Sanders of the River

Sanders of the River (1935) is one of the Korda Brothers' most problematic movies. One critic called it England's Birth of a Nation, laying bare the racial and political biases of its era. This makes it an easy target for "politically correct" viewers, yet its inert, somewhat sloppy structure does it no favors either. Modern viewers will likely view it as a curio.

Nigeria is a British colony governed by the wise Commissioner Sanders (Leslie Banks). Good "Lord Sandy" exerts a firm but fair rule over Nigeria's chieftains, befriending Bosambo (Paul Robeson). When Sanders leaves the colony, the tribesmen stir up trouble. The Old King (Tony Wayne), resentful of Bosambo's power and influence, declares war. The new commissioner (Martin Walker) proves unable to deal with the rising, forcing Sanders to return and clear things up.

Sanders of the River makes for odd viewing. Director Zoltan Korda's episodic structuring feels like a silent movie, consisting of tableaux and self-contained set pieces. Much of the show consists of tribal ceremonies and musical numbers, which occasionally impress but largely bog down the narrative. For that matter, the movie's surprisingly short on action, with only two set pieces and some smaller bursts of violence. Those expecting a straightforward adventure like Korda's The Four Feathers might be disappointed.

By 1935 standards, Sanders of the River is impressive. The Kordas filmed extensively on location in Nigeria, a rarity for any film of that era, let alone the chronically cash-strapped British industry. Much of the second unit work captures tribal ceremonies, providing an almost docudrama feel, along with exotic animal footage. One effective montage has tribal drums beating out a war call, intercut with hyenas and hippos running wild. It's a powerful sequence, representing the elemental forces unleashed by Sanders' departure. It also points up the movie's most obvious flaw.

Sanders' racial content is harder to ignore than in, say, Gunga Din. The movie opens with a dedication to the Britons engaged in "protecting" their African subjects. The movie's main thrust is that without British rule, Africa degenerates into tribal squabbling. It's an appealing myth that absolves empire builders of responsibility for the chaos left behind; it's not British divide-and-rule and dismantling of social structures, but Africans' murderous nature. Later British movies like Simba and Guns at Batasi reiterate the same theme.   

Perhaps it's unfair to harp on this angle. For one, blackface is refreshingly absent. And Sanders does give its African characters more agency than many of its contemporaries. Bosambo in someways transcends stereotype: he's got a wife (Nina Mae McKinley) and family, proves a tough warrior and wise leader of men. Even the villainous King is smart enough to manipulate his fellow tribes, while resenting the white gunrunners who trick him into war. But the final reels make Sanders' message plain: Africans need the white man to get along in the world.

Paul Robeson loudly disowned the movie: hoping to play a dignified African chieftain, he saw Bosambo's dignity diluted through re-shoots and editing. The contrast between Robeson and Korda's intentions comes off in the finished show. Robeson makes Bosambo compelling through sheer charisma, belting out his melodramatic war songs with gusto, and commanding every scene. Yet the character misses a chance to really develop, becoming a slightly more assertive Uncle Remus-type: submissive, cheerful, eager to please.

The supporting cast registers little. In the title role, Leslie Banks is so stiff and upright he's almost a parody. Nina Mae McKinley has some nice scenes sparring with Bosambo, but never gains depth. Tony Wane makes a charismatic villain. Jomo Kenyatta, the future President of Kenya, appears in a brief role.

Sanders of the River probably didn't raise an eyebrow when first released. Today it's badly dated, and not just for the obvious reasons. It's still worth watching, but not necessarily as intended.

"There's something wrong with the Church..."

A video clip featuring Bishop Fellay of the SSPX...what's not to like?

H/T to California Latin Mass

Yes, I do know that there are difficulties between Rome and Econe but, can you honestly say that +Bernard Fellay is a raging heretic or schismatic?

I have met this man.

He epitomises saintliness. I attended a Mass that he celebrated and I received the Blessed Sacrament from him.

He also, incidentally, consecrated a chalice for my family chapel.

I approached him before Mass with the request (at the time we had a small chapel in Pembrokeshire, where we said a 'dry' mass most Sundays and then had a real Mass whenever a priest came to stay).

Bishop Fellay was most suspicious, wary, I guess, of anything dodgy in the way of sedevacantism or the demonic.

He gave me a thorough interrogation; this was not going to be easy.

"Why are you having Mass in a private chapel?"

"Why do you not attend a normal Latin Mass?"

"Who is this priest who comes to say Mass for you?"

Eventually he said: "Come back and see me after Mass, I will give the matter some thought"

He walked off with my precious chalice in his hands.

And, when I went to the sacristy after Mass he told me that he was prepared to consecrate the chalice. Phew!

But first, he had to write out an attestation of consecration - in Latin - fluently and without thinking, as if it were his first language.

A fragment of Catholic history - Bishop Fellay's note of consecration
for a chalice

I am not, by choice an SSPX follower.
25 years ago they were the only option for a traditional Catholic family living hundreds of miles from the bright city lights.

The Society carries it's own agenda of problematical issues, foremost of which, is the puritanical attitude of some of their priests.

But, can you really fault them?

If you stood one SSPX priest alongside one of our OF only priests you might be shocked at the physical distinction, let alone the spiritual.

The Society priests bear the mark of the cross and it shows in their faces and in their demeanour and, who knows, before long we might all be beating a path to their door.

Controversial Lord Slams Divans, Launches Scathing Attack on Britain's Favourite Bed

The bed most offensive to God?: The classic divan with under-bed storage

By Bill Gardner
Religious Correspondent 
The Argus

Shocked parishioners of Brighton's Catholic churches walked out distraught yesterday as they heard of God's detestation for divan beds.

Divans slammed, but set for bounce back

The divan bed, well known for its comfort as well as useful under-bed storage facility was at the heart of a controversial statement in yesterday's reading that sent shockwaves through the Catholic community, 67% of whom are said to own the offending instruments of sleeping luxury. In the biblical passage read out at Mass yesterday, the controversial Lord blasted the divan, leaving communicants wondering whether they should approach the Sacred Banquet of Holy Communion, having slept on a divan bed just the previous night.

'Woe to those ensconced so snugly in Zion
and to those who feel so safe on the mountain of Samaria,
Lying on ivory beds and sprawling on their divans,
they dine on lambs from the flock...'

That's better!: An ordinary bed construction pleasing to the Lord

Catholic quilt complex

In what has since become known as 'Catholic quilt complex', many worshippers complained of the Lord's controversial words over one of the nation's favourite beds. One worshipper who came to Mass five minutes late and left immediately after Communion said,

"You have to get to know the Lord first before you make up your mind about some of the things He says. Sometimes He just gets angry and blows His top over something that appears relatively small and unimportant - divans being a case in point. He did this especially in the Old Testament. It's a part of His personality and you just have to get used to it. What can we say? 'In a quilt I was born, a sinner was I conceived'. I think you have to supply a corrective to the divan thing and that is that Jesus's approach is much more gentle and caring. Perhaps if the Lord were to know just how popular the divan was to become in the 21st century, He might have thought twice about saying that. I can understand how many think that's just offensive to modern sleepers."

