What to do with the lukewarm?

What to do with the lukewarm ?

For traditional practising Catholics, the question of what to do with the lukewarm, is a difficult one. Our brothers and sisters have been led astray by heretics and apostasy from within the church. Many have had a lifetime of misinformation and lies directed towards them. We all feel sad, we all pray for their souls as they have been led into sin. However, the lukewarm must take some responsibility for being so easily led. Letting their weakness lead them into sin. No one can be blamed for being tempted or even for failing, however, with faith and hard work this can be corrected. At some point some congregants must have thought, why is being a Catholic just like being a protestant. Why when the church taught one thing for so long, do they now accept the complete opposite. Especially when you know that our faith is set in stone. Did they ever wonder why their faith was being watered down? Did they forget that as the church militant it is their duty to stay vigilant and true. 

Mainstream culture has heavily corrupted our society and our church. That alone would weaken our church. Even if the hierarchy was faithful. Again, this is something that every Catholic has had to endure, and it continues to cause great pain to the faithful. This of course is something that we can sympathise with the lukewarm on. As this has been and still is a major factor of stress and tension for all faithful.

The majority of the lukewarm are allowing and even encouraging the destruction of the faith. Poll after poll conducted shows their lack of belief in the core fundamentals of the faith. Which shows that they appear to have become heretical.  It could be said that they no longer actually believe in the supernatural or historic parts of the faith. If this is true, then they become more of a club which have just become used to going out on Sunday mornings. I really think they should consider if they belong to the one true faith, as their presence is harmful, with their current views and actions (supporting corruption and scandals).

We need to hold to the standards of the faith and demand the truth. For example, abortion is murder, which is the truth. The homosexual lifestyle, the trans condition is not compatible with the faith. Though both must be tolerated and respected, however, they are not allowed to be practising in the church. Women cannot be deacons or priests this is simply impossible it is not compatible with the teaching of the catechism or scripture. The Holy Eucharist is the actual body of Christ it is a mystery it is not symbolism. Heaven and hell, the devil, demons and angels exist in reality and these are Catholic teachings and are impossible to separate if you are a Catholic you must have these views if you don’t then the catechism would say you are not a Catholic, why pretend to be one. There are a lot of faiths and churches that will accommodate any belief and where you can get a sense of community. If you want to belong to the one true church without destroying it, you must follow its teachings as those who love it do. Just because you are selfish and stubborn, you are happy to ruin the only church that faithful Catholics have, while you have hundreds of options to choose from. I ask if you do not believe in the core fundamentals then why continue to say you are a Catholic. I ask you please find your faith again; I want all my Catholic brothers and sisters be true Catholics. If you do not, cannot or will not stay with the values of the church, you must ask the question, why do I call myself a Catholic. The lukewarm are protestant in reality. So, what is the difference between Protestant and Catholic and would it genuinely make a difference to you if you do not actually believe in the fundamental tenets of the church anyway? 

This may sound a little harsh however it is the complete truth and I say it with love. As the church needs to stay true to itself, as it is the only way to salvation.        

It is easy for other Christian sects to change, to 'modernise’, as their faith is simply made to make their lives easier and I question whether they really believe in Jesus or the bible. Many of these religion’s came to be because people found being a Catholic too hard and too difficult, they did not want to feel tested or guilty and did not want to try all their lives to be morally good. When it was not fun or convenient.

The Catholic church and of course the faith are the most tolerant religion that has ever been. In the catechism it teaches you that you must be tolerant of all races, genders, ages, cultures and sexual orientations and always to have charity and kindness in your heart for people who are different from you.

The people who are not Catholics and choose to sin in their lives, we must be tolerant of, however, we cannot accept sin for ourselves. Those who profess to be Catholic, must hold themselves to account for their behaviour and if we transgress, we risk being expelled from the church for refusing not to deliberately sin. We must never move away from our teachings. We do not need and cannot move away from our teachings without becoming heretics and destroying Jesus’ church. We can modernise in many ways but there is no need to modernise teachings.

I ask you what we need to modernise in ways of our teachings. Our teachings and understanding of Science, moral’s, ethics, history is without fault.

     

 RC

For Greater Glory (Cristiada) Film Review

For Greater Glory (Cristiada)

For Greater Glory, also known as Cristiada is an historical war drama film released in 2012, directed by Dean Wright and written by Michael Love, based on the events of the Cristero War. It stars Andy García, Eva Longoria, Oscar Isaac, Rubén Blades, Peter O'Toole and Bruce Greenwood. The film was shot in Mexico City, Durango, Zacatecas, San Luis Potosí, Tlaxcala and Puebla. Including an ecological reserve, Sierra de Órganos National Park in the town of Sombrerete. The film is based on The Cristero Rebellion, the 1976 chronicle of the war. The film has received mixed reviews by critics and viewers alike. The film was not a box office success.  

The film is well shot, the music is good and the pacing for the most part is fine, The acting is great and the writing is also good. The film is a great watch it’s emotional and entertaining. The action scenes are very well done too. The characters are well written but some are under developed, however that doesn’t take away from the story. Many scenes are hard to watch yet are historically correct and important for all to watch. The film for the most part is historically accurate with the only exceptions being more down to plot convenience. Some would say that the plot is a bit of a tired theme. But it is done very well and sometimes there is no need for over complexity or plot twists, to make a film good. This film can be enjoyed by all but I think it’s very important for Catholics to see this film to see where anti catholic bigotry can easily lead to. Saying that the film is not preachy and can be watched as a great action war drama.

This is a must-see film.

RC

The New Pope Review

The New Pope

The New Pope is a drama television series created and directed by Paolo Sorrentino for Sky Atlantic, HBO and Canal+. It is a continuation of the 2016 series The Young Pope. It received positive reviews from critics and viewers alike. The series aired in early 2020, having nine episodes in total. The cast comprises Jude Law as Pope Pius XIII, John Malkovich as Pope John Paul III, Silvio Orlando as Cardinal Angelo Voiello, Camerlengo and Cardinal Secretary of State, Cardinal Hernández, Cécile de France as Sofia Dubois, Javier Cámara as Cardinal Bernardo Gutiérrez, Ludivine Sagnier as Esther Aubry, Maurizio Lombardi as Cardinal Mario Assente, Marcello Romolo as Pope Francis II, Mark Ivanir as Bauer, Ulrich Thomsen as Doctor Helmer Lindegard.

