Guy Fawkes Day commemorates the Gundpowder Plot of fifth November, a plot by Guy Fawkes and other English Catholic to blow up Parliament and thus assassinate King James I, and install a Catholic monarch instead. But the plot was detected, the plotters were executed, and Guy Fawkes Night became a celebration of the Protestant supremacy and foiling of Popish plots. So, it had an anti-Catholic element. Big deal.
I remember, when I was a kid, the British comics (which were the comics I got, since there weren't any Irish comics) used to print "Guy Fawkes masks" over centrefold pages, at this time of year-- the idea being that you would cut them out and put them on a cardboard base.
Today, there seems to be no mention of Guy Fawkes Day-- neither on the mainstream media, nor on social media. I find it very sad.
The jingle by which Guy Fawkes Day was immortalized was:
Remember, remember, the Fifth of November,
Gunpowder, treason and plot.
I know not the reason why the gundpowder treason
Should ever be forgot.
Why should any traditions be forgot? It makes you sad. Anyway, happy Guy Fawkes Day!
Talking about English comics:I saw two days ago, for the first time in Perth, the Beano annual for sale.
ReplyDeleteDennis the menace hadn't aged a bit
Hurray! The Beano remains a bastion of poltical incorrectness, as afr as I can see!
DeleteMeh to Guy Fawkes. Have you seen the video of those boys being removed from the Brussels Cathedral Lutheran commemoration? One by one reciting the Rosary. Yahboo to certain commemorations Mal.
ReplyDelete(End of my tether) Sinéad.
Ha ha ha. Well, I would rather some good old Protestant bigotry than the wishy-washy latitudinarianism of so many Christians today! (I haven't seen that video.)
DeleteAh come on, I've read about now, they were acting the maggot! A time and a place for everything, surely?
Delete
ReplyDeleteDo they look like they were acting the maggot to you? I think they look quite earnest. And they were in the right. Sinéad.
Well, this is the Catholic Herald's report:
Deletehttp://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2017/10/30/video-police-remove-catholics-praying-rosary-from-reformation-service/
Sorry, I'm only realizing now that this is a CATHOLIC Cathedral. Well, that puts a different spin on it. Yes, they shouldn't have been ejected.
DeleteUnless they were being really loud and obnoxious. Anyway, I'm not in favour of ecumenical services in Catholic churches myself, so I agree with them.
DeleteLook it up on youtube, catch the feel of what happened. The obnoxious ones were the rest of the coots trying to drown out their prayers. Stick Brussels Cathedral Rosary in the search space. Nothing new under the sun. Sinéad.
ReplyDeleteLooking at it now. It looks like they were trying to be disruptive...they would have been better off handing out their pamphlets outside, in my view. I don't know, Sinéad. I don't agree with the ecumenical service but I don't think their approach was the right one, to be honest.
DeleteMind you, I'm a bit stung from having agreed with the SSPX over the controversy at Knock, and feeling as though I'd been rather misled about it when I learned the full facts.
ReplyDeleteOf course they were trying to be disruptive. Good grief that is the point! Protestants ( who are NOT Catholics) who have enough Catholic churches without taking any more were plonking their bums on Catholic church pews with the priest's blessing. At what point will you, as a layman say, ah no, I may have to take a stand here. Leaflets. They'll be quaking in their boots. Come on Mal they're IN the house. Inside. I'm so surprised at your lack of foresight here. Can you honestly not see where this is all going? I'm off to Lidl. Email me if I'm clogging you your blog.
Sinéad.
You're never clogging my blog, comments are always welcome, and of course I sympathize with you here. But surely protest has to be balanced with respecfulness? After all, the bishop had to have authorized this and we do have a duty of obedience to our bishops. And a right to criticize them, yes, but respectfully.
DeleteOr maybe it's just my innate hatred of "scenes"-- there are other ways to make the point.
ReplyDeleteWe don't have to obey bishops who are taking the mick Mal. It's our church too, not just his, it belongs to those who built and prayed in it and those who will in the future too. It's an entrustment with conditions. You're the Chesterton man, you already know this.
When I see a determined effort to bring Lutherans into the Church through conversion then aye, let them in. As it is all I see is words like unity that mean nothing of substance and nobody is required to convert. Coz that might yaknow, offend people. People's souls are on the line. Are we doing them a favour by inviting them in and not calling them to convert but to tell them they are grand where they are? Are they grand where they are?