The first time they tried this, he was lowered on a divan

How did Jesus treat the divan?

Speculation is rife that some of the Lord's healings in the New Testament may have had to be 're-done' because of God's dislike of the divan.

For example, the man lowered through the roof in the Gospels, we are told, is lowered down on a 'bed'. Theologians suggest that the first time the man was lowered through the roof, he was on a divan. Knowing He was to fulfill the whole law, His Apostles sent him back up the roof saying, "Look, the Lord wants to heal you, but lose the divan already! You know how much His Dad can't stand them!"

In another example, the healing of Jairus's daughter, theologians speculate whether the Lord Jesus, approaching the bed of the young girl may have realised that she was sleeping on a divan and only healed her out of his boundless compassion, in spite of his obvious misgivings about the luxury bed with the useful under-mattress storage facility so loved by the people of today.

Theologians continue to ponder on whether the Lord possibly checked under the sheets first to make sure it wasn't a divan and, seeing that it was an ordinary bed without the useful compartments for storage, healed the girl.

Mercy: The Lord heals Jairus's daughter even though she's on a divan?

As can be seen in the re-construction, the family and friends of the young girl clearly tried to cover up what kind of bed she was sleeping on. Some speculate that she was moved to a different bed, which was not a divan, while others maintain she was indeed on a divan, but the Lord, knowing everything, looked with pity and compassion upon the young girl and in His mercy healed and raised her up anyway.

Argus survey reveals crisis at heart of Catholic Church

An exclusive Argus survey of two Catholics in the region suggested that if God's position on the divan does not change substantially within the reign of Pope Francis the slumbering Church will eventually die due to lack of members. Many Catholics hope that Pope Francis will enable the Church to get with a more comfortable programme for the Church's members all round, but if he does not come up with the goods many in the Church will take at face value the words of the Lord who told the crippled man to 'take up thy bed and walk'.

'Memory foam': A mental affliction affecting many Catholics

My 'memory foam' agony

These angered Catholics, however, will take up their beds and walk out of the Church with one man saying...

"I've suffered all my life with this kind of Catholic quilt complex. Why should I have to change my bed, or even my sheets, for religious reasons? Why is the Catholic Church always interfering in the bedroom? It hurts so much, it really does no good at all for my memory foam."

'Memory foam' is a mental condition that affects many Catholics, the image to the left showing exactly what happens when Catholics are indoctrinated by the Church with notions of sin or Salvation. The graphic image let's Argus readers know just how impressionable are the minds of these Catholics, that they absorb both shock and information (shocking information) so readily.

Two minutes of pop perfection there. William, it really was nothing. It was your journalistic integrity, now lampooned regularly on the internet.

No Sex Box please, we're Catholic

I am not a prude and I am not a puritan but I find this subject distasteful to the extreme.

Even writing this post, I feel, adds a touch of voyeurism to the topic to be discussed so, forgive me, if I am oblique in my description of a television programme due to be screened shortly.

The executives of Channel Four (should that be Carnal Four?) are well known for their ability to pick up an intimate and sensitive topic, to give it a crude and sensationalist treatment and then have the nerve to present it as a piece of social record; a service to the community.

Whereas, of course, we would call it pornography.

Here's how Channel 4 describe the programme:

In a few days time they (sic) will be premiering 'Sex Box' a participatory programme Sex Box is a new sex talk show with a difference; a panel discussion about the real sex lives of people, with one exceptional twist. In a unique television format inspired by the work of sex researchers, three couples have sex, then talk about it afterwards, while the feelings and sensations are still vivid and truthful. involving couples and sex and panel discussions.

They discuss their experience with the programme's host, agony aunt Mariella Frostrup, in front of a studio audience and with a panel of experts: internationally syndicated sex columnist Dan Savage, sex body language and relationship expert Tracey Cox, and psychotherapist, broadcaster and author Phillip Hodson......

........Sex is integral to our lives. It's one of the strongest human drives. But few of us talk about it openly and honestly to those that matter most: to our partners and to young people. Many of us find it difficult or embarrassing to talk about sex.

So there you have it; the last paragraph is the justification bit. They actually go on to state that their aim is to help stamp out pornography and "reclaim sex" whatever that means.

More cant may be found under their pompous heading 'Corporate Responsibility'.

Here is an extract:

 Accountability
We aim to promote responsible behaviour.

Community
We aim to continue to play a responsible role in the community.

One does wonder at  morals of the producers and those couples who are taking part in this most important piece of journalistic hum-bug.
I believe that ferrets and weasels have a higher code of moral conduct.

But this is just one more example of how the world around us is hell bent on striving to find even lower depths of depravity.

A letter of protest (I know but we ought not to give up on protesting) is the only means we have, other than prayer, to try and slow down this process.

Here are the contact details for C4's CEO, David Abraham:-

Channel Four
124 Horseferry Road
London
SW1P 2TX






 

The Rich Man and Lazarus

The 'rich man' who suffers eternally is the one who ignores Jesus Christ, in his own lifetime and, blind to Him, never sees Him in this life, or the life of the world to come.

'If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they believe, if one rise again from the dead.'

It is striking that the Lord Jesus says this. Firstly, because the name of one man that He raises from the dead is called Lazarus, who He names in the parable today.  Secondly, of course, because He Himself will rise from the dead on the third day following His Passion and Death, during which He seems like something less than human, something cast away and scorned.

I've no doubt that this parable is to awaken within hearers the desire to love the poor and to show them Christian love and therefore be witnesses to the Lord who loves the poor. It is obvious that, since the beginning of the Church the followers of Our Lord Jesus Christ have been identified with the service of the poor. In the 21st century, this is still the case today. St Cosmos and St Damian, whose feast we celebrated last week, is but one example.

Searching for Christ in His Holy Parables

Yet every parable the Lord gives is Christological and we are always to search for Christ in them.  Jesus raises Lazarus from the dead, but Lazarus is to die another natural death later on and remain dead even if his soul is immortal. The Lord dies once but will live and reign forever more as both King and Judge. He, too, like Lazarus, is the one who will 'rise again from the dead' but to the glory of the Resurrection in His Sacred Body. Yet it is He, also, who people will not believe, or believe in, Who people will neglect and ignore at our eternal peril. People will not believe in the need to repent despite that His Church calls men to do so after His glorious Resurrection, Ascension and His sending of the Holy Spirit to His Bride, the Church.

Who is the rich man? 

The rich man is humanity - all of us - me, you, etc - but the hearers of this Gospel parable will be firstly Christians. It is to the Gospel's hearers, to the Church and then to the whole World to which the Church preaches the Truth that the parable is aimed, that we may repent and follow Jesus.

Who is the poor man?

Who is Lazarus? There can be little doubt that Lazarus is the poor man at our gate in literal terms who the Lord loves and raises up, for 'He raises the poor off the dunghill and sets him among princes, yea, even the princes of his people.' Today's collection was for CAFOD in most English churches. Well, CAFOD do (dubiously Christian) good work overseas. The Lord doesn't say that Lazarus is overseas. He says he is at our gate. He is very close by in all senses of the word! Of course, the Lord is pointing to the poor man at our gate, outside and within our Church communities and homes.