The series is again well shot the music is good and the pacing is also good. The writing for the most part is very good except for the ending. The actors do a great job again and the plot is better than the first season. It is very entertaining however again there are a few untruths and mis directions about Catholicism. However again they can be ignored for the most part. The arthouse vibe from the first series is stronger and more present than in the first series. There is more nudity, sex and some darker vibes in general. However, there are some truly amazing scenes in this series and at times the tension is palpable. Worth watching as a drama series for sure and again accept from the ending which I don’t believe was the first choice in how this series was going to end. Parts of it simply do not make sense. Again, if you’re a Catholic that can fast forward through the sex etc its defiantly worth watching even with the bitter ending though not a anti catholic ending.

RC

The Young Pope Review

The Young Pope

The Young Pope is a drama television series created and directed by Paolo Sorrentino for Sky Atlantic, HBO, and Canal+. The Young Pope received two nominations for the 69th Primetime Creative Arts Emmy Awards. The series has ten episodes and was first aired in the autumn of 2016. The cast is Jude Law as Pope Pius XIII, Diane Keaton as Sister Mary, Silvio Orlando as Cardinal Angelo Voiello, Camerlengo and Cardinal Secretary of State, Javier Cámara as Monsignor, Bernardo Gutierrez, Master of Ceremonies of the Holy See, Cécile de France as Sofia Dubois, Ludivine Sagnier as Esther, Toni Bertorelli as Cardinal Caltanissetta, James Cromwell as Cardinal Michael Spencer. The series received positive reviews by critics and viewers alike. It also enjoyed good ratings when aired.

This series is very well shot it has great writing, good music and is very well acted. The story is very compelling and its well-paced. Jude law is superb in this so are most of the actors. Its been very well cast and the whole series has been well put together. Its surprisingly not very anti Catholic which is nice. Now that doesn’t mean that they haven’t slipped in a few questionable facts, history and theological ideas etc. But overall, it’s very manageable to miss/ignore. It does have nudity in it and is quite new age/hipstersish. This seems to be the style of Mr Sorrentino; I would say that it is probably why the series is able to be as tame towards Catholics as it is. As many other productions tend to be more openly hostile and unbalanced. I would say this is a must watch as not only is it a good drama but it’s an interesting look into how a traditionalist Pope could act in the 21st century. It also explains the faith in some ways quite well for new Catholics or nonbelievers. Overall its a good drama and an important watch for Catholics, maybe it could be a good way of introducing Catholicism to someone if they struggle with less entering methods of learning. 

RC

Kingdom of Heaven Film Review

Kingdom of Heaven

Kingdom of Heaven is a 2005 drama film directed and produced by Ridley Scott and written by William Monahan. It stars Orlando Bloom, Eva Green, Ghassan Massoud, Jeremy Irons, David Thewlis, Brendan Gleeson, Iain Glen, Marton Csokas, Liam Neeson, Edward Norton, Michael Sheen, Velibor Topić and Alexander Siddig. Filming took place in Spain and Morocco. It received mixed reviews by critics and the public alike. It was a minor financial success.

The film is very well shot and the soundtrack is amazing the acting is mostly good. However, many of the characters are underdeveloped. And the plot is overly simple and the main character Orlando bloom seems to be pushed randomly into every situation because the plot needs him too be, without really any explanation for it story wise. Historically the film is a mess, with a tired old theme catholic bad guys who like war against humble peaceful ultra-honourable Muslims. And religion doesn’t really matter just be good etc etc vibe. The film does try to balance a little on both sides but they are token at best. It isn’t a bad movie but it is lazy and has a tired plot line. The action scenes are actually good but are few and far between. It’s a shame it really does demonise the Catholics of that time. And pushes the civilised and barbarian trope. Its worth doing research about this time in history to counteract the myths in this film.     


RC

Gunpowder Mini-Series Review

Gunpowder Mini-Series Review

Gunpowder is a 3-part mini-series made by Kudos and Thriker Films. With the BBC and HBO airing the series. It was developed by Ronan Bennett, Kit Harington and Daniel West and is based on the Gunpowder Plot in London in 1605. J. Blakeson directed the series.

The series stars Kit Harington, who is a direct descendant of his character Robert Catesby, Peter Mullan plays Henry Garnet, Mark Gatiss as Sir Robert Cecil, Liv Tyler as Anne Vaux and Tom Cullen as Guy Fawkes.

The series was well received by critics and viewers alike. It does have scenes depicting, torture, nudity and disembowelment, but it is all done with historical accuracy and is respectful to the story.

The series is well written and shot. With a good soundtrack and is well paced. It is a very well made series with great acting by all including extras who really help add to the atmosphere. Even though it is a well know story and you know the outcome, it surprisingly keeps you on your feet and keeps your interest.  It is historically accurate.  Which was something that did surprise me in this day and age. It is a very entertaining series with great moments of tension, horror, drama and grief. It also shows very accurately the discrimination of the Catholics in England. 

It is definitely worth watching and sharing with all.

RC

Knightfall Season 2

Knightfall Season 2

So, season two starts off slightly better, still historically bad but some issues like the acting are resolved and some characters have been improved. Mainly Landry’s, however, writing and pacing are still massive issues. Mark Hamill is introduced as a veteran Templar who instructs new Templars, his character is a very good and likeable and is very well acted. Other new characters are introduced with various degrees of success. The plot of this season is a bit better than the first, however again pacing and u-turns by a few characters push you out of the moment more than once. Again a few interesting historical nuggets but mainly just a reasonable action drama series. The ending is rushed and not really satisfying even if the series tries to wrap up nicely you can’t help but feel that this series should be remade with more of a historical tone or maybe even just more basic action series with less drama in it. Season two is definitely better than one however overall, it’s not really worth watching. If you have time to kill reading/listening/watching a real history about the Templars would be not just educational but would have more action and more interesting characters to it than this series.