People were martyred for refusing to along with the Reformation. Churches destroyed. Monasteries emptied and monks and nuns turfed out. It turned Europe upside down, heresy and lies tend to do that. That clown in charge of the cathedral doesn't care about those he invited for if he did he would call them to convert. He ignores all that and invites them in and calls the police on Catholics reciting the Rosary in their own cathedral. He's a faithless clown.
I marched down to Lidl in a fury thinking about your response this evening. You are so aware of culture and religion, the use of space and territory and boundaries and symbols. So if the likes of you who are so smart can't see this for the mockery it was then we're on the ropes. Tell me this much, why the hell are we bothering with an ecumenical service??? What is the point, religiously speaking of doing such a thing in a Catholic church?? For what?? I just do not understand your naivety on this, it's stunning. Or maybe I'm mad as bats? Could be neither could be both, but you have to get over the hatred of causing a scene. You're a Catholic in an increasingly anti Catholic world. You may have to cause a scene eventually so don't let pride shush you.
I wonder the Mother of God thought of what happened there that day and what Mr. Luther's reaction was too. Which of them was smiling and why? I think those boys are little diamonds, God bless them and the bishop can go run up a wall, he's a turncoat disgrace.
Sinéad.
It's not that I disagree with your attitude towards ecumenical services, I don't, but I notice how often gentleness of disposition is enjoined on us in the New Testament: "A servant of the Lord must not quarrel, but on the contrary be gentle towards all, a capable teacher, patient of evil, correcting opponents with meekness" (2 Timothy), "the wrath of man does not work the righteounsess of God", (James 1:20), and so on...
DeleteReading the lives of the saints it strikes me that examples of docility and obedience abound, but rarely defiance of those in ecclesial authority.
I absolutely do think it's important for faithful Catholics to stand by doctrine today, so something like the dubia or the fraternal correction is entirely justified; a dignified, respectful approach.
Although I share the anguish of what is happening in the Church right now, I do think excessive panic over it possibly shows a lack of faith in the promise to St. Peter...this is one moment in a long and often chequered history. The Church doesn't need us to save it, we need it to save us...
Well, I don't mean to sound preachy, because I'm myself striving to find the right balance between docility and fidelity to orthodoxy. I'm pretty sure those guys offended against the first in an excess of enthusiasm for the second, although perhaps I'm wrong.
At what point do you think we should tell a priest he's in the wrong? That's not a question that needs to be answered here. Just something to stew on.
ReplyDeleteIf kneeling to pray the Rosary is not meek, is quarrelsome then I'm headed for the hellfires. I might be overreacting but you're really underreacting. How can you not see this for the outrage it is?
You wrote of the long chequered history of the Church. I wonder did anyone ever get kicked out of a church before for praying a Rosary while Prods sit there like they own the place? Come on! This is NOT a new thing. You're so much better than the promise of St. Peter line. How does calling a faithless turncoat a faithless turncoat show panic that the gates of Hell will not prevail? We can allow Catholicism to be mocked because ah sure it's ok for the gates of hell won't prevail anyway. That's cowardly Mal. I am not calling you a coward but the attitude of not doing the right thing because Jesus will save us anyway is definitely cowardly. I hate the St. Peter line being used in a disagreement because it excuses us from doing the right thing.
Where's your line? You probably are more tolerant than I am. Fair enough. When it gets to that line, will you stand your ground? Will you say to a priest, "actually you can't give that Bapstist/Lutheran/Yoga lovin' Buddhist Holy Communion." Where is your boundary? Will you doff the cap to the priest or stand your ground? That's what I want to know.
Of course God can do it alone but that's not really the point, vine and branches and all that.
Peace (I mean that, really!)
Peace.
Peace to you, too....my line would be anything that is clearly against defined doctrine. And even then, I would have to ask myself, is this something I'm called upon to actively oppose or is simply not participating in it enough? For instance, I wouldn't dream of turning up at the World Meeting of Families because of their homosexual propaganda, but does that mean I should turn up and protest-- is that my place, does it cause scandal, etc.?
DeleteEcumenism is enjoined on us by the documents of Vatican II and St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI were both enthusiastic proponents of it...is an ecumenical service in a Catholic cathedral going too far? I don't know. Was anything actually said or done at this service that was contrary to the teachings of the Catholic faith? I don't know.
I can't find any instance of Chesterton ever writing against the Catholic Church of Catholic churchmen, his fire seemed entirely reserved for its opponents, not including "opponents within"...
