Reporting briefly...

I'm told that yesterday's Open House Conference was nothing special, that the majority of the laity present showed the confusion which we have come to recognise in those who have been influenced by the modernism which has infiltrated the Church this past 60 years, and that there were only a small number of priests in attendance. The archbishop attended, but nobody can recall any statements from him, so it seems like it will be business as usual - i.e. the apostasy continues apace - in Glasgow.

@Carol H
Carol, thank you for your kind words about the Catholic Truth blog - hugely appreciated.

Also, just to mention that I understand you remarks about speaking with Fr Sherry - I held him in high regard when he was in Scotland and even shared a platform with him when we were both invited to address a Conference in Cork - but I know that at least one woman in Glasgow wrote to him on his arrival in London as District Superior to ask for a meeting with him about the bannings (she was horrified to witness, in person, what happened to Martin on the day HE was banned) but while Fr Sherry acknowledged her email, he made no mention of her request for a meeting. Ambitious clergy is, I believe, a particular feature of the SSPX now. I know there are ambitious clergy all over the place, but I see a particular tendency in the Society, kind of in the nature of things, if you get my drift.

@Martin Blackshaw

Just to clarify one thing, Martin. You wrote the following about my expulsion, referring to Fr Wall: He obviously doesn't know Patricia as well as he thinks, but she went quietly because she didn't want to cause scandal to others by turning up at church for Mass and being forced to leave by the police.

Well, it didn't occur to me that he would call the police. I was told by Fr Hennick that people would be put on the door to keep me out, but if I somehow got in, then he would simply not begin the Mass until I was removed. Which I took to mean that someone or some group would either persuade me to leave or physically remove me. I didn't know what to think.

The reasons I chose not to just attend as usual (which I now regret), however, and which I stated in my email(s) responding to the banning, was two-fold. As I said to the priests at the time, I'm always careful not to impose my company where it's not wanted, so I assured them that I would accept (not respect) their banning; thus, the threat of having me actively removed could be set aside. But Father Hennick had also warned me that my niece and her children (one of whom was a server at Mass) would be subject to unnecessary drama if I insisted on attending, so again I assured him that I was indeed mindful of my family members and didn't want them to suffer any embarrassment. I, therefore, went quietly for those reasons. I continued to drive my niece and children into Mass while I went on to the diocesan Mass - until the archbishop of Glasgow ended that provision. But there was a third reason why I decided just to accept the banning and it is this: I truly believed that once Fr Wall's temper had cooled and he had time to reflect on the whole situation, he would find a way to invite me back, given that a few members of the congregation had asked him to reconsider.

Had I thought of the possibility of ending up in handcuffs, I must admit, that would have been reason # 4, without a doubt

The whole situation is a scandal but who was it said "there's always something to be glad about"... In short, it is through this scandal that I have been able to identify my (very few) true friends from the rest. Signed Pollyanna

@Carol H
I've heard/read this many times, Carol and I have to accept that, if this has been your personal experience, so be it. Generally speaking, however, I find it impossible to comprehend. Most especially with regard to children. Think how quickly they run to mother to snitch on a sibling for the simplest thing. I struggle to believe that these same children would remain silent about something so obviously seriously wrong but, I dare say, there are exception to this as to every other rule.

@English Catholic
Many thanks for those links, some of which I'd seen previously. It's very disturbing indeed that Bishop Barron is considered one of the "good guys" among the bishops. Truly astounding that we are living through such disorientation.

Thanks again for posting - we need to keep ourselves fully informed these days.

@Martin Blackshaw - Well I hope I have many tomorrows because I need all the time I can get to prepare for my (terrifying) judgement... I popped in here to say that I won't be able to attend the Open House Conference (can you hear those cheers!) because I have a multitude of things to attend to this coming Saturday. In any event, I know that there will be priests in attendance who are there because the archbishop expects his priests to be there and there are also those who will go to check out what is being said. All of that is fair enough - it beats attending because you want to join the Open House Brigade in building their own very new religion.

@salliperson

As I've said below to Martin, I struggle with this idea that people who have been abused in this shocking way keep silence - for any reason - for years, indeed decades, before speaking out. I really struggle to believe that.

@Martin Blackshaw

That's my own first instinct - to ask why it takes so long for these allegations to come to light and I'm afraid I struggle to believe them. I think the normal response is to scream from the rooftops in such a situation and not to be intimidated or blackmailed into silence. Who knows. I dare say the truth will emerge in due course.