RC

Knightfall season 1

Knightfall season 1

Knightfall is a historical fiction drama television series created by Don Handfield and Richard Rayner for the History channel. The show ran for two seasons from 2017 to 2019. Season one at ten episodes and season two had eight. Executive produced by Jeremy Renner. The series was conceived by Renner's production partner Don Handfield and Richard Rayner. Filmed in the Czech Republic and Croatia.

Tom Cullen plays Landry de Lauzon a senior brother, Master and Commander of the Paris Temple. Ed Stoppard as King Philip, Sabrina Bartlett (main season 1) and Genevieve Gaunt (recurring season 2) as Princess Isabella, Olivia Ross as Queen Joan, Julian Ovenden as William de Nogaret, King Philip's scheming counsellor, Jim Carter as Pope Boniface VIII, Pádraic Delaney as Gawain, the greatest swordsman of the Templar Order and Simon Merrells as Tancrède de Hauteville, a veteran Templar. Both Seasons received average reviews by critics and the public alike.

Knightfall recounts the success, fall, persecution, and suppression of the Knights Templar, as orchestrated by King Philip IV of France on October 13, 1307. The series focuses on the fictional Templar leader Landry du Lauzon, a brave warrior discouraged by the Templars' failures in the Holy Land who is reinvigorated by news that the Holy Grail has resurfaced. The series is not historical in the slightest but does have lots of historical facts and events mixed in sometimes well, other times badly. So not one to watch if you want to learn more about the Templars however it is sometimes interesting to see that they did include a few good bits about the history, actions and life of the Templars. The truth is two of the main characters Landry and the Queen are not likable at all I mean I couldn’t stand them and as so much revolves around them it makes it hard to watch. Also the motives of quite a few characters are bazar to say the least. Making it clunky to watch. The acting is quite hit and miss but the soundtrack is on point and the shooting for the most part is fine, the pacing is off quite often and the writing is too. There are also some strange ideas in the show concerning Catholics and the templars history. There are a few very good scenes mostly action scenes, however overall, its probably a season that you can fast-forward threw to get to the slightly improved second season.

Season 2 Review coming soon

RC

A visit to a Byzantine Rite

Byzantine Rite

After many months of having little to no access to the sacraments, entering a period where we have regular access to the mass has been a real joy and very much lifted my spirits. So, waking up on Sunday and looking at my schedule, realising that I would be attending not one but three different types of mass this week was something I really relished. After attending the Latin mass on Sunday and Dominican Rite on Monday, I had the opportunity to attend the Byzantine Rite held at the Ukrainian Greek Cathedral of the Holy Family in Mayfair. It wasn’t a full sung Mass as can be expected on a week-day, it was a Low Mass with a few Covid 19 adaptations, however, I very much enjoyed the style of the Liturgy.  Even though I do not speak any Ukrainian I
very much understood the rhythm of the Mass. Having met a handful of Byzantine Catholics I did not expect anything else from their Liturgy as they have always struck me as very orthodox in their faith.

The Rite itself has a very reverent manner to it, for one the priest Ad orientem throughout the Mass, with the exception of turning to the congregation for some of the responses. The congregation themselves respond with a great deal of deference throughout the Liturgy, there is a great deal of crossing of oneself, something which I am told the Latin Mass used to contain a lot more of, rather than distracting from payer I find the bowing and crossing of oneself added to the rhythm of the Mass putting one in a very reverent state and I imagine once you mastered the basic responses and order of the Mass it would become second nature.  I really found the reverence with which the priest went about the consecration to be exceptional.  The communion at the end featured the Eastern Rite of communion in the silver spoon which I understand is commonplace in the East.

Overall, I enjoyed the Mass and look forward to attending a full sung Mass on a Sunday once normalcy has returned. I would say even though the Liturgies of the Latin Mass and the Byzantine Rite are quite different they share a sense of reverence, a sense of the holiness and the real sense of the sacrifice that is taking place and while they are very different I can very much see why Byzantine and Latin Mass Catholics seem to be a home for orthodoxy and orthodox Catholics within the church.  I think very much that there should be more outreach between the Latin Mass congregations and our brothers and sisters in the Eastern Rites, because we share so much in common.


Please visit our pilgrimage page to see the Cathedral of the Holy Family.

AC

Letters of Confusion from a Catholic Convert Part 2

Abortion

I still struggle on all sorts of levels with this as I have always felt birth control was a sensible precaution.  I have always been anti abortion and cannot conceive of a time when I would think that abortion as a method of contraception could be acceptable.  This is very much fed by a belief in a modest and appropriate way of living. If you do not sleep around you will not get pregnant. If you get pregnant it is a human life and you are, like it or lump it responsible for it. Having a child is a gift, not a right, not an accident, not a punishment, but a gift, you should treat it as such. That is not to say I think it is acceptable for women to go on having babies until it eventually kills them. I do not, I do believe there is a middle course. 

As someone who was born in the fifties I grew up with the massive changes in the sixties when birth control started to become the norm and abortion laws started to be relaxed. Most of us never thought about whether this was appropriate or not, we just knew that girls died having back street abortions and the changes in the law regarding abortion would stop that happening. Of course sleeping around would stop it happening too, but then many women by this time had decided that they wanted to behave as badly as men and do just as they pleased and this allowed them to do so (in my opinion) and before anyone starts getting antsy I know it is not that simple and many girls did not get pregnant willingly or genuinely believed they would be with their partner forever. It is just that I personally believe in a moral code which means you do not keep trying out different men until you find one that suits you.

The changes in the law certainly stopped the back street abortions but it has not stopped abortions generally. In fact it is now far worse in some ways because we now believe that is our right to terminate a pregnancy at any time because it is inconvenient, the baby is the wrong sex or it has something wrong with it. This attitude does not shock anyone. It is a woman’s right to do with her body as she pleases. Really. So it is okay to murder a baby because it is not big enough to scream out loud and say stop, well I have news for those who think that, they do scream, they do suffer, because they are sentient.  There are people who think it is okay to let a baby die once it is born because it is deformed in some way or it is has downs syndrome. These babies cannot contribute to society or will be a drain on society so should be allowed to die. I think Hitler would be proud of this attitude, it was just what the National Socialists advocated. No I am not being overdramatic.  Killing a child because it is not a perfect representation of who we are is wrong. Just wrong.

