It's Like Talking to a...

More Receptive to Church Teaching than Tina Beattie?

Tina Beattie's back from her holiday and has posted this little nugget on her blog.

'Jennifer Sleeman, an Irish grandmother, has called on Catholic women to boycott Mass on 26th September and to stay at home and pray for change instead. (She suggests that men who are sympathetic to the cause should also join the boycott). The call is receiving widespread publicity and support from around the world. Click here for Rose Marie Berger's blog which gives links to a number of others. I must admit, I have mixed feelings about this and I wonder what other people think. I'm deeply sympathetic but also unconvinced. Let me try to explain why.'

So it is, that with flowing verbosity and a stream of consciousness that would have had even James Joyce reaching for a duck feather pillow, Tina explains why she is not encouraging women to boycott Mass even if, should 'a small minority of Catholics responded to Sleeman's call, that would be a most eloquent absence', instead suggesting...

'If you're sympathetic to the causes which the boycott wants to promote, but don't want to boycott Mass as a way of expressing that sympathy, why not pin a rainbow-coloured bunch of ribbons to your clothes that day? It would be a way of celebrating God's rainbow-coloured Church, a way of protesting against the spreading conformity and of showing to everyone around us that we're glad they are there, not because they think like us or look like us or agree with us, but because we are humans made in the image of God in whose diversity and difference all of creation is reflected and renewed, and we lament and protest the attempt to deny or close down that spacious sense of belonging by power masquerading as authority and fear masquerading as care.'

Her penultimate paragraph includes a stand-out quotation attributed to Julian of Norwich. A mystic of the Church, Julian of Norwich, was never formally beatified or raised to the Altar in any way...

'Let's be the rainbow people of God, who wear a sign of hope that all shall be well and all shall be well, and all manner of things shall be well (Julian of Norwich).'

Don't you just hate it when the lives of those who lived and breathed the Infallible Teachings of the Church are taken out of context? The holy anchoress did not call upon people to be 'the rainbow people of God'. The visionary, who was graced with a profound spiritual insight into the Passion of Our Lord Christ, His Agony and His Suffering, is said to have been related these words "All manner of things shall be well", by Christ concerning the Last Judgment at the End of Time. 

The question is, would the humble mystic anchoress, Julian of Norwich, author of Revelations of Divine Love, whose holiness is relatively well-documented, have agreed with Tina on women's ordination or have been the kind of Catholic whose mind is seared by feminism and other heretical ideologies espoused by Tina? I very much doubt it somehow!

Finally, to just drive this point home, since she feels confident enough to quote a holy woman from the Middle Ages, the English mystic of the fourteenth century said, throughout her revelation, that she submits herself to the authority of the Church:  

"I yield me to our mother Holy Church, as a simple child oweth."

Who knows? Maybe one day Julian of Norwich will be formally beatified? That would be another important woman in the Church, wouldn't it, eh? I don't know! Why didn't St Therese of Lisieux, St Catherine of Siena, St Theresa of Avila just give up on their silly devotions, piety and long-term striving for sanctity and stampede upon the Vatican demand for "Wimmin' Priests Now!"?



It is clear that Tina believes in 'the Choych'. She just doesn't believe in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. If Tina is so keen on all this women's ordination lark, then why doesn't she just hook up with Sinead O'Connor, otherwise known as 'Mother Bernadette Mary' and become a Priestess in the Definitely-Not-In-Communion-with-the-Holy-See, 'Irish Orthodox Catholic and Apostolic Church' and incur the latae sententiae excommunication that is automatic as a result, or, alternatively, follow the advice of the holy anchoress she so esteems and be a flippin' Catholic!

Hawking: No Need for God for Creation

Wow! Now, we're in for a theological debate!

Professor Stephen Hawking has lit the 'blue touchpaper' and asserted that God is not required at all for an explanation for the Universe because, er, "It's science".

In the absence of any real scientific knowledge I'm going straight to Douay-Rheims to bash my Bible! What is particularly striking about the Catholic Faith in terms of God's relationship with His Creation is that it is He who chooses to build a Covenant with Israel. It is He who condescends and exchanges words with the Prophets and it is He, the Eternal Word, through Whom all that is made was made, who condescends to take human flesh in the womb of the Blessed Virgin. The Lord was perfectly within His rights to remain aloof, distant and to leave us to scramble around in the dark for meaning. Take the words of Scripture that describe Job's encounter with the Almighty, for instance.