How easy it is for us to ignore our Salvation, to neglect our Saviour!

But is the Lord saying something else more as well? We can be assured that His Divine Words are most certainly saying more. Jesus becomes a type of Lazarus. We are the rich man in our flawed, fragile, fallen human nature, whether we be materially rich or materially poor, financially secure or not, feasting excessively or not. 

Why? Because whatever we have or indeed don't have, we would prefer the pleasures and passing enticements of this World than Him. In fact, most of us would prefer anything but Him, because He is the Way, the Truth and the Life and we have our own way, desire or seek our own truth and want to live our own kind of life. We need Him, He who identifies with the poor man, Lazarus, the man at the gate, in order to bring us to Salvation. Jesus tells us this parable, that we may see how much we need Him - so that we might repent and love Him with our whole heart.

If we ignore the poor man, 'Lazarus', a 'type' of man who in truth is the discarded and ignored Lord Jesus, Who we ignore out of selfish pride and selfish sinful habit, the man Who will lovingly die for us in His Passion - the 'Man of Sorrows' - yes if we ignore Jesus Christ, we will surely befall the fate of the rich man! 

"Sorry Lord, now's not a good time..."

Looking for Jesus or Looking Elsewhere?

Where is Jesus? Where have we ignored Him? Do we ignore Him or neglect Him first in our hearts? Do we push His presence out of our hearts when He is 'knocking at the door', when He is at the gate of our hearts? There He is, in our hearts, calling us lovingly to commune with Him and to pray to Him yet we resist. There He is, calling us to virtue and we resist, instead choosing our own wills! Do we drive the Lord Jesus out from our hearts through our selfishness and sin? I can say, yes!

The Lord is ever calling us to Himself, to converse with Him, to pray to Him, to cast all our cares upon Himself so that He may assist us with His love, mercy and grace, but so often, He is knocking at the door and we say, 'Now is not a good time!'

Oh, He is always knocking at the door until, tired and exhausted He slumps like Lazarus outside my heart while I feast on whatever my heart desires at the time, leaving my soul arid, dry, embittered and without Him Who I have been told to love with my whole being! Yet what do I love Him with? The spiritual equivalent of a fingernail! He is 'lucky' to get an hour's prayer out of me a day in total and in doing so, I consider Him the fortunate one! 24 hours in a day, He gets one, and I think, O haven't I done well! O what malice, what stunning ignorance of a blind and deaf sinner! For 23 hours in a day, Lazarus is ignored!

Ignored by Christians: The Lord God Almighty Himself

Jesus: The Lazarus of the Eucharist 
 
Have we ignored He who rose from the dead that we may live, fed by His Heavenly Food in the Blessed Sacrament? Do we receive Him in a State of mortal sin and make sacrilegious communions? Do we neglect to visit Him in the Tabernacle? Do we pay no attention to the neglected Most Holy Sacrament of the Altar? Do we receive Him lovingly or indifferently?

At this time, if ever there were a poor Man, a Lazarus most neglected, most discarded and most unloved, there is He, in the Tabernacle! How many pass Him by and how few pay Him any attention! Daily there is God in every town, in every Tabernacle waiting for us to visit Him. How He yearns for us. Yet we would rather do other things! How perverse is the nature of the rich man, we, humanity, when the Lord of all the Universe wants us and we reject or ignore Him!

Jesus neglected and ignored in the Confessional

Jesus: The Lazarus of the Confessional

Do we ignore the neglected Jesus at the gate when He is waiting for us in the Confessional, so that we may not suffer the fate of the rich man and die out of His love? How patiently does this most ignored Jesus wait for us in the person of His priest, yearning to give us His mercy so we may not die out of His friendship, yet we resist due to the perversity of our nature and flee His light, His goodness and mercy! Yet there He is at the gate of the Confessional, poor, neglected, ignored - we don't even see Him!

Jesus: The Lazarus of the Priest

We are called to assist spiritually and temporally our Priests who stand in the place of Jesus in the Church's Sacraments and who have been indelibly marked made by ordination as 'alter Christus'. Do we help and assist them and our parish, financially, practically and spiritually by our prayers. How indifferent we are to our priests so much of the time, yet it is they who bring us Jesus, the only true and lasting riches we should seek!

Jesus: The Lazarus of the Suffering and the Persecuted Church

The suffering souls in Purgatory await our prayers to God. What do we do for them? They who are so helpless and who are unable to assist their own selves? The persecuted Church around the World, especially in the Middle East, riven by terrorism and the desecration of Churches, while the slaughter of Christians continues unabated await our prayers and support. How interesting it is that while the genocide of Christians goes on every day, this is not of the least interest to the world's media! The media is never interested in Lazarus. Are we interested in aiding them with at least our prayers?

The glory of Jesus and the triumph of Lazarus turns 'worldly triumph' on its head

Yes. Lazarus dies neglected, unloved and alone, forgotten in the hearts of rich and worldly men interested only in furthering their own pleasure and excess. Jesus is the Victim of our sins. As sure as 'Lazarus' is taken into the 'bosom of Abraham' at his death, so Jesus, the true Lazarus, is taken after His Passion and Death and Ascension to the Bosom, yet more, to the Right Hand of the Eternal Father. Lazarus's comforting is a 'type' of the triumph of Jesus over sin and death, to reign at the Right Hand of God the Father, so that those who refuse the love, mercy and grace of the true Lazarus, the One who 'comes back from the dead' is appointed Judge of both the living and the dead and a 'great gulf' exists between those who choose Him in this life and will live forever with Him and those who do not choose Him in this life, who die without Him and who shall live without Him forever more.

And so Holy Mother Church continues to warn Her children and the whole World of the fate of those who ignore Jesus, the true and victorious Lazarus, who died but dies no more, who suffered but will suffer no more, yet Who suffered and died and rose again for the love of us all. Ignore Jesus at your peril! Christians are called to recognise Him in all those places in which He can be found. Yes, in the poor man at the gate, yes in the sick and imprisoned, but also in those most neglected of places - our hearts, our souls, in the Most Holy Eucharist, in the Sacrament of Penance, in the Holy Souls, in His priests, in the persecuted Church around the World. 

Let us not be blind to Jesus, since He has said that those who ignore Him in these places where He can be found, ignore Him at our eternal peril. Jesus is the One Who reigns not just in the Bosom, but at the Right Hand of the Father Almighty. He is comforted. His suffering and torment on Earth over, He lives forevermore. We, too, will live forever more, but we must choose our eternal destiny. Will we repent and seek Jesus for grace so that we will live lives of peace, justice, virtue, mercy and victory with Him, or will we choose eternal separation from He Who is the True and Everlasting Lazarus - the glorious Resurrected One, Jesus Christ, Our Blessed Lord.

'If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they believe, if one rise again from the dead.'