There is no justification. None.

I can understand why a mother might want to abort a baby which is not going to survive, I really do, but that is not our modern attitude to abortion, we believe we have a right to kill a growing child because it is inconvenient. We do not want it, we no longer sleep with its father and have moved on to someone else. Well, that is called sin. A small insignificant word in a modern society, which no longer believe that sin exists. I know life is complicated and sometimes we fall for the wrong person, but that does not give us the right to take a life.  We make mistakes but we are responsible for those mistakes. I find the lack of responsibility reprehensible.

I have a huge problem with stopping a woman from aborting a baby because she was raped. It is this
sort of issue which gives a lot of Catholics sleepless nights. To be honest, I swing from she should have that right, to knowing in my heart that by saying that you are blaming the baby for the sins of its father. But the emotions involved must be heart breaking and should not be minimised.

Abortion is an awful thing, so many young women have been forced into abortion by their partners, their family or sheer desperation, I can only imagine their suffering as they get older and wonder ‘what if’, ‘what would it have been like’, that must be like torture. 

So many women go into abortion thinking it is an easy option, better than being landed with a baby they really do not want. So many desperately regret that in later years. They are not always properly counselled or given the support and the options that are available. Certainly if you do not want your baby there are probably a dozen couples out there who do. We live in a world where morality exists as a convenience. If it is not convenient it does not count. This seems to be where abortion sits and just to say it is a sin, well I realise, that does not mean much today. I know it is a sin, so are many things, what truly bothers me is, how did it become not just normal but a good thing to kill a baby because you do not want it, because it is inconvenient to you, when, did this happen. There are women out there who have had to abort a baby when they did not want to, because it was them or the baby, it seems to me that we minimise their misery at the loss of a precious life. But what offends me most is this attitude that it is alright because a woman has a right to do what she wants with her body. She does but it is a sin, it is immoral and that I think is the problem. Many people now view morality as outmoded. After all every self help book you see tells you, that you are the most important being in the world. You have to do the best by you. Get rid of anyone in your life who doesn’t support you. You have to do what is best for you ignore what others want from you if they do not add to your life get them out of your life.

How do people think we have come as far as we have. Because so many people have put the needs of
others before themselves. When you have a child, that child changes your life forever, because they become the most important thing in your life. You protect them at all costs. You love them unconditionally. It is how we survive and thrive. This is changing though, a child is a commodity and if it is not convenient, if you have fallen pregnant at the wrong time then just get rid of it. Just think about that sentence, just get rid of it. Like a piece of trash. How sad, how wrong is that. Abortion is such an emotive and complex issue. I do not agree with some of my friends that it is simple, it is wrong full stop. I believe it is wrong, but I do not believe it is simple. When people’s emotions are involved nothing is simple. I remember when my second child was a few months old, thinking I was pregnant again, I remember, the fear, the panic I felt, I was genuinely terrified. I was barely coping, just hanging on by a thread emotionally, I had no one to turn to, so I do understand. I knew if I was pregnant I would have it, there was never any question about that, but I remember the fear and the relief when I found I wasn’t pregnant. Even all these years later.

I would never minimise the feelings of someone who felt they had no option but to get rid of their unwanted baby, never, it will for me never be right, it is a view I held before I became a catholic and it is a view I still believe in, abortion as a method of contraception is wrong, just plain and simple. My problem is I also understand fear and shame, loss and grief and the need to be your own person no matter what. I will not minimise the emotions of those women who feel they have no option, but I do question whether they  really do have no option and has our society progressed so little that a woman cannot be supported to have her baby no matter what. I could write pages about this, but in all honesty like many people I truly just find the disposal of a precious life appalling and it saddens me desperately.

MC


Citadel Interview Fr Ian Hellyer MA

The series of interviews will be a string of light-hearted questions for men of the faith to hopefully shine a light on them as people. This interview is with Fr Ian Hellyer MA who is a converted church of England priest.


When did you decide to become a priest?

My sense of being called to be a priest really began in earnest when I was a university student in my early twenties. I was then taking part in spiritual exercises in the tradition of St Ignatius of Loyola. It seemed to come out quite clearly that God wanted me to offer myself to the church for sacred ministry.

Why did you become a priest?

Well I initially thought I was being ordained priest as an Anglican back in 1996. However, as we know, the Catholic Church declared Anglican Orders to be null and void, I was ordained to the Sacred Priesthood in
2011. However, my motivation was common throughout, I believed I was called by God to serve Him in this way. I believed that pleasing God was more important than anything else.

What is one of your favourite things about being a priest?

It is certainly offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

What is one thing that most people do not know about being a priest that would surprise them?

It might be how exhausting or draining offering the mass is. It was certainly a surprise to me.

What is your favourite drink?

Beer. And not the weak pale stuff people call Lager! Proper English beer at room temperature!!

What is your favourite meal?

Indian cuisine.

What is something that you are passionate about outside of church and faith?

I love the natural world. I can spend hours looking at birds or animals etc.

Which Saint has inspired you?

As a young man it was St Francis of Assisi. I liked how resolute he was. Later it was St Anthony the Great.

What book would you recommend people to read?

The Holy Bible of course, because by the Holy Spirit one can hear the very Word of God. I think people should read and meditate on the Book of Psalms in particular.

What is one of your favourite books?

Amongst novels it would be The Lord of the Rings.


What was one of the hardest issues in your conversion?

Well it was very hard searching my heart over the various theological differences between the Catholic Church’s magisterial teaching and the Anglican Church. This was agony! It took nearly 10 years working through that. Until the Ordinariate was proposed, I also found it difficult to imagine letting go of what I perceived to be the good and faithful things about being Anglican. Once the idea of the Ordinariate was presented that difficulty was overcome (thanks to Pope Benedict XVI). The very practical difficulty was that I was married with a large family and by converting I would lose both home and income.