'1 'Then the Lord answered Job out of a whirlwind, and said:

2 Who is this that wrappeth up sentences in unskillful words?
3 Gird up thy loins like a man : I will ask thee, and answer thou me.
4 Where wast thou when I laid up the foundations of the earth ? tell me if thou hast understanding.
5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
6 Upon what are its bases grounded? or who laid the corner stone thereof,
7 When the morning stars praised me together, and all the sons of God made a joyful melody?
8 Who shut up the sea with doors, when it broke forth as issuing out of the womb :
9 when I made a cloud the garment thereof, and wrapped it in a mist as in swaddling bands?
10 I set my bounds around it, and made it bars and doors :
11 And I said : Hitherto thou shalt come, and shalt go no further, and here thou shalt break thy swelling waves.
12 Didst thou since thy birth command the morning, and shew the dawning of the day its place?
13 And didst thou hold the extremities of the earth shaking them, and hast thou shaken the ungodly out of it?
14 The seal shall be restored as clay, and shall stand as a garment :
15 From the wicked their light shall be taken away, and the high arm shall be broken.
16 Hast thou entered into the depths of the sea, and walked in the lowest parts of the deep?
17 Have the gates of death been opened to thee, and hast thou seen the darksome doors?
18 Hast thou considered the breadth of the earth? tell me, if thou knowest all things?
19 Where is the way where light dwelleth, and where is the place of darkness :
20 That thou mayst bring every thing to its own bounds, and understand the paths of the house thereof.
21 Didst thou know then that thou shouldst be born ? and didst thou know the number of thy days?
22 Hast thou entered into the storehouses of the snow, or has thou beheld the treasures of the hail :
23 Which I have prepared for the time of the enemy, against the day of battle and war?
24 By what way is the light spread, and heat divided upon the earth?
25 Who gave a course to violent showers, or a way for noisy thunder :
26 That it should rain on the earth without man in the wilderness, where no mortal dwelleth :
27 That it should fill the desert and desolate land, and should bring forth green grass?
28 Who is the father of rain? or who begot the drops of dew?
29 Out of whose womb came the ice; and the frost from heaven who hath gendered it?
30 The waters are hardened like a stone, and the surface of the deep is congealed.
31 Shalt thou be able to join together the shining stars the Pleiades, or canst thou stop the turning about of Arcturus?
32 Canst thou bring forth the day star in its time, and make the evening star to rise upon the children of the earth?
33 Dost thou know the order of heaven, and canst thou set down the reason thereof on the earth?'

Of course, He could go on and indeed does lengthily, giving Job a going over so proper that Saturday night brawls in Brighton's notorious West Street simply cannot compare, but you get the general gist. It can be summarised by saying, "You weren't there mate, so you don't know!"

In the fullness of time, in the Person of Jesus Christ, God reveals Himself to mankind and by accepting the lowly state of our humanity, dwells with men and teaches men, before accepting death upon the Cross at the hands of men, destroying any remaining notions that God is distant, aloof or indifferent to humanity, raising human nature to the Divine Life of the Blessed Trinity.

Scientific enquiry which does not include a healthy respect for the Creator inevitably leads to Pride which always excludes God and raises man up to replace Him. For evidence of this see the ridiculously expensive CERN search for Mrs Higgs's Bosom. For yet further evidence of the disastrous consequences of this see John Smeaton's blog on experimentation on human embryoes, now frighteningly set to be adopted Europe-wide.

Bash! Bash! Bash!

"There is No Love without Sacrifice..."

After a year punctuated by gentle nagging from my beloved, I am on day 3 of giving up smoking. Is it day 3? It feels like a long time.

In the wake of day 1, marked by the kind of nauseating exhilaration exhibited by born again Christians, born again Scientologists and all born again fruitcakes, I am on the cigarette addict's equivalent of methadone - nicotine patches - It's come down time, so if any of my posts seem excessively angry, vengeful, spiteful or any of the nasty traits that people do not usually associate with this gentle, charitable and humble blog then you know the contributing factor.