The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith

The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith (1978) makes for bleak viewing. Fred Schepsi's Outback epic achieved notoriety for its extreme violence, which is only part of its rich texture. It's a disquieting mediation on race and colonialism, trapping its protagonist between rebellion and self-destruction.

Jimmie Blacksmith (Tom E. Lewis) is a half-caste Aborigine raised by the Reverend Neville (Jack Thompson). Jimmie tries to fit in to Australian society, working as a laborer, farmhand and policeman and marrying the white Gilda (Angela Punch Macgregor). But he can't overcome engrained white prejudice and grows increasingly bitter. Then Gilda gives birth to a white child, whose parentage Jimmie doubts. His latest employer (Don Crosby) finally pushes Jimmie too far, triggering a bloody killing spree. 

Outwardly, The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith seems a standard liberal outrage picture. Australia's had a long history of mistreating or exploiting its aboriginals, whether through extermination or intermarriage with whites. This subject's informed a number of recent films, notably Rabbit-Proof Fence (2002) and Australia (2008). Some later scenes do espouse an overt message, as when schoolmaster McCreadie (Peter Carroll) enumerates the "benefits" (namely alcohol and measles!) that Europeans introduced to Australia. But Schepsi, adapting Thomas Keneally's novel, mostly makes his points through nuanced storytelling.

Jimmie starts out submissive and cheerful, wearing white clothes and smiling at insults. He's considered a hopeful prospect for civilizing: Neville encourages him to marry a white girl to produce quarter-black offspring (and hence dilute the native gene pool). But his efforts to act white only earn suspicion and condescension. McCreadie's friendliness unnerves Jimmie: a man who unblinkingly killed an infant can't bring himself to harm someone who genuinely respects him. Whether playing the "good native" or rapacious savage, Jimmie's lost his own sense of agency: he's defined and destroyed by the European mindset.

Yet Schepsi avoids making Jimmie Blacksmith a revenge fantasy, or its protagonist a Civil Rights martyr. Indeed, Jimmie's a morally compromised character from the start: he doesn't mind maiming Aboriginals as a policeman (though he draws the line at murder). He certainly forfeits our sympathy when he butchers whole families with rifles and axes. This rampage makes the Apache depredations of Ulzana's Raid seem chivalrous, yet points to the story's tragedy. Australian society, from callous officials to a ruthless posse, now has license to slam uppity "blacks" into place.

Schepsi skillfully evokes turn-of-the-century Australia, mixing period design with dialogue about the upcoming Federation and the Boer War. (One pointed aside has a character contrasting Britain's critique of Boer racism with their own treatment of native Australians.) As expected the violence is graphic, complete with axe murders, shootouts and brutal beatings. It's contrasted effectively with beautiful Australian scenery, bolstered by Ian Baker's gorgeous photography and Bruce Smeaton's suitably tragic score. It's a gritty, violent show that nonetheless achieves aesthetic grandeur.

Tom E. Lewis (The Proposition) gives a remarkable turn. He's effortlessly charming yet lets hints of Jimmie's frustration periodically slip through. His first murder impacts viewers like a carefully timed explosion. Steve Dodd and Freddy Reynolds play Jimmie's relatives drawn into his vendetta. Several up-and-coming Australian stars feature in supporting parts: Jack Thompson (Breaker Morant) as the Reverend, Angela Punch Macgregor as Jimmie's wife, Peter Carroll (The Last Wave) as the obsequious McCreadie and Brian Brown in a walk-on role.

The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith is a remarkably powerful film. Rarely listed among the highlights of the Australian New Wave, its violent pessimism earns comparison to that period's best American Westerns.

Pope Francis Taking Ecumensim to a New Level

Photo by Elisabetta Pique: Rabbi Skorka in front of Santa Marta

Courtesy of Vatican Insider.

'Argentina’s Rabbi Abraham Skorka, in this interview, tells how Pope Francis and he are making history by their friendship, and reveals that they dream of travelling together to the Holy Land soon', Gerard O’Connell, Rome

'Never before in the history of Christian-Jewish relations have a Pope and a Rabbi celebrated their friendship by living in the Vatican together for several days, sharing all meals, including on two Jewish festivals and the Sabbath at which the Rabbi said prayers in Hebrew, and discussing what more they can do together to promote dialogue and peace in the world.

That is what actually happened over the past four days at the Vatican guesthouse (Santa Marta) where Pope Francis lives and where his friend from Buenos Aires, Rabbi Abraham Skorka, has been his guest from September 25 to this day.

“I eat with him at breakfast, lunch and dinner every day. He cares for me, and controls everything regarding my food to makes sure it is all kosher, and according to my religious tradition. These are festive days, and I have to say certain prayers at meals and, I expand the last prayer and translate it. He accompanies me together with the others at table -his secretaries and a bishop, and they all say ‘Amen’ at the end”, the Rabbi said.

By acting in this way, the Pope and Rabbi are sending an extraordinary message of friendship, dialogue and peace not only to their respective religious communities but also to the whole world. And they plan to do even more together, Rabbi Skorka revealed when we talked together at Santa Marta, on September 27.

He and the Pope are planning to travel together to the Holy Land next year. The Israeli and Palestinian authorities have invited Pope Francis, and the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, Bartholomew1, wants him to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the historic meeting of his predecessor, Athenagoras, with Paul VI in the Holy City.

“We are dreaming of traveling together to Israel soon, and the Pope is working on this subject”, the Rabbi said. “I dream of embracing him at the Kotel, or Wailing Wall, and I will accompany him to Bethlehem, in the Palestinian territories. His presence can help a lot at this moment when the peace talks are starting again”, he added.

Skorka sees a deep spiritual significance for both of them in being together at the sites that are sacred to their respective religions. “I do not cease to be a Jew for him, and he goes on keeping his own faith. But the two spiritualities have to have a point of encounter. We cannot live in a world where we reject each other, we must build bridges.”

He believes his friend “has become a spiritual reference point for the whole world, not just for the Catholic Church” as was evidenced recently when he called for a day of prayer and fast for peace in Syria.

“Ours is a spiritual journey”, he said of their friendship which dates back to 1997 when Bergoglio became coadjutor bishop of Buenos Aires archdiocese. “Like him I don’t much like the protocol, and like him I too go for the essentials”, he added. Since then, they have done many things together, including producing an interview book – Sobre el cielo y la tierra (‘On heaven and earth’) that has been translated into several languages and will soon be in Hebrew too.

“We hold to different traditions, but we are creating a dialogue that has not existed for centuries. Both of us believe that God has something to do with our friendship and with what we are doing. There are too many coincidences for it all to be mere chance”, said Skorka, 63, who is Rector of the Latin American Rabbinic Seminary.

“We come together without burying our identities. I spoke to him about evangelization, and he stated emphatically that the Catholic Church cannot engage in proselytism”, he said...'

Click here for full article...

"Consider yourselves already dead"

The American Catholic yesterday carried a fine post featuring clips from the 1949 film '12 O'Clock High'.