What made you convert?

I converted because I no longer believed all that Anglicanism stood for and I came to believe the truth that the Catholic Church teaches. Some of the issues that I saw was problematic in Anglicanism was moral teaching especially the life issues, but also ecclesiology and opening holy orders to women.


When did you decide to become a Catholic priest?

I offered myself for Holy Orders as part of the conversion process from Anglicanism to the Catholic Church in the Ordinariate. Of course, the Church did not have to accept me! However, after prayer,
scrutiny, and passing a faculties exam, I was accepted by the CDF and a dispensation from clerical celibacy was granted by the Pope. I also had to make a whole raft of solemn promises and in particular as a married man, I solemnly promised that if my wife died, I would not seek marriage again.

What is the best piece of advice you would give to someone on the fence about converting?

First, seek the truth. Second, pray much. Third, I would try to convey how joyful it is be a Catholic. I have never for one moment regretted it.


RC

Citadel Interview Fr Thomas Crean OP

The series of interviews will be a string of light-hearted questions for men of the faith to hopefully shine a light on them as people. This interview is with Fr Thomas Crean OP a well-respected theologist from the UK. And Author of Letters to a non-believer, Integralism and The Mass and the Saints.   


When did you decide to become a priest?

Strictly I could not decide to become a priest, but only decide to ask to be accepted as a candidate. I decided to do this in June 1993, though I was not able to begin my novitiate until September 1995. I was at the end of my second year at university at the time.

Why did you become a priest?

To offer Mass, to hear confessions, to preach (though one can do the last of those as a deacon). 
More generally, to play some small part in the Church’s mission of saving souls for eternity. 

What is one of your favourite things about being a priest?

The fact of living in close quarters to the Tabernacle.

What is one thing that most people do not know about being a priest that would surprise them?

I don’t know.  It depends on the people.  Perhaps non-Catholics might be surprised that we are generally not unhappy about celibacy.  Sometimes Catholics are surprised to learn that priests are not obliged to offer Mass every day (though of course it is encouraged).

What is your favourite drink?

Wine (in moderation)

What is your favourite meal? 
Any traditional English or Italian dish especially if well cooked.

What is something that you are passionate about outside of church and faith?

I have interests, for example in literature and philosophy, but I wouldn’t call them passions. The Church and the faith are big enough to occupy anyone’s attention. When I was a boy, I was passionate about Liverpool Football Club.

Which Saint has inspired you? 

Lots: St Thomas Aquinas, St Therese of Lisieux, St Thomas More, St Edmund Campion, St Dominic, St Athanasius, St Joan of Arc.

What book would you recommend people to read?

Introduction to a devout life by St Francis de Sales.

What is one of your favourite books?

Literary Distractions by Ronald Knox

What made you choose the Dominican order?

I wanted to join a religious order so that I might concentrate on what matters most.  I was attracted to the Dominican Order because of the ideal of contemplation overflowing into action, and because they had been around a long time, and because I liked St Thomas Aquinas and the Dominican Salve Regina and the idea of singing the psalms and the Dominican habit.

Do you find writing books challenging?

Yes, I find thinking very hard work.  But I enjoy the challenge.

What subject do you enjoying teaching the most? 

Any, where the students are interested, and where I feel at home in the subject. St Thomas Aquinas normally comes into it somewhere.



RC

Letters of Confusion from a Catholic Convert Part 1

The Tridentine Mass


I became a Catholic less than a year ago, I have always been a Christian, but came very late in life to Catholicism, for many reasons.  There are a lot of things to get your head around in Catholicism.  The first being that not all Catholics know what their religion is about.  Many I have found do not even appear to understand the basics.  They seem to take a very protestant point of view, which I find, deeply disturbing. When deciding to become a Catholic I had to learn the Catechism and understand the Apologetics and what it means to be a Catholic.  None of which was as alien as I had thought it would be, although my priest certainly made me work for it. There was a great deal of reading and a lot of understanding to be done.

The things I have struggled with and in some cases still do are those which I believe many genuine Christians have always had trouble with, such as, Abortion and birth control; The role of women in the church; Homosexuality; Obedience; Education; The role of celibacy in the clergy and religious; Clerical politics; The ‘worship’ of Mary and the Saints; The Pope and Papal Infallibility. As someone who grew up in the fifties and sixties all of these things have had a profound affect on my life and probably everyone else’s too and I certainly had a lot of ‘knowledge’ which simply wasn’t true.  It was perceived and often through the eyes of the media. When learning about Catholicism I fully expected to find a lot things which I just simply disagreed with, but this was by no means what happened.

Some things when explained were to me more than reasonable, I just had not understood them, I had taken the prevailing protestant ideology and assumed I knew all about Catholics and Catholicism.  I did not and much of what I had learned was as I have said down to the media.  One of the first things I learned was not a shock to me of course, the Media is anti Christian and vehemently anti Catholic. The first real shock for me was the Mass. I had been going to the Latin Mass with my son and he said it would be a good idea if I went to a Novos Ordo Mass.  Well my friend in the protestant church was right when she said “why do you want to become a Catholic their mass is exactly the same as ours”. Oh dear she was right it was.  Even down to the awful handshaking.  I do not doubt that there are many very devout Catholics who attend Novus Order Mass, either by choice or lack of choice, but it is so much like the Anglican Mass it’s not very Catholic is it? I could not then and still struggle now to see the difference in the Novus Ordo Mass and the High Church Mass I had previously attended at my Church of England Church. 