I am on a strict diet of hard boiled sweets and DOING ANYTHING NOT TO THINK ABOUT CIGARETTES.

That said, if I should ever appear to look down on you or hate you because you are smoking and I am not, just remember you have it in writing that you can thump me. Yes, even if you're a Priest. I'm not doing this because I want to be 'drug free' or 'clean' or add a day to my life or anything like that, it's her, and I'd happily pipe on a cigarette all my life but I just have to keep telling myself, "There is no love without sacrifice..."

Why don't they put the health risks associated with giving up smoking on the package!? Health risks associated with giving up should really be listed like those health warnings you currently get on packages...

'Giving up Smoking Can Seriously Damage Your Ability to Sleep and May Cause Insomnia (It is 5am), Manic Alertness, a Chesty Cough and Feeling Like S**t All the Time. In Fact, After 3 days of Giving Up Smoking You Won't Give a Flying One About your Lungs, Your Heart, or Your F***ing Sperm Count! Your Intake of Sweets, Lumps of Cheese and Anything You Can Lay Your Hands On Will Treble. You will be a Thorough Displeasure to Know and You May Overcompensate Your Loss by Masking Your Need with Irritating Levels of Knowing Smugness While Thinking of Smokers, "Ah, yes, I was once weak like you are", Leading to the Kind of Unholy Presumption that Leads God to Call You to Account at an Hour You Did Not Expect, Only to be Found Dead in Your Kitchen with Your Hand in Your Bin Looking for Dogends'

George and Diane are probably coming over tomorrow with a bottle of Lambrini and a packet of 20 Sterling Silver Superkings. Let's see how long I last...

How the West Was Won

One of the biggest and most ambitious of Hollywood's epics, How the West Was Won (1962) is excellent bravura entertainment, utilizing its unique Cinerama filming to the fullest. It's certainly impressive spectacle and a highly entertaining film, even if it's ultimately not the sum of its parts.

Divided into five chapters, the film (narrated by Spencer Tracy) tells the story of the taming of the Old West through the eyes of the Rawlings family. In 1830, Zebulon (Karl Malden) takes the family out west via the Erie Canal. Zebulon's daughter Eve (Carrol Baker) falls for fur trader Linus Rawlings (James Stewart), who saves them from a gaggle of river pirates. Two decades later in St. Louis, Eve's sister Lily (Debbie Reynolds) is a dance-hall girl who decides to go West to San Francisco. Surviving an Indian attack on the way, Lily is caught in a romantic triangle with gambler Cleve (Gregory Peck) and wagon master Roger (Robert Preston). When the Civil War breaks out, young Zeb (George Peppard) enlists in the Union Army and sees action at the bloody Battle of Shiloh, where he saves the lives of Generals Ulysses Grant (Harry Morgan) and William Sherman (John Wayne) from a Rebel deserter (Russ Tamblyn). Zeb goes west and finds himself embroiled in the contest between the Union and Central Pacific Railroads, which also provokes the Arapaho Indians. Finally, Zeb ends up with a lawman, facing off against train robbery Charlie Gant (Eli Wallach) and his gang.

Helmed by three big name directors, shot in Cinerama (the three-panel, curved format of super-ultra widescreen) and with half of Hollywood in the cast, How the West Was Won is heavy on the spectacle. The story is episodic, with five different chapters spanning the better part of a century. Despite the attempt to connect the stories - most of our protagonists are members of the same family, a recurring musical cue is feature, and Zeb features in the final three chapters - there's no real flow or narrative drive between the sections, a regrettable flaw. The movie doesn't achieve the scope required for the ostensible awe at "the taking of the West" to take hold. To be fair, the individual episodes are generally strong, well-crafted vignettes, but it's not a terribly deep film on the levels of story, character or themes. Its virtues lie elsewhere.

Henry Hathaway (True Grit) does the balance of the film, including the two best scenes: an exciting rapids scene, and Zeb's shootout with train robbers. John Ford handles the shortest episode, a brief account of the Civil War, which seems rushed and curiously underdeveloped, cribbing battle footage from Raintree County. George Marshall (Destry Rides Again) gets the "railroad" segment, a draggy, dramatically-inert segment that goes on too long. There's relatively-little difference in style, perhaps due to the format, and the movie isn't as uneven as it ought to be.