Gregory Peck plays a WW2 USAF commander who addresses his aircrews about to embark on a fraught and dangerous mission.

His message could apply to us all today (see yesterday's post HERE).

I am not being either alarmist or fatalistic when I state that, within a very few years, we will have Catholic martyrs in the west just as, today, we have them in the east.

If trends continue at the current pace, in 20 years time we will have full blown Sharia law on the streets of London.


Try walking down Oxford Street in 2033 dressed in a mini skirt and sleeveless blouse (if you are female, of course).

Or strolling back from the off-licence with a bottle of Vino Collapso about your person.

You will be fortunate to escape with a flogging.

So Wingco Peck's message is an apposite one, a mantra that we Catholics should adopt (if a martyred saint has not already laid claim to it).

With a rather large leap of the imagination into a world of fantasy (something that I am increasingly good at these days), one might imagine Gregory Peck as the Pope addressing his cardinals.

Those words might cause a certain tightening around the collars amongst their Eminences.

A foretaste of what may be to come perhaps?

Now Remember, Children...

Pope Francis's Five Fingered Prayer

After you've done that, grab the nearest Rosary and pray the Pope doesn't appoint Marini to the CDW.

Prophecies Becoming Clearer

'Night of Screams': Garabandal children foresee Archbishop Marini in charge of liturgy...

If rumours are true,  then now we know what the children of Garabandal saw... 

The horror.

The horror.

So, you think you are a Catholic right?

But are you really a Catholic? 
One who lives, eats and breathes the Faith?

We need more than pious expressions

By that I do not mean spending your day with your hands clasped together and an annoyingly pious look on your face.

I mean that, in every action of your working or social day life, do you weigh up responses and actions and words so that you both reflect the light of Christ and convey to those around you that you are one of the Flock, not one of the herd?

It's not easy.

It's going to get tougher.

The pressure on Christians, and on Catholics in particular, is becoming more intense daily.

This is not an 'Apocalypse Now' sort of a post, but, it must be admitted, that the end of times should ever be in our thoughts.

This is a post concerning the downward spiral of morals and morality; the decline of decency and the upsurge of war, terror, famine and pestilence.

Back in the 1970s, the late Archbishop Fulton Sheen was proclaiming that "Christendom is dead.....Christendom is finished" - but he went on to say that Christianity was still alive.

45 years later it may be true to say that Christianity is in its death throes; the Holy Father has said that the Catholic Church could fall like a house of cards. He does not mean (I trust) that it will disappear off the face of the earth, we know that, in the end "my Immaculate Heart will triumph" but we are likely to be flattened and scattered just as a house of cards, when it collapses.

I trust that I will not be around to see Holy Mother Church in extremis.

But the young Catholics of today will have to face....what?

Not just abuse and derision, we have had that ever since Christ trod the earth.

They will have to face actual persecution, imprisonment and, as in Egypt, Syria, Kenya and Pakistan at present - a real and bloody martyrdom.

Persecution, in the western world, will take the form of accusations and trials for those who resist the incoming tide of sewage.

Same Sex "Marriages", collaboration in abortions, opposition to fundamentalist Islam (which will, mark my words, morph into everyday Islam) - in short, any form of opposition to the politically correct agenda, whether outwardly secular or, inwardly, from within the Church, will result in Catholics suffering for the Faith.

Not just Catholic Doctors and Nurses but also clerical and administrative workers, social workers, hoteliers and those in the hospitality industry, pharmacists, the list is endless.

Sooner or later, all will be called to witness their Faith.

What can be done?

Right now we can pray the Rosary, live the Fatima message of penance and reparation.

We can also recognise that apparently minor drift such as allowing Muslim prayer rooms in Catholic Schools and 'Inter faith' visits to the local mosque or temple, are actually far from being 'inter faith' and are purely one sided, encouraging Catholics to participate in idolatry and heresy.

Priests who stray from Canon Law in their dress, behaviour or liturgical abuses need to be brought to account.
Bishops should be reported to the Nuncio or Rome direct.

And our fellow Catholics must be made aware, not by shoving latin texts down their throats but by reasoned, charitable debate - they have a very long journey to make, not having looked in the mirror for quite some time.

We need to make our Faith shine out so that, by our deeds, words and actions, we show that there is opposition to moral decay; that the forces of darkness cannot command the high ground - that ground belongs to us and we will not surrender it.

It may surprise some to learn that the majority of Muslims believe that we church going Christians are a degenerate, immoral bunch of savages.

One small way of rolling back those misconceptions is to say Grace before meals when in mixed company; inaudibly to ourselves (and God) and by making the sign of the Cross.

If you have not done that in public before, it takes a little bit of teeth gritting until you get used to it.

I remember having a coffee at Heathrow Airport a few years back when my attention was caught by a young woman at a nearby table, about to tuck into her meal. She paused for a second, blessed herself, said Grace and then blessed herself again.

That example gave me the courage to start saying Grace before meals in public.

It is the young Catholics who will inspire and enthuse and ensure Our Lady's promise will be fulfilled.

Rocco and His Brothers

Luchino Visconti quickly abandoned his neo-realist roots for more ambitious works. La Terra Trema (1948) shows Visconti experimenting with the epic format, albeit with docudrama styling. Senso (1954) provides an exorbitant Technicolor romance. Rocco and His Brothers (1960) is similarly conventional, a long but intimate study of an Italian family's trials and tribulations. This long but absorbing show matches Visconti's later epics in everything but scope.

Along with their mother (Katina Paxinou), the Laprondi brothers relocate from rural Italy to Milan, where they find difficulty fitting in. Vincenzo (Spiros Focas), already established in the city, is charged with housing his relatives, causing tensions with his fiancee (Claudia Cardinale). Rocco (Alain Delon) struggles with menial jobs then joins the Army. Ciro (Max Cartier) studies at university. Then there's Simone (Renato Salvatori), whose work as a boxer draws him into less reputable activities. A fling with prostitute Nadia (Annie Girardot) has dire consequences when she also falls for Rocco.

Many label Rocco as a neo-realist film, but this is misleading. Despite the working class setting it's really a classic, big-scale melodrama like The Best Years of Our Lives. Visconti spends much time drawing the family conflict, watching the small-town Parondis adjust to life in Milan. The city makes mincemeat of the brothers, drawing them into crime or else dehumanizing, unsatisfying work; even the educated Ciro ends up in a factory. Yet unlike La Terra Trema, this isn't a Marxist tract but a layered character drama.

Visconti's script provides an episodic structure, ostensibly developing each of the Parondi brothers. But the narrative's main thrust (and interest) involves the feud between Rocco and Simone. Visconti avoids the temptation to make Rocco a saint; he's nice and well-meaning, but essentially complacent. In contrast, Simone soon slides into desperation and depravity. There's a disturbingly sexual dynamic between Simone and his manager (Nino Castelnuovo), who openly ogles Simone in a shower. Inevitably the catalyst between Simone and Rocco is Nadia; she narrowly escapes audience contempt by developing a belated sense of self-worth.