There also seems to be a belief in the hierarchy of the Catholic Church that the Tridentine Mass is somehow dangerous, the mass that has held Catholic faith together for some 1400 years. Again I am mystified.  You have to have permission from the Bishop to hold a Tridentine Mass and many refuse to have them. I really do not understand this attitude. The Tridentine Mass is the traditional Mass surely that is the one which should take precedence.  Everyone, including the Catholic Church, bangs on about respecting traditions but it appears that they do not respect their own. They want to dispense with something which has held the faith of the Catholic church together for over 1400 years, something that stems from 2000 years of history and tradition. What is the reason for this bewildering attitude. When the Mass changed I believed, probably because of the way it was reported at the time, that the Catholic Church was simply doing their traditional Mass in English, not that the Mass was being changed dramatically from its traditional state.  For goodness sake they even moved the altars.  The priest faces the congregation not God. In my opinion and the opinion of many other Catholics, this is not a proper Catholic Mass, but most people seem to fear voicing their opinion, for fear of what the senior Clergy (generally the Bishop) may say about this and that if they ‘rock the boat’ their traditional Mass will taken away from them because they are being ‘difficult’.  Unlike many of my friends in the Church I am not a born into the Catholic church.  I chose this faith.  I want to understand why its senior Clergy want to make it more Protestant. The reason I chose the Catholic faith was because, it, I believed, still worshipped and revered God in a very traditional and ancient manner.  They still held tightly to the scriptures and Commandments of God.  To me those Commandments are precious, they are what stop us from becoming mere creatures, acting in venal and animalistic ways. The Mass should be traditional if you make it something which is changeable and ‘moves with the times’ you are just handing over your faith to the Devil. Modernism is all about making things easy, not worrying about doing the right or the wrong thing, not caring if you are doing the right or the wrong thing as long as it suits you. YOU become the most important thing in the world. I am not stuck in the past, I have moved with the times like everyone else, but I still hold on to my personal Christian values. I do believe in tolerance and kindness.  But as someone who has chosen to become a Catholic I do not believe that it is about me, it is about God and believing and worshipping and striving to be the very best Christian that I can be.  I am also striving to understand those who want to change and destroy a Mass which has lasted for so long, which has held out over so many brutal periods and times of destruction. 

I will keep on trying to understand how my chosen religion works, what I am getting right and wrong and I will keep on asking questions, even if those questions sometimes upset and disturb people. I want to have discourse with people who have different views, I want to understand a different perspective.  I do understand that I am not always right and that I get things wrong. But if I don’t ask the questions how will I know?

MC

Film Review The Scarlet and the Black

The Scarlet and the Black

The film is a 1983 American made-for-television historical war drama directed by Jerry London and written by David Butler. It stars Gregory Peck as Monsignor Hugh O'Flaherty and Christopher Plummer as SS-Obersturmbannführer Herbert Kappler. It was nominated for an Emmy in the category Outstanding Film Editing for a Limited Series or a Special.

Based on J. P. Gallagher's book The Scarlet Pimpernel of the Vatican (published in 1967), the film tells the story of Monsignor Hugh O'Flaherty, a real-life Irish Roman Catholic priest who saved thousands of Jews and escaped Allied POWs in Rome.

The film was well received at the time and still is well thought of today. Being distributed throughout the US into schools to encourage interest in history. Considering its very serious topic the film is quite lighthearted, however being able to perfectly move between fun and very emotional scenes seamlessly.
The acting is very good throughout and not just by the main actors but the secondary cast as well. The pacing is fine however the music is somewhat outdated, and the filming style can sometimes seem the same.

The film does have a couple of minor and mostly insignificant inaccuracies; however, it is remarkably historically accurate. And could and has served easily as an educational tool. A good book on the subject to read before the film would be The Myth of Hitler’s Pope by Rabbi David G. Dalin.

The film itself is enjoyable to watch and worth sharing with people who wish to learn more about history.

RC

Film Review A Man For All Seasons (1966)

A Man For All Seasons (1966)

The film is a British biographical drama based on Robert Bolt's play of the same name and adapted for cinema by Bolt himself. It was released on 12 December 1966. It was directed by Fred Zinnemann.

The film and play both depict the final years of Sir Thomas
More. It was a critical and box office success. It won the Academy Award for
Best Picture at the 39th Academy Awards, while the cast and crew won another
five, including Best Director for Zinnemann and Best Actor for Scofield. It
also won the Golden Globe Award for Best Motion Picture - Drama and the BAFTA
Awards for Best Film and Best British Film. It was also a critical and box office success.

Paul Scofield plays Sir Thomas More, Orson Welles as
Cardinal Wolsey, Robert Shaw as Henry VIII, Leo McKern as Thomas Cromwell, John
Hurt as Richard Rich, Wendy Hiller as Alice More and Susannah York as Margaret More.

This film is amazing, a true classic. Its very well written
and directed.  It is extremely well shot and the music is just right. It is very well paced. The acting is truly superb especially that of Scofield (More) and Shaw (Henry VIII). The film is Historical accurate with only minor/insignificant changes. A brilliant introduction to ST Thomas More, the film is a must watch and a great film to share.

RC

Genealogy

Listening to Ven Archbishop Fulton Sheen series Life worth living is a brilliant investment which I highly recommend, he was discussing the topic of the papacy he defended it eloquently as always, but I shall not go into that here as I’m more interested in the one the angles he took on which is obvious but also quite brilliant, Ven Archbishop Sheen always manages to illuminate things in such a way as if you had always understood his point even if you didn’t know it, such was his gift which he keeps on giving.

He is one of the greatest teachers the church has seen in modern times. So, during the discourse he discussed Math Ch 1 vs 1 through 25 the genealogy of Jesus of course we also have the genealogy in Luke Ch 3, he pointed out that this was the Lords proof of his ancestry not that he needed proof but still here it is, now what’s interesting is how this leads into two great themes of this age one constant attacks by non-Catholics on validity of the Papacy and two attacks used amongst Catholics in our own struggles internally. Here I speak of course of the battle between those Catholics who wish to keep the faith as it has been for 2000 years and those that wish to change it along the lines of a church that started in the 1960s.

So, to argument number one the genealogy contains many names from Abraham to Jesus in Mathew and in Luke Jesus to Adam but in between we have many names of which some are very good men, holy men, some are a mix, and some are not good or have at least done bad things imperfect as he says, so let’s say even if none have done any bad, they certainly have had siblings that done bad things at the very least. Well as is pointed about by Ven Archbishop Sheen we have this lineage within the Church too he gives himself as an example we know that he was consecrated by Cardinal Piazza who consecrated by Pope Pius X from there you can all the way to Peter and then to him Our Lord and savior Jesus Christ who built his church upon the Rock of Peter.