In the many dialogue scenes, the directorial styles are uniformly static. Not to worry, though, as there's plenty of spectacle to admire, from beautiful location shooting to lots of thundering action scenes: the rapids, a cast-of-hundreds Indian attack, a buffalo stampede, a running gun battle on a moving train. Even without the required Cinerama process, the movie is one hell of a ride, and rarely fails to entertain. Accompanied by an excellent Alfred Newman score, the movie is certainly exciting, and succeeds in its primary goal even when the story flags.

As with many all-star epics of the time - The Longest Day, The Greatest Story Ever Told - West assembles a huge cast of big stars and gives them all glorified bit parts. Oddly though, even the dubious thrill of star-spotting is largely diminished here, not least because the Cinerama format prevents extensive close-ups.

Some actors do manage to stand out. James Stewart and Carrol Baker have a sweet, melancholy romance in their early segment. Gregory Peck does surprisingly well against-type as a shifty gambler. Eli Wallach plays another "charming bandit" part in arguably the film's best sequence. Scene-stealers Walter Brennan and Thelma Ritter make the most of minuscule screen time, and the attentive viewer can spot Lee Van Cleef and Harry Dean Stanton in bit parts.

A few cast members stand out in a bad way. The biggest role, unfortunately, goes to George Peppard, who is stiff and uncharismatic as usual. John Wayne and Harry Morgan have an odd, poorly-written and indifferently-acted scene as Generals Sherman and Grant. Henry Fonda and Richard Widmark are uncharacteristically wooden in their comparative-large roles.

How the West Was Won may not add up to a great film on the whole, but the individual parts are just dandy. If you're looking for a lot of impressive scenery and spectacle, then this film's for you.

"Shall I delay publication for them...Shall I? Hmm..."

"Nah!"

It really is incredible. If you gave me a pound for every time I have seen his face or heard his name past few days (in Southbourne, for Heaven's sake, cut off from the rest of humanity!) I'd be able to pay my Council Tax and have money left over to pay for my Papal Visit pilgrim pass coming in at just £5, a bargain, but I'd still not be filthy, stinking, absurdly rich like him.

Apparently, WWIII is breaking out in the Labour Party over the ongoing Tony Vs Gordon car park fight that the British press has salivated over down the years. Old 'Tone is really putting the boot in apparently and isn't holding back. Can this be the same Tony Blair who was sent to bring peace to the Middle East?! Could it be that he is allowing his personal ego to overshadow the good of the Labour Party? Never! 'Tone would never do that! If there's one thing he loves in this World, its the Labour Party! Maybe he only loves New Labour!

I can't do those screen shot things very well but I thought this was a rather amusing juxtaposition of political stories from the BBC News website...

• 'Blair 'warned on economy' in 2005

• The UK should have addressed its public deficit back in 2005, former Prime Minister Tony Blair has told the BBC.
  
  
  
  
  

  ---

Politics 

  Ed Miliband: It's time to move on  

Diana's death was unique - Blair'

Redemptorist Publications's Horrific New Release: Updated

RPs 'Spiritual Companion'? Thanks, but no thanks!

Update: Redemptorist Publications now have 'no problem' with my blog post and objected only to the articles being re-produced 'in their entirety'. Below is the revised blog post.

What on Earth is going on?!

I have read an original copy of a new leaflet from Redemptorist Publications entitled 'Celebrating the Papal Visit: Your Spiritual Companion.'

Page 1 and page 4 are passable efforts at presenting very briefly Pope Benedict XVI and the intercession of the Saints, but pages 2 and 3 are absolutely terrible. I will quote briefly from the article written by one Lucy Russell, entitled, 'It's Not Easy Being a Catholic...'

In her article, Lucy tells us that, in February, she was 'asked up to London to teach a seminar to some PhD students'.  She writes that she was greeted by her 'former supervisor' who kissed her cheek and told her that he and his partner had been two of the first people to sign the National Secular Society's petition objecting to the Pope's visit. Among his chief objections to the visit was summed up by the question, "Can you believe the things he has said about homosexuality?"