Visconti provides direction unfussy yet stylish. He and photographer Giuseppe Rotunno show a nice eye for the grunginess of factories, freezing tenements and smoke-filled boxing arenas, but make the show suitably cinematic. Throughout he casts moody shadows and crafts stylish set pieces like Simone's final confrontation with Nadia. If Nadia stretching her arms Christlike rings false, the scene's dramatic impact compensates. Despite its nearly three-hour length, Rocco never grows tiresome like some of Visconti's later works.

Alain Delon scored his big break playing a nice character a world apart from his gangster roles. Renato Salvatori (Z) draws pity, showing Simone as unable to overcome his shortcomings. Annie Girardot (The Witches) makes a strong impression, alternately tragic and hysterical. Claudia Cardinale appears briefly as Vincenzo's feisty fiancee. Nino Castelnuovo and Paolo Stoppa (Once Upon a Time in the West) play crooked boxing managers. Katina Paxinou (For Whom the Bell Tolls) gets stuck playing a stereotyped Italian matriarch but makes it work.

Rocco and His Brothers stands out as an affecting drama. There's no greater tragedy in melodrama than a family self-destructing, whether Willy Loman's brood or the Corleones. Visconti shows a family struggling, suffering, but finally enduring.

Just what sort of a Catholic are you?

Want to know if you are a traditional Catholic, a liberal or a reactionary, misguided omadhaun?

"Umm....maybe I'm in the omadhaun category"

Take this test that will tell you precisely where you stand in the Church.

Left, right or centre.

Please check through from 1 to 12 selecting one option from each numerical unit.

Each point is a question based on an action, preference or belief:-

 1a) Prefer to receive Holy Communion standing and in the hand
 1b. Receive Holy Communion kneeling by mouth
 1c) Sitting in a circle and passing the Body of Christ around

2a) Dislike electric candles

2b) Have an affection for felt banners in church

2c) New age incense and Buddha sticks are your thing

 3a) Mass with clown priests and fancy tricks turns you on
 3b) You inhale deeply when the thurible passes by

 3c) Dancing on the sanctuary holds a certain fascination for you

4a) Latin is the universal language of the Church
4b) Inclusive language in all things man sorry! person

4c) Any language is OK (as long as it’s not Latin)

5a) Reserve hair and nail clippings just in case you become a saint

5b) Believe that we all go to heaven (apart from Adolf Hitler and a few others)

5c) Want to come back to earth as a butterfly

6a) Like Mass in churches that are rectangular with stained glass

6b) Prefer Masses in round churches round like a distorted spaceship

6c) Adopt a ‘let’s do it here’ approach as to where you attend Mass

7a) ‘‘Shine, Jesus Shine"

7b) "Faith of Our Fathers"

7c) "I wish I was a Wriggly Worm"

8a) Pray quietly with joined hands

8b) Hold the ‘invisible beachball’

8c) Wiggle your hands in the air whilst ululating

9a) Read the missal version of the kiss of peace
9b) Go for the full on lips approach

9c) Give your neighbour in the pew a bear hug

10a) Debate on the concept of hypostatic union in the pub

10b) Have difficulty in naming the seven sacraments

10c) Don’t know what a sacrament is

11a) Read The Catholic Herald
11b) The Catholic Times
11c) Remove old copies of The Tablet for re-cycling

12a) Drink vanilla and peach tea
12b) Red wine or real ale

12c) Alcohol free lager shandy

Now, here is the analysis of your scores:

If you answered as follows (1b/2a/3b/4a/5a/6a/7b/8a/9a/10a/11c/12b)

Then, congratulations, you are a true blue, traditional a Catholic - an asset to any parish.

We recommend:

Keeping on the path you have selected, the following steps will help you:-

a) Break into Salve Regina at the top of your voice when in the bank or supermarket
b) Ask your priest if he will drop the Lakota Mass and replace it with a Latin one.
c) Knee in the groin any professional parish 'greeter' who meets you outside church

However, if you scored read as: (1a/2b/3c/4c/5b/6b/7a/8b/9c/10b/11a/12c)

You are definitely in the liberal category (hard luck). You probably also favour women priests, married clergy and believe that mortal sin died the death some few minutes before Vatican II sat for the first time.

We recommend:

a) Buy a copy of the Catechism and memorise it
b) Say the following line before you climb into bed each night: "Dogma is unchangeable, the Catholic Church is our authority" - repeat this several thousand times.
c) Take more exercise - try touching the floor with your knees regularly.

And, finally, if you scored as follows:- (1c/2c/3a/4b/5c/6c/7c/8c/9b/10c/11b/12c)

You are a misguided omadhaun and need to purify your system, start by drinking five gallons of holy water a day and then:

We recommend:

a) Attend regular colonic irrigation sessions, North Korean style
b) Burn all unCatholic possessions such as buddha place mats and photographs of your bishop.
c) Cancel your liturgical dance classes and take up plainchant

And, should you fall outside of all of those categories, then, sorry, but you are on the wrong bus.

We recommend:

a) A do it yourself lobotomy kit comprising one club hammer and a cold chisel

And, if you conduct point a) successfully, you will be relieved to know that there is no point b) or c).

Remains of King George VI to be re-interred in Westminster Cathedral

Well, that might give one or two folk in Lambeth Palace an attack of the vapours.

Let's imagine a few more public figures and where they might be re-buried.....

Queen Elizabeth I to be given a Requiem Mass at The London Oratory

or, maybe

Sir Ian Paisley to finish up (when he does actually die) at St James's, Spanish Place.

Stephen Fry (God bless him) when the time comes should, perhaps go to somewhere a little more humble, St Patrick's Soho Square, a mere stone's throw from a certain watering hole much favoured by the Fry fans.

But the whole concept of taking people away from their spiritual (or atheist) roots is risible.

Some 18 years ago, Tescos wanted to develop part of the Welsh town of Carmarthen so that they could have another superstore and massive car park.

The trouble was that the site that they identified as being the best they could get, had once been a monastery and cemetery for the monks.

Never ones to over worry about religious sensitivities, they went ahead to develop but not before agreeing for the mortal remains to be exhumed and re-buried accompanied by a full TLM, a Latin Mass no less.

It can be done. It should be done with the remains of Richard III.

Into Great Silence

Having already made a dramatic impression on the life of the Franciscans of the Immaculate, one has to ask whether it is all part of some strange Jesuit plot?

Not everyone is called to 'go out to the peripheries'. Some are called to be simply faithful husbands and wives, devoted to family, others to the contemplative life, others to the active life. I have been out to the peripheries and have now learned not to let the peripheries know where you live. I wouldn't wish that on a family!

To me, the time I have with Jesus is precious. It really is not that much time I spend with Him. I wish I could spend more time with Jesus than I do. I appreciate the opportunity to spend an hour with the Lord at Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament.

Thankfully, it is quiet there in the Church. That hour is more valuable than any active service I may do for those who I see in the 'real world'. Of course, it is the 'real world' that messed them up and where nobody showed them the love of Jesus.