So, what many Anti Catholics would claim about the church that because we have bad Popes, bad bishops etc would in effect invalidate the lineage of Christ, is has linage is also an attack upon the
method in Gospels used by Mathew and Luke in evidence for our savior Jesus Lordship! also further on this we have historical proof of the pope’s existence many pre 3rd century Popes where well known historical figures! we in the Catholic church are blessed with an inbroken line of succession to the 12 to Peter the first Pope and to Christ himself. As the future Saint said you could have
started a church 10 years after that moment where the keys where handed to Peter and it might as well be 10 million years to late!

Now onto the second question to the people within our church who protect those in the hierarchy even when it has been proven that they are unworthy and that they are not to be trusted, please look through the list of Cardinals and Popes that have littered our history be honest would
you say that we shouldn’t criticize the countless bishops who become Arian heretics denying our Lords true divinity, or would you defend Pope Alexander VI who had mistresses and was constantly
embroiled in corruption who turned the Lateran palace into a Harame. I hope not but to be frank some would, there are no doubt parishioners in Cardinal McCarrick’s diocese defended him up until the last! If we can admit the great King Solomon erred at the last years of his life, that the mighty David was wrong in committing adultery that Samson was weak willed with the philistine
woman then we level some tempered criticism against a man, because the Pope is still a man, some of the liberal members of the church are falling into Pope worship that our Protestant critics accuse us of. The papacy is infallible but only when one, the Pope is talking from the position of the Holy See, two he is talking directly to the whole the church not a specific group or even continent three
he’s talking on matters of faith or dogma. So, you can point out when a bishop, cardinal or even the Pope is doing something wrong, when they are not living up to their office even when you feel that he is endangering souls if it is done respectfully and with his office in mind.

To the final point several bad Popes and many bad bishops does not invalidate the line of succession of inheritance, we would I hope never to dare to say for example Solomon was not rightful king
because of king David’s miss deed, how much more would we not and pray no one would dare to say that of Our Lord Jesus Christ was unworthy. So why then would anyone as outside enemies of the church often say a few bad popes a few bad bishops invalid the line from Christ and St peter through to now and why can’t people admit that there is bad Popes, after all Judas Iscariot performed many miracles, many good deeds were chosen yet he is proof that the church because it is made of men who are all fallen will fail sometimes. I love the Office of St Peter as I love the Church which is the body of our Lord Jesus Christ here on earth, I will always defend it against its enemies, that might mean being critical at times, but to correct an erring brother whether above you or below done with true Christian charity is an act of love not dis-obedience as St Paul points out many times.

I genuinely do not make this argument about any current events that I will cover separately it is more pointed at the inconsistency within arguments directed as the traditional Catholic who receives attacks from every side while they simply want to worship God and be faithful servants to
Christ.

AC

Film Review Becket

Becket

Becket is a 1964 dramatic film adaptation of the play Becket or the Honour of God by Jean Anouilh made by Hal Wallis Productions and released by Paramount Pictures. It was directed by Peter Glenville and the screenplay was written by Edward Anhalt based on Anouilh's play.

The film’s stars are Richard Burton as Thomas Becket and Peter O'Toole as King Henry II. It was well received by critics and viewers at the time and was financially successful. Becket won the Academy Award for Best Adapted Screenplay, and was nominated for eleven other awards, including for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Supporting Actor, and twice for Best Actor.

This is a great film and a must watch. The main two actors Burton and 0’Toole do a brilliant job. It is well-acted and well shot with good music. It is well-paced and has some great moments of suspense, as well as some surprisingly very funny moments and of course, heart warming moments. The film does have some historical inaccuracies, however, most are minor details and don’t affect the narrative. The film really speaks to Catholics and I think is an inspiring message. This film is worth getting and watching again and again as it is timeless. Especially for traditionalists who will see this as especially inspiring. It really is a must watch.   

RC

Film Review 2 Popes

 

The Two Popes.

The film was made by Netflix and started streaming on December 20, 2019. It also had a limited theatrical release in the US and UK. The Director was Fernando Meirelles and written by Anthony McCarten. With Jonathan Pryce playing Cardinal Bergoglio and Anthony Hopkins playing Pope Benedict XVI. The film has mostly received positive reviews by critics and the general public. I have to say as a work of art it is a well-made film, well shot and well-paced. The music goes well and helps strengthen the film. The acting too is very good, not just by the main two characters but also by the secondary characters and extras. It is well written as a story and does keep your interest.

However, it takes massive liberties with the historical facts of the church, like the church’s history and its scandals. It also plays fast and loose with the backgrounds of the two main characters Cardinal Bergoglio and Pope Benedict XVI. With an obvious push to make Cardinal Bergoglio look overly Saintly. It pushes very Liberal and heterodox views as reasonable. It does ruin the film. Sadly, many uneducated people who watch this film will take it as fact instead of a piece of fiction. The most dangerous parts being, the tossed in, mistaken historical facts and misinterpretations of church dogma. The story itself is about a frictional series of meetings between the two men. In which they discuss the issues of the church their opinions and Cardinal Bergoglio’s past. It is worth watching if only to know what lies and misinformation they are trying to push on the unsuspecting general public. However, it’s not the worst piece of propaganda made.   

RC

The Capitulation to the Pentecostals / Back Door Apologetic

I have spent many years defending the faith from protestants of many ilk’s, I have done so with Love and compassion, with gentleness in some cases and forthrightness in others, but after the Amazonian synod I know so much of my work has been undone, in fact forget my meagre efforts this synod and blatant idol worship has undone the work of countless missionaries, priests, monks and apologists of the Catholic Church. As Bishop Emeritus Muller pointed out, all of this will lead to scandal and to further embolden the enemies of the church, especially in South America where the many protestant sects, not least among them Pentecostalism, a most vile heresy, that shows blasphemy to the Holy Spirit. The countless conversations I’ve had explaining honouring Mary is not worship, that art, icons and statues aren’t idol worship that the catholic church does not permit idolatry recounting the heroic deeds of St. Boniface & St. Willibrord telling them of the positions the church takes against the act of idolatry, explaining Holy images, recounting the old testament seems to have been smashed by the idols of the inner circle of the Vatican. 