I take this question very seriously...this is an email I sent to a rather conservative priest of my acquaintance, very recently, trying to work these issues out for myself:
"Dear Father
Do you have any thoughts on docility and obedience, especially in regard to what appears to be erroneous teaching from bishops, priests and perhaps even the Pope?
I've been trying to get my bearings on this for a long time. I have a few different thoughts:
1) I sometimes feel I am torn between a choice of two "cognitive dissonances"-- either feeling out of harmony with Tradition, or with Authority.
2) The emphasis on Pharisaism in the Gospels must be there for a reason-- surely it doesn't simply pertain to a historical situation. Therefore when I tend towards rigorism I do worry I am being a Pharisee.
3) I have never been able to pin down a definitive understanding of what exactly is Infallible and authoritative, beyond the ex cathedra proclamation of dogmas. Are the documents of Vatican II, for instance, authoritative?
4) I sometimes wonder if it is better simply to take one's lead from one's bishop, and the Church, and give up personal scruples for the sake of obedience. I mean, even to the extent of rhetoric, emphasis, etc.
What do you think? I realize a book could be written on this topic, but any thoughts at all would be gratefully received.
Many thanks"
I think it's legitimate to share the response of the priest, who is a very learned man, without revealing his identity...I notice the emphasis he puts on respectfulness:
ReplyDeleteGood to hear from you. Okay, serious questions you are asking.
First of all, you must know Church teachings in the various areas that come up, what Scripture says, what the catechism says. Papal pronouncements must be accord with them. We are bound to obey Church teaching, but we are not bound to obey teachings that veer from those teachings, nor the individual teachings of a pope or bishop that veer or contradict Church teaching. That, we now know, can happen, and it has happened in the past (cf. John XXII and the beatific vision).
There should be no disparity between Tradition and authority, if there is, there is a problem. See above.
We are bound to respect in filial charity the pope and bishops, particularly our local bishop, even those who teach contrary to the Catholic faith since they are successors of the apostles, but we are not bound to obey them should they teach error or command us to sin. In such cases we respectfully decline and pray for them. This may involve suffering and persecution for a time..
The Pharisees were so caught up in the minutiae of individual rules and laws they forgot charity and spirit of the Law. However, Jesus in condemning them did not urge us to be liberals and disregard the Gospel so as to be charitable, as our modern liberals tend to do, and as the Pope has done in his accusations of rigidity. We must be careful to find a balance that is faithful and does not contradict the law of God and the teaching of the Church. We are not to be Jansenists nor religious Marxists. Look to the Saints to see how they did it (they have a teaching role in the Church). I would recommend looking at St John Paul II who offers a great example for us moderns.
The documents of Vatican II are authoritative: they are official documents of an Ecumenical Council. There are various levels of authoritative documents.. Infallibility concerns teachings on faith and morals and there can be formal declarations (like that of the Assumption) and the exercise of the ordinary magisterium (as with Pope John Paul II's declaration on women priests). They are to be held as definitive.
While we are bound to be obedient, we must do so not as robots but as thinking members of the Church so as to discern if what a pope or bishop is saying is faithful to Church teaching. We need to ask questions for greater understanding - this is what the five dubia submitted by the Cardinals is. Such questioning does not and should not display rejection, but if the answers are not satisfactory we must adhere to Church teaching.
Careful with scruples, they are rooted in the irrational rather than the rational, and as St John Paul points out, faith and reason work together (cf Fides et Ratio).
I hope that helps. We live in strange times, but all we need to do is to stay faithful to Christ, the Gospel and the unchanging teaching of the Church and seek the gift of peace in our hearts to live and endure. Prayer is vital, especially prayer before the Blessed Sacrament - that's what keeps me sane (insofar as I can be considered sane!!)
ReplyDeleteI'm relieved to hear that you see that one must always discern and not necessarily obey. I'm also relieved to read that you are trying to figure these things out for yourself. I'm doing the same thing and it's a blessing to find priests who are wrestling with all this too.
I always find that things work out better when I step in to solve a potential problem earlier, for then I can have the chatsies and find out where we both stand. Then I can see who is genuine and who when given an inch is on the road to take a mile. My own opinion and this is just an opinion is that a fine amount of those in charge of churches and the Church are not in good faith. I doubt that the priest there was in good faith. It'll all come out in the wash over the next few years anyway. I am hopefully wrong. I'm of the same mind regarding next year. I've already decided to take annual leave!