Frankly, if you don't spend time with Jesus in quiet, in prayer, your service to those in whom you serve Jesus will be poor. Prayer and works go hand in hand. Works without prayer will be fruitless. Without peace and quiet, it is difficult to pray. Thankfully, the Holy Father went on:

'While reading the catechism is necessary, it’s not enough, he said. “It’s necessary to know Jesus in dialogue with him, talking with him, in prayer, on your knees. If you don’t pray, if you don’t talk with Jesus, you don’t know him.”'

St Francis: Enjoyed periods of peace and quiet

But we need peace and quiet to pray! Also, what about finding Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament? What about finding Jesus in the Gospels (Dei Verbum, anybody?), or in the works of the Saints that you may find in a library? What about the Dominican's study and prayerful meditation, the fruit of which is preaching? What about finding Jesus in the Sacrament of Penance?

Please, Holy Father, Your Holiness, do not present us with a reductionist, one-dimensional vision of the Christian life and mission. There are a variety of gifts to the Church, of which the service of the poor is but one. St Francis of Assisi received the stigmata while in ecstatic prayer in a peaceful and quiet location in La Verna.

I know that people will say, 'Laurence, you're taking the Holy Father's words out of their context' or 'Laurence, you're misinterpreting what he is saying' but maybe if the Holy Father were to say less things 'off the cuff' old grumps like me would be less grumpy. We have a duty to love the Holy Father, but surely the Holy Father has a duty to teach us the fullness of the Faith, not one aspect in isolation, divorced from the rest. Jesus can be found and served in the poor in the real world. He can also be found in every tabernacle in every Catholic Church in every Diocese around the World until the End of Time. It is notable that at this time belief in the Real Presence of Our Lord in the Eucharist is at an ebb. It is also noteworthy that while His Holiness has described the poor as the 'flesh' of Jesus, He has said not a great deal at all about the Lord's Flesh and Blood in the Most Holy Eucharist.

'You won't find Jesus there mate!'

Please, Holy Father, teach us to love Jesus in the poor and neglected, but also too in the Most Holy Sacrament of the Altar, for He is our Life, our Heavenly Food, our Salvation. Did not St Peter say, 'Lord, increase our Faith'!?

Teach us, also, to pray, so that in a world so full of enticing illusions, we find our true Reality in Him.


I'm getting more than a bit narked off with writing not completely supportive posts about the Holy Father. I'm considering going 'into great silence' myself for a while. The fact that His Holiness said you won't find Jesus in a library when that's probably where Pope Emeritus Benedict is right now is a little 'insensitive'.  Grrrrr!!!

There is an interesting post at The Hermeneutic of Continuity.

 Fr Tim covers the case of the Christian preacher, a Reverend Williamson, arrested in Scotland for "shouting" in the street.

We could have an interesting debate as to whether he was shouting or, as I suspect, speaking in a manner designed to carry his message effectively to those who passed by.

The fact is, that this poor man was bunged into the chokey for 5 hours - because he proclaimed the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

But Fr T also mentions a television programme of the 80s, almost erased from my brain cell, 'Not the Nine O'Clock News'

Here is the clip referred to:

                           

Rich pickings for many future posts at NTNON...thank you Father T.

Every Catholic parent should read this

There are some inspirational blogs out there but, every so often, you come across a post that is not just well crafted but also shows great insight and the ability to make the point clearly and effectively.
Catholic Tide carried the link to the Archdiocese of Washington HERE.

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows

Guy Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (2011) is a textbook bad sequel. I found 2009's Sherlock Holmes entertaining if disposable fluff, but A Game of Shadows is so formulaic it's impossible to enjoy, even as a Friday night popcorn flick.

Years after his last adventure, Sherlock Holmes (Robert Downey Jr.) charts a series of assassinations and terrorist bombings across Europe. Holmes suspects a pattern, determining that Professor Moriarty (Jared Harris) plans to trigger war between France and Germany while selling arms to both sides. Closer to home, Holmes entertains mixed feelings as Watson (Jude Law) becomes engaged to Mary (Kelly Reilly), though she's disposed of when Moriarty's assassins target Watson on his honeymoon. Also along for the ride are a gypsy fortune teller (Noomi Rapace), Holmes' well-connected brother Mycroft (Stephen Fry) and a mysterious killer, Tiger Moran (Paul Anderson).

A Game of Shadows provides a parade of cliches. For all the intricate period detail and overdone humor (even 12 year old viewers will tire of the homoerotic Holmes-Watson jokes), Ritchie barely surpasses Michael Bay sensibilities: fight scenes, clipped exposition, rote character development, forced humor, murder, explosion. Writers Michele and Kieran Mulroney utterly fail to raise the stakes or flesh out their protagonists, even with a larger cast and threat of world war. Maybe the finale will shock you if you haven't seen The Dark Knight Rises, The Avengers or Skyfall. This movie's so rote it would fail a Turing test.

The deal breaker is Ritchie's direction. The original Sherlock occasionally grated with its jerky, over-choreographed fight scenes, but Shadows takes it to absurd Looney Tunes levels. The initially-cool idea of Sherlock mapping out his fight moves for the audience grows annoying through repetition. Do we really need a two minute flashback showing how Sherlock rigged a villain's rifle to misfire? When Ritchie's not shooting fights in inscrutable close-up, he's using slow motion and undercranking effects in painfully obvious ways. Watch cannon balls and bullets zip past our heroes, splintering trees and grazing cloaks!

Robert Downey Jr. wears out his welcome. Where Tony Stark successfully retained his roguish charm through four films, Downey's Sherlock becomes a self-consciously obnoxious bore. Jude Law makes a bland foil. A few glimmers come from the supporting cast: while Noomi Rapace's (Prometheus) gypsy sidekick is wasted, Jared Harris (Lincoln) makes an agreeably understated Moriarty, backed by a vicious Paul Anderson. Stephen Fry makes ideal casting as Mycroft,but he's barely in the film.

There's nothing wrong with mindless action if done well. But Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows doesn't offer anything beyond insipid cliches. There's no charm or excitement to be had, just chintzy steampunk aesthetic and Robert Downey Jr. doing his best Jack Sparrow impression. Enough already.

The EF Mass 'cannot' be banned

In my previous post I speculated on a Plan B if the unthinkable happened and the Latin Mass was banned.

It was a speculation.

I hope that it will never happen and, yes, I do know that it 'cannot' be banned but, sometimes life throws a googly at you and the impossible becomes possible.

I would like to thank those who commented and to post here, a comment made by a young Catholic woman named Hannah.

If there is anything to make me feel on top of the world (apart from two pints of Rev James), it is to see the witness of young Catholics.

Here is Hannah's comment, I hope she will forgive me for bringing it to the fore:-


"The Traditional Latin Mass cannot be banned and thank God for that.

I would be completely heartbroken if that happened. The banning of the Latin Mass would be the cherry on the top of this Chastisement the Church is undergoing.

The Church is under the judgement of God.
I pray that it will come to end.......soon.

To those who cannot attend a reverent Liturgy, have hope.

The Church will return to her former glory. You may think I'm crazy for saying that, but it's true.