Our enemies will use this as an axe to attack us, they convert people who will abandon the faith and so souls will be lost. How hard it is to defend the church when the Pope endorses idolatry. I want to defend the Pope, the Church all Bishops if I can, but not against Gods Truth. We are losing people to atheism and protestant sects because we not being Catholic if we simply acted Catholic, preached the gospel, spread the faith full of vigour, not diluted even one ounce of the catechism, we would be gaining converts, not losing them. Yet the modernists insist if we water it down some more people will come, what people would come, because those people are not followers of Christ! Because at this point the faith has been watered down in the mainline church so much, I don’t even recognise the Catholic faith in the new faith that is forming. Please read Bishop Emeritus Muller’s statement or check out Return to Tradition, who does an excellent job of reviewing his statements, also please see the book review which further proves that Vatican 2 hasn’t worked won’t work and can’t work. I recognise the council of course I will say before enemies of tradition i.e. traitors to Christ will say, I am not blind, I recognise that the bull in the china shop is inside but am I supposed to agree its destruction is a good thing, can I say that the bull is not a good addition to the shops profitability, to the decor of the shop! There comes a point when being subtle doesn’t work on this issue of idolatry, there cannot be debate it’s the first commandment. There are still people saying there was no idol worship, at the same time the video is everywhere even at the amazon synod a press spokesman said here was no idol worship at the same time as the video was playing in the background, they said it, no Pachamama moments later Pope Francis apologised for the disrespect at the Pachamama statue being thrown in the Tiber. The watered down liberal worldly faith being pushed by the German Bishops and in general in the main part of the church is not working, it is not the faith our fathers and definitely not the faith of the apostles given to them by Christ, Ignatius of Antioch. wouldn’t recognise this flabby soft faith. Neither is the revolutionary Marxism dressed up as Catholicism that is liberation theology it is not Catholicism IT isn’t even a form of Christianity, but a form of Marxism dressed up with Christian trappings, it’s as close to true Catholicism as Santa Mortua is it’s also just as satanic in reality. Wake up brothers and sisters this is evil those who deny the truth are not of God by their fruits we shall know them.

AC

Imperialism and the myth of the noble savage.

A strange pattern has occurred since the lead up to and the finish of the Amazonian Synod in Rome this year. Accusations of racism, imperialism and even white supremacy by liberal catholic media and even Clergy including Bishops of the church. This truly is an indicator of the person throwing these bizarre, groundless and quite laughable insults about, it’s an indicator that they themselves are either completely ignorant of the church’s teaching, history and tradition or they are themselves racist or just completely dishonest. 

To start with it shows a lack of knowledge of the teachings of the church, the main Cardinal for the amazon region Cardinal Krautler claims to have never baptised anyone and will never baptise anyone, which is a direct disobedience of Jesus Christ himself who said "Therefore, go and forth teach ALL nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Mt 28:19). It denies the wishes of Our Lady in America who appeared to Juan Diego as our Lady of Guadalupe beginning the conversion of Mexico and the Americas! It also denies the history of the many great Missionary saints who set forth to convert the world including many of whom were martyred for their pains, including, I might add Apostles like St. Thomas the Apostle who was slain in India. It denies our missionary tradition, of great men like St. Boniface and St. Patrick who converted completely heathen lands with Love and directness! 

I believe this ignorance comes from a neo liberal sense of real imperialism, they do not think the Amazon is capable of being Catholic, that they need to be pandered to because they are below the task, despite the fact that we are called to baptise and spread the gospel by Jesus’ great commission to all peoples. They are also showing their own ignorance of the Amazon itself, 85% of people in the region live in urban areas, they are not living in trees and running around with blowdarts, as the liberals in the church would paint them. The whole thing stinks of moral relativism it stinks of neo Marxism, the idea that the Amazonian people should be left to walk on the path to hell because they couldn’t possibly lose their cultural traditions becomes all the more amusing when these same people claim that traditionalists in the church are stuck in the past.

All of this has had to disturbing side effect in that Pentecostal churches have taken over 80% of the amazon as they have no qualms about converting people! This fact in itself clearly shows that it’s not a resistance to Christ but an abandoning of Christ by the heavily liberation theology influenced Catholic in name only missionaries of the region. I will say to them that they don’t know the faith, the faith of Christ can conquer all, it can change all, because God is all. When the first Catholic missionaries arrived in Frankia, Germany, England, Ireland and Scandanavia the Latin Roman Rite would have seemed far more foreign to them than the modern Roman Rite does to the people of the amazon, what they would have seen in their eyes is mystical, oriental, strange practices of the mass, the incense, the Latin prayers the singing, the chant would have been so foreign to them so exotic, but they did convert, they embraced it because it was beautiful, because it was from God because it was Truth. Now those same peoples, the German Bishops who have in the main part abandoned the faith in reality say the Amazonians are too primitive to be saved, it’s disgusting, all people of the world can be saved we don’t water down the faith we give it them it full of its richness, we tell them the truth of Jesus Christ and they will embrace it and rejoice. The accusation this is European faith that we are trying to force upon non Europeans is laughable! It shows they know nothing of the faith or Europe, the faith shaped Europe Christianity made European culture the church moulded Europe to the point where those ignorant of both can’t tell them apart and so attack European culture not knowing that they are attacking Catholicism. The German bishops conference is showing its totally repugnant Racist and supremacist face, they are wise they enlightened and all of us who just want to practice real Catholicism are ignorant. It harks back to the example of a major synod when they started to lecture the African bishops who hold fast to the Catholic faith about being stuck in the past and quite rightly the African Bishops said to them, mind your own house is emptying than on being burgled and on fire! 

In short keep your "noble savage" myths to yourself, we love our Amazon brothers and sisters we will see them baptised see them confirmed and united to us as equals in the loving embrace of Mother Church where they can be saved brought to Jesus Christ finding everlasting salvation.

God Love you

AC