I'm looking into Mormonism in the worst case scenario....
ReplyDelete(That's a joke. People sometimes take me very literally, I'd better make that clear!)
Heretic! Burn you on the bonfire!!!!!
ReplyDelete:-D
When reading these conversations from an ex-Catholic country widely influenced by Lutherans and modern fallacies I find it somehow comforting to note that at least you discuss problems in a sensible way. Here (Sweden) it wouldn´t even be that. If 99 per cent of the population don´t bother at all, then a majority among the rest would hardly have the guts or energy to even point the crucial questions.
ReplyDeleteIncidentally just the other day I had, for the first time ever, a talk privately at home with a female "priest" from the Lutheran Church of Sweden (an acquaintance from before she became so) but I didn´t get so very much wiser when it came to things like outlook or beliefs. Some things said did make me understand it a little better all the same. That is just a parenthesis, and privately, but what I do care about, probably as much as you Anonymous do, is those kind of "public events" that keeps going on and on at high official Church levels. It makes me feel strangely cold and frustrated too, or even blurred, while trying to make any sense out of it. Why not talk about the main Catholic Church teachings instead? After several years of reactions like these that were displayed in your conversations I suppose I´m more coming to a kind of more pragmatic-like attitude lately, maybe something akin to what Maolsheachlann was saying in the response. However low key that may be, it does NOT equal to being indifferent or simply cowardly. More a way of practically dealing with today´s major concerns for pastoral care in the Catholic Church. Having said that... more than protests, of any brand, I really think we might need more traditional apologists, both among priests and among laymen.
I have conflicted feelings on this matter. I've swung from one side to another a lot...whenever I travel towards the right or the traditionalist side, I feel myself frustrated at just the opposite; take Church Militant TV, for instance. ALL IT EVER SEEMS TO SPEAK ABOUT is the crisis in the Church and the apostasy of bad bishops, to the extent that it becomes a monomania. That is surely not healthy. You can't be angry all the time, you can't just be negative all the time...
DeleteOn the other hand, yes, I do wonder, why on EARTH are we even talking about ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue when we hardly know what we believe ourselves? Don't we have plenty of work just trying to sort our own houses out? Is ecumenism really worth it when you are trying to hit a moving target anyway, when the Anglicans and Lutherans and Methodists etc. etc. seem to change their beliefs every year?
I'm all for good relations between Christians, but I have to admit I'm extremely sceptical of ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue.
I don´t believe in that kind of diffuse talks, and especially not the events, either. The main point for me is just that not voicing protests DOES NOT equal to an attitude of "give up and rest your cases since this is the only way we can do it" but that this struggle to try some not-so-traditional dialogue, for reasons of pastoral care and showing respect in an honest way, is at least also an effort to be loyal to the Church hierarchy, and to Him that is TRUTH, at the same moment. What you write about the other ditch is exactly what I´ve seen too. It doesn´t make sense to only repeat all the disgust online, it does not seem to help much for real conversions but rather the opposite. I´m all for "staunch" apologists in the historical sense, but not so sure if the major online "faith warriors" actually does the same thing as the historical faith heroes did.
ReplyDeleteWell, exactly. They often appeal to someone such as Archbishop Fulton Sheen but did you ever hear the Venerable Sheen bashing the Church? I'm not saying that makes it illegitimate, but it's certainly a notable difference.
DeleteCan´t wait to hear some good news that the tide is changing and traditional apologists come on board to make the Ship a more holy and shining beacon of light.
ReplyDeleteCould it be that the communist mindset (Russia´s errors spreading around the World according to Fátima)has weakened the Church laity so much that there are only these kind of distorted apologetics left. Sad thoughts.
ReplyDeleteWell, I don't think it's true to say that "only" those apologetics are left.... there are a lot of good Catholic writers and media out there. EWTN is pretty good, I think. The Catholic Herald is good. There's Edward Feser, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Bishop Barron (most of the time)....I don't think the picture is all that bleak.
DeleteNo that´s accurate, The Catholic Herald seems the best paper hereby at this time. Dr Edward Feser and his friends are a blessed beacon of light in this respect! I also like Crisis Magazine (also in America). American Chesterton Society has great videos by their chairman Dale Ahlquist as well. But still the major trend is not those few writers and speakers here and there, and the whole surroundings or climate seems to be even worse influenced by the Red Ideologies than generally admitted by the "good mainstream" both in Church and in public sphere.
Delete