Not an ideal start for a Catholic to teach at a seminar on the Faith. Who could blame her for bricking it? She goes on to say that she spent the initial part of the seminar,

'...trying to defend the Pope, reminding a room of atheists, Muslims and lapsed Catholics that the media is keen to report on the Pope's comments on homosexuality, but we hear significantly less about his comments on war and poverty, that sometimes some sentiments are "lost in translation" between languages etc',

While we can agree that there is some sensationalism in the media concerning the Holy Father's statements on homosexuality, I have not yet read any quotations that are not eminently sensible. Aside from the headlines, his statements, often quoted accurately are not "lost in translation". The Church's teaching makes it quite clear that the culture of homosexual behaviour, as well as the act of homosexuality itself present a grave threat to society, the Soul and the human family.

'The discussion moved on to the Vatican's response to the Holocaust and then on to the teaching of sex education in Catholic schools. Reporting on Catholic sex education had been misleading, I said: never had I, in school, been told that being gay was wrong. We were shown condoms, we knew about abortion and at GCSE I had written a discursive essay on a woman's "right to choose".

We all know that Catholic education is so bad nowadays that yes, Catholic school children probably are putting condoms on cucumbers and the local Connexions service probably are only too happy to refer Catholic girls to the BPAS to arrange abortions and morning after pills without parental consent, but it really needs to be made clear that the Church explicitly condemns both trends and that it is absolutely right to do so. We need to recall here also, that while the act of homosexuality is condemned by the Church, the orientation (of which I am only too familiar), while constituting an intrinsic moral disorder is not a matter of sin either mortal or venial.

Lucy goes on to say that the 'discussion went on' to include the 'position of women in the Church', but she neglects to include her answer in the article, so we shall have to leave her response to the imagination and hope that she defended both priestly celibacy and the Church's requirement for Priests to be male valiantly.

Anyway, Lucy, if it is any consolation, immediately after I posted this blog, I dealt with an enquirer into the Catholic faith abysmally when she asked me, "Do atheists go to Hell?" for her 'university theology dissertation' when, after an exhausting 45-minute explanation of the Catholic Faith, the Church, our continual need for conversion, the Incarnation, the Role of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Atonement, the Sacraments of Baptism, Reconcilation, the Eucharist, the Anointing of the Sick and Christ's Second Coming as Judge of the Living and the Dead, I was still left mumbling into my tea about the Mercy of God and that we don't know because only God can judge the Soul...I'll have to answer to God for my response and I have a feeling that I was found very much wanting...

I've was asked, by email, to remove all of the quotations sourced from the leaflet from this blog post but I do not think that is a good idea. Redemptorist Publications may be embarrassed by this blog post and so might the individuals involved in the production of this leaflet, but the publication house presumably enjoys many benefits of being a 'Catholic publisher' with the prestige that this brings and so it should really endeavour to reflect the Catholic Church's Infallible Teaching. If it does not, in its literature, then I am sure that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith will be only too interested to know about it.

Without much more ado, then, I draw your attention to the article positioned neatly next to Lucy Russell's piece entitled, 'Hot Topic', as if, somehow, during the Papal Visit, a 'hot topic' of discussion will be women's ordination! In this article we are encouraged to consider...

'One topic which is hotly debated within the Church is the ordination of women and if you live in the capital you might have seen on of the ten London buses currently displaying the slogan, "Pope Benedict Ordain Women Now" - a campaign organised by the UK Group, "Catholic Women's Ordination".

It should be noted that this topic is only 'hotly debated' by heretics and schismatics. The same little piece encourages readers...

'Why not get together with a group of friends to discuss it, or talk to your parish priest? It could be one of the many questions people ask you!'

...leaving the reader quite unsure where this little 'spiritual companion' to the Papal Visit to the UK stands on the whole issue, while ensuring that the link to the said Catholic Women's Ordination group appears underneath the article. Surely, any Catholic publication should be encouraging the Laity to get together with a group of friends and the parish priest to give the CWO group a good old traditional denouncing over brandy and biscuits! No?

Sadly not. A defense of the Holy Father and Catholic Teaching this is not. The same 'spiritual companion' came with an offer to have The Tablet as a free trial in your parish! Any time the Arm of the Church formerly known as the Inquisition wants to put the editorial team of The Tablet and whoever authorised this 'spiritual companion' and, indeed, me, on trial in our parish, that is fine by me.

