils like this were allowed to spread for years – doing God alone knows  how much harm in the process. For false ecumenism to go unrebuked for so long is no different from from putting cyanide in the water supply and letting it takes it course; what is worse is to fabricate these lying agreements in the first place.

    As for Assisi – decent Popes do not commit the sin of indifferentism. Wojtyla complained of indifferentism in the Church: since he was committed this sin, it was absurd of him to blame others for doing no more than he did.

  • Parasum

    “JPII under his watch without firing a single bullet help crumbled the greatest menace mankind had known”

    ## The “greatest menace mankind ha[s] known” is not frippery like Communism (evil though it undoubtedly is), nor a nuclean war, but sin. Being murdered by Communists or vaporised by bombs doesn’t bring damnation – sin does. 

    @google-fdceca574807a0f82def96cd562631ff:disqus

    “A pope that promotes the ‘demonic’ cannot be called ‘great’. ”

    ## Indeed not. “The gods of the nations are demons”, according to St. Paul. False religions such the pope fraternised with keep souls from the salvation Christ intended for them. This false and anti-Christian ecumenism is a denial of the Catholicity of the Church, of the dogma that outside the Church there is no salvation, and of the Uniqueness & Lordship of Christ the Universal King.

     

  • Parasum

    “This is because prayer itself is not wrong.”

    ## That depends on who or what is being prayed to. To pray: “Great Goddess Mary, Creatress of all things, mother of all gods,” is a prayer – and a thoroughly objectionable one. To pray “Almighty & Eternal Set, Father of Darkness, King of Death”, would be very wrong indeed.  So would prayers to Thor, Zeus, Isis and other such deities (all of whom have worshippers BTW). “Best of cheesecakes, we bless you” would also be wrong. Prayer can be wrong in many ways – it is entirely wrong for a Catholic bishop to provide opportunities for unbelievers to practice superstition. That some people are unable to see that is depressing. Superstition is a sin – or it was. If it no longer is, that shows how Vatican II, by introducing ecumenism, has corrupted Catholic thinking.

  • Sweetjae

    I strongly disagree with your opinion, I had already refuted these allegation and misrepresentations of Assisi and “clown masses”. Enough said.

  • Sweetjae

    False and mostly misrepresentations!

  • Guest

    If only he were!!

  • Cjkeeffe

    This bishop or the one recently conscreated or Portsmouth should be the next Cardinal and by pass westminster.

  • Morton674

    The bishop of Shrewsbury in 1962 was called ERIC Grasar

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PWZKI7JBARE4DDT3NQ22RWMOJE Benedict Carter

    Bishop Davies’ comment is a deliberate echo of John XXIII’s “prophets of doom” speech at the start of Vatican II which everyone present knew was aimed at the three little children of Fatima and by extension, at Our Lady. 

    We know how that worked out. 

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PWZKI7JBARE4DDT3NQ22RWMOJE Benedict Carter

    ….

  • JabbaPapa

    Bishop Davies’ comment is a deliberate echo of John XXIII’s “prophets of
    doom” speech at the start of Vatican II which everyone present knew was
    aimed at the three little children of Fatima and by extension, at Our
    Lady.

    Rubbish !!!

    Pope John XXIII : In the daily exercise of Our pastoral office, it sometimes happens that
    We hear certain opinions which disturb Us—opinions expressed by people
    who, though fired with a commendable zeal for religion, are lacking in
    sufficient prudence and judgment in their evaluation of events. They can
    see nothing but calamity and disaster in the present state of the
    world. They say over and over that this modern age of ours, in
    comparison with past ages, is definitely deteriorating. One would think
    from their attitude that history, that great teacher of life, had taught
    them nothing. They seem to imagine that in the days of the earlier
    councils everything was as it should be so far as doctrine and morality
    and the Church’s rightful liberty were concerned.

    We feel that We must disagree with these prophets of doom, who
    are always forecasting worse disasters, as though the end of the world
    were at hand.

    It was clearly aimed at the reactionary conservative faction inside the Church ; and which is most clearly present inside the SSPX in the group led by Bishop Tissier de Mallerais.

    Reactionary conservatism did not spring up like a mushroom in the wake of Vatican II — it has existed since the 14th century at the very latest.

    Claiming that Pope John XXIII was preaching against the seers of Fatima and against Saint Mary is a gross slander.