Our Lady triumphs in the end. We must continue to hope and pray.

And, especially, give God due worship at the Holy Sacrifice.

The Latin Mass means so much to me. I will always love my traditional Catholic Faith.

I feel so close to God at the Latin Mass. I really can't describe it.

The Latin Mass is indescribable. I feel sorry for those who hate it.

Only the worst enemies of Holy Mother Church could hate it, could hate tradition and our heritage.

If you haven't been, GO! GO GO GO! You will never regret. It's amazing to sit there in silence before Mass without having to listen to the yakking before and after Mass.

It's amazing not to have to watch people treat God like a cracker aka Communion in the hand.

It's amazing not to see armies of lay people handle God ahd the sacred vessels.

It's amazing to be able to kneel to receive the Holy Eucharist on the tongue at the altar rail. And so on and so on.

Most of all, it's amazing to be able to lift your mind and heart to God in a Mass where you KNOW Heaven meets Earth."

Thank you Hannah.

RIP Luciano Vincenzoni

Italian screenwriter Luciano Vincenzoni passed away Sunday at age 87. He's best-remembered for his contentious collaboration with Sergio Leone, writing or co-writing the scripts for For a Few Dollars More, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly and Duck, You Sucker! He also penned the scripts for A Professional Gun and Death Rides a Horse, the Oscar-nominated The Great War (1959) and a variety of other films - including that timeless masterpiece Orca.

Leone fans are keenly encouraged to check out Cenk Kiral's old interview with Vincenzoni here. He's very frank about his relationship with Sergio, and just a bit arrogant. Of course, if you co-wrote The Good, the Bad and the Ugly you're entitled to a slight ego.

Digesting Excommunication: Questions

A thought popped into my mind today following news of the excommunication of an Australian heretical priest. The thought was this:

'Did Pope Benedict XVI excommunicate anyone?'

So, I've just done a search. This pontificate just gets more perplexing. It's a rollercoaster. No two days are the same. So here's the gist:

Just two orders of excommunication have come from the Pope in the 20th century, none in the 21st. The most famous excommunications of recent (though not my recent) memory are Fidel Castro, excommunicated by Blessed Pope John XXIII and the Lefebrevists (forgive me if I never spell it right) who were declared automatically excommunicated by Blessed Pope John Paul II. I don't know whether it was he himself or a Diocesan or other Bishop who pronounced the excommunications. Excommunications which have come through the Pope's office are rare. Incredibly rare. Yet out of the blue, today it happens! If I've missed out on any other papal excommunications, forgive me and let me know what I've missed out.

In the case of the Bishop of Toowoomba, the Bishop William Morris was, I believe laicised, not excommunicated, though I am happy for someone to correct me. Benedict XVI didn't like just excommunicating people. It wasn't his style. He had the exterior of a rottweiler, but was on the inside something of a chihuahua. That's a compliment, by the way. In examining this Wikipedia article on excommunication, throughout the 20th century, these events were incredibly rare, rarer in the 21st.

Greg Reynolds holds his heavenly P45 certificate

But now we get to Pope Francis...

In fact, excommunications usually - almost always - come from a Diocesan level, unless the one being excommunicated is a Bishop perhaps, so it is strange therefore that Pope Francis and Rome acted 'unilaterally' in excommunicating a renegade priest supporting lady priests and homosexual acts.

It is strange - especially in the light of the Pope's recent interview - that such action was taken out of concert with the Bishop of the Diocese in which the priest ministered in his own heretical - though not uniquely heretical - way. The interview with Pope Francis made it clear that the Pope believed this concerning complaints about orthodoxy:

"It is amazing to see the denunciations for lack of orthodoxy that come to Rome. I think the cases should be investigated by the local bishops’ conferences, which can get valuable assistance from Rome. These cases, in fact, are much better dealt with locally."

Others have noted that this is a problem because at a local level, so often, nothing happens to stop wolves from entering the sheepfold and tearing the lambs to pieces. I say this because behind the scenes Bishops even in dear old England seem to be working towards advocating similar things and then denying anything ("nothing to do with me guv'nor") when challenged about it. So are we to be glad about this extraordinary measure which we are told came through (at least) the Pope's office, or a little concerned? It is not so obvious as one would at first think.

Benedict XVI laicised a scandalous Bishop. He lifted the excommunication on the Lefebrevist Bishops. I don't think (correct me if I am wrong) he excommunicated anyone. Perhaps Pope Francis, because he has laid the groundwork of a media-friendly first six months and because he is near universally popular within the Church feels he can do this and still hold the ship together. We hope and pray he can and governs wisely. We don't know, we certainly cannot read his mind. I'm sure we should wait for more facts to emerge, but...

Two things have me concerned though:

First: If this came straight through or from the Pope, then it is unusually 'ultramontane' for His Holiness to do this, even if this kind of action is welcomed by faithful Catholics fed up to the back teeth of heretical priests and even Bishops. Why praise collegiality with the Bishops and then excommunicate a renegade priest soon afterwards? Why not just let the Bishop do it, or get the Bishop to do it? I thought the Pope was not a 'renaissance prince' governing the Church as his personal fiefdom. Sorry to sound irreverent, but I'm confused by this. Two conflicting messages are coming through.

Second: No reason was given for the excommunication. Tim Stanley says, 'Well it's obvious', and so it is...to us...who trust in the orthodoxy and soundness of our beloved Pope. However, excommunication without a reason is a little 'authoritarian' if it comes straight from the top when a Bishop at Diocesan level could have done it perfectly well. I know I'm beginning to sound like a Tablet columnist, but first media reports are suggesting an extraordinary use of papal privilege in exercising the Keys at a time when the same Pope is calling for important decisions to be handled by local Bishops. I'm glad Pope Francis is taking charge of the Church when, at a local level, Bishops cannot be trusted necessarily to act for the good of the flock, as witnessed recently when Bishops allow wolves to come in and campaign for the kind of things this renegade priest is into. However, I'd sound a note of caution too. Can the Pope just excommunicate whoever he likes and give no reason? This excommunication has been delivered from the top down to the bottom. There is no suggestion it was done in concert with the Bishop of the Diocese. Without wishing to go against my advice concerning how to be loyal to the Pope this morning ("pray, hope and don't worry"), I'm wondering what would happen if the Pope woke up one morning and decided someone in the Church was too 'Conservative'?

Er...we love you Pope Francis!

Yikes. For all you priests, bishops and cardinals in Rome, may I suggest you hold back on that new car and go for something a little more Franciscan. If the car you are thinking of buying is newer than 2005, I'd think again. Quite where this whole episode leaves ACTA and Terence Weldon...and the more traditionally-minded Owlie is anybody's guess! I hope I don't get a certificate through the post tomorrow. I wouldn't wish it on Owlie nor even a wilful heretic. Ultimately, excommunication is the measure of last resort to bring someone back to Jesus Christ and His Church. St Pio of Pietrelcina told us all intrigue and scandal is useless compared to the glory of Heaven, but did he see Pope Francis's first six months coming?