@chris griffin

Clarification: you are being totally untruthful to claim that I said Fatima "must be accepted by all Catholics". Nowhere, did I say that. You have thus identified yourself as a troll, a person who thinks nothing of peddling falsehoods and blackening the character of another. Your fixation with the abortion issue does not mean you get a pass on every other sin. You even call Our Lady to account for not mentioning abortion in her Church-approved apparitions! Some Catholic - about as Catholic as Joe Biden!

@chris griffin
No, I didn't run away (that's the childish response of certain types when someone feels they have to withdraw from a discussion - accuse them "running away"). I was planning to return briefly because I have, almost by accident, uncovered a fact about you, through your various comments on GTV, that I was coming in to comment on that. Will do so in a moment, but first, your insistence on 5 sins that cry for vengeance, is rooted in a paragraph from the new Catechism of the Catholic Church, a catechism renowned for its unreliability, not to mention errors such as the novelty of making the death penalty "inadmissible". I prefer the traditional Catechisms, so here's the Catechism of Saint Pius X:

Catechism of St Pius X

8 – Q. Which are the sins that are said to cry to God for vengeance?

The sins that are said to cry to God for vengeance are these four: (1) Wilful murder; (2) The sin of sodomy; (3) Oppression of the poor; (4) Defrauding labourers of their wages.

I planned to return when I discovered that you do not accept the Church-approved Fatima apparitions, despite two of the three seers now being canonised saints, and you don't accept them because Our Lady did not mention abortion. Incredible. You need help, and I don't mean that sarcastically, but literally.

Sadly, you are simply an opponent of abortion, like many atheists, agnostics, Muslims, Hindus, Protestant and, of course, Catholics - but Catholics who accept ALL of the Church's teaching, ALL of Divine Revelation, not just the bits that suit their personal agendas. That is how you are presenting on this site. Your Catholicity, if it exists, is hidden behind the Protestant practice of citing select Scripture passages to support your argument - which is always about abortion.

So, I am not going to waste any more time with you. If you choose to make snide remarks and insult me because I do not have the time to keep going over the same ground over and over again, then you do that. I'm not interested.

@chris griffin
No, there are NOT five, but FOUR sins that cry to Heaven for vengeance: Murder, Sodomy Oppression of the poor, and Defrauding workers of their just wages.

I disagree that this is a worthwhile conversation. You simply keep on telling me what I've known since well before I participated in the battle against the legalisation of abortion in the UK in 1967, without any apparent appreciation that there are other grave sins as well. DUH! As for the "worst catastrophe in the history of the world" - that, as Our Lord has made clear, is to commit the "unforgiveable sin": "...Therefore, I say to you, every sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven men, but the blasphemy of the Spirit shall not be forgiven." (Matthew 12:31), In other words, repentant abortionists, whether repentant doctors or repentant women who have had abortions, can be forgiven and enter Heaven. Not so those who blaspheme against God the Holy Spirit. Any sin directly attacking God is, in the very nature of things, more serious than any other sin. I am amazed that you do not know this.

In any case, with all due respect, I will take my leave now and won't be responding further.

@chris griffin
Well, "actively pro-life" to most people means being involved in some group or other fighting actively against the abortion law etc. I am not involved in any pro-life group although I take every opportunity to speak out against it, have written to MPs etc. on occasion. However, there are FOUR sins that cry to Heaven for vengeance, of which wilful murder (abortion) is one. And with respect, it is not up to you to decide who possesses "religion that is pure and undefiled before God..." Only God can make that judgment. As St Paul put it in his first letter to the Corinthians, we may possess all the virtues (including fighting abortion) but if, all that being so, we lack charity, then we are as sounding brass and tinkling cymbals.

Now, if you disagree with anything I've written here, and insist that nothing except abortion is important, then I'll not respond further. Abortion is, of course, of central importance, but there are many other sins that grievously offend God - check it out; as well as the four sins that cry to Heaven for vengeance, there are Ten Commandments!

@chris griffin
It's not possible to exaggerate the gravity of abortion. But that doesn't mean that there are no other sins, extremely grave sins. There are souls in Hell who have never had an abortion, never helped anyone else to have an abortion, never performed an abortion - may even have publicly condemned abortion - but they are in Hell for some other sin. Do you think any other sin matters? Or is God solely concerned about the heinous sin and crime of abortion?