All quotations sourced in this blogpost are from the document 'Celebrating The Papal Visit: Your Spiritual Companion' and copyright of this document belongs to Redemptorist Publications © 2010.

For more information on this issue see Hermeneutic of Continuity and Mulier Fortis.

Greetings from Southbourne!

Well, actually, like all my other postcards, I'm sending it from Brighton because I'm crap at sending postcards.

I'm sure I'll sound like a complete philistine when I say that arriving in Southbourne feels like walking into Paradise, but then, having been trapped in Brighton for the past few years and not having had a holiday for ages, my expectations of what 'eyes have not seen, nor ears heard' have perhaps lowered somewhat, so, if I do actually make it into Heaven, I can say, "Good Lord! And I thought Hengistbury Head was nice!" If I end up in Hell then at least I can reflect on my memories of a more pleasant micro-climate with nicer scenery.

Anyway, I'm back now and I am heartily pleased that the Pilgrim Leader's package of passes and other Papal Visit memorabilia stuff has arrived as well, so I am glad to report that I shall be leading a trainload of Brightonians, probably with a stick, to make me feel at least a little bit like Moses (unless, that is, sticks are banned), to Hyde Park, so that we can all see the Successor of St Peter in the flesh and adore Our Blessed Lord in the Sacrament of the Altar with him, having been bombarded all day with a veritable host of 'liturgical entertainers' set to make the Royal Variety Performance guys look like a bunch of talentless amateurs. God bless 'em!

Having been back at home now for at least 20 minutes, I have seen, yes, mine eyes have seen the glory, the beatific vision that is the Altar stage for the Beatification Mass at Cofton Park. Just in case you missed it, here it is, posted on the Papal Visit 2010 website for yet more evidence, if it were needed, of the Cliff Richardisation of the Sacred Liturgy, architecture, music and direction of the Catholic Church in England and Wales dictated by the organisers of the 'V2' festival: Dated, still singing naff songs from the 70s and suffering a heartbreaking, expensive and quite bizarre obsession with cosmetics in order to appear modern and youthful in the face of an aging and dwindling fanbase that just cannot understand the urgent and pressing issues facing 21st century man.

So modern! Altar 'Stage' for Cofton Park Beatification Mass

"How?!" I hear you cry, "How can it be that the kind of person who deeply appreciates Southbourne as a 'summer holiday' destination can think that this Altar scene for the Beatification of the Venerable John Henry Cardinal Newman is vulgar, tasteless and totally at odds with all that is beautiful, good and holy, nevermind the theology of Pope Benedict XVI and Newman?!"

Well, I've heard of 'white elephant' projects before, but I didn't think the liturgical designers would actually use the concept as a template! Presumably, just off shot on the left is the spiritual 're-birthing room' requested by the Blairs!

I wonder what the kneelers will look like? The stage designers do know that the Holy Father only gives Communion on the tongue, kneeling, don't they? They're clearly very familiar with Pope Benedict's XVI theology and heavily documented reverence for the Blessed Sacrament.

This appears to be the difference between the traditional and liberal elements in the Church. If you were to ask a liberal how he will stand at Our Lord's Glorious Second Coming, he would say, "Gosh...I don't know!" or  "Second what?" or "I hope that God is merciful to me." If, on the other hand, you were to ask a traditional Catholic how he will stand at Our Lord's Glorious Second Coming, he would say, "I wouldn't stand at all. No, no! I'd definitely kneel!"

Well, enough of this carping and bitchiness over the organisation of the Beatification Mass in Cofton Park and Hyde Park by a cartel of vulgar modernists, because even torrential floods of rain and liturgical pap won't stop me from being thrilled to see the Holy Father. Also, if there is one thing that makes Saints out of us sinners it is in being terribly nice, smiling a lot and keeping absolutely schtum about heresy both inside and outside the Church, that is, according to Christina Odone, who really takes issue with the possibility that England's latest-soon-to-be-Beati will, God willing, one day be declared a fully paid up canonized Intercessory Saint in Heaven. For Heaven's sake, Christina! Nobody's perfect!