Speaking In Season & Out... Once Again!

Following the ad limina visit of the Bishops of England & Wales, today it was the turn of the Scottish Bishops.

Again, Pope Benedict XVI has hit the nail squarely on the head... pretty much the same message as for the English and Welsh Bishops, but without the pointed comment about needing to speak with one voice... because, as I remarked to a friend this evening, the Scottish Bishops have had a far better track record on defending Church doctrine, especially on pro-life matters.

One passage I particularly enjoyed reading, given the stuff going on here with Stand Up for Vatican II:

"Hand in hand with a proper appreciation of the priest’s role is a correct understanding of the specific vocation of the laity. Sometimes a tendency to confuse lay apostolate with lay ministry has led to an inward-looking concept of their ecclesial role. Yet the Second Vatican Council’s vision is that wherever the lay faithful live out their baptismal vocation – in the family, at home, at work – they are actively participating in the Church’s mission to sanctify the world. A renewed focus on lay apostolate will help to clarify the roles of clergy and laity and so give a strong impetus to the task of evangelizing society."

And then there was this one...

"Recent developments in medical ethics and some of the practices advocated in the field of embryology give cause for great concern. If the Church’s teaching is compromised, even slightly, in one such area, then it becomes hard to defend the fullness of Catholic doctrine in an integral manner. Pastors of the Church, therefore, must continually call the faithful to complete fidelity to the Church’s Magisterium, while at the same time upholding and defending the Church’s right to live freely in society according to her beliefs."

It's excellent. You can read the whole thing HERE. There's also a video clip:

Twitch of the mantilla to Fr. Ray Blake, especially for the video clip.

Flattery... (Of A Sort!)

Last Friday, I put up a post highlighting the connection between the "Stand Up For Vatican II" crowd and the dissident group, Catholics for a Changing Church (CCC).

The objectives of CCC can be seen quite clearly from their website - starting as a protest against the papal encyclical, Humanae Vitae, they rapidly formed themselves into a pressure group... though in 1980 they claim to have been marginalised following the National Pastoral Congress in Liverpool, and subsequently they morphed into a "think-tank/study group."

They obviously haven't been studying the actual documents of Vatican II - as I explained before, all the things they hold so very dear (Mass "facing the people" and in the vernacular, married and female clergy, the primacy of conscience, etc. etc. ad infinitem... *yawns*) were actually not called for by Vatican II, and were, in some of those cases, explicitly condemned.

Their "thinking" has also been somewhat ineffective: they state that they have

"...looked at the future form of the Christian faith. We feel that if we don’t like what is on offer, it is incumbent on us to advance our own ideas for wider discussion."

Hardly an example of the filial submission of mind and will to the authority of Holy Mother Church envisaged by the Council!

I suspect that, in 1980, they were told as much... which is when they declared themselves "marginalised" (and, in all probability, terribly hurt and upset) because no-one would actually take them seriously.

Bernard Wynne, one of the main agitators in the anti-Latin Mass campaign at Our Lady of the Rosary, Blackfen, who aired his "grievances" in The Suppository, is the Chair of CCC. I wonder how many parishioners, who thought that maybe Mr. Wynne had a right to express his concerns about the liturgy, actually realised that he was also campaigning against Church teaching?

Of course, my openness in criticising the actions and aims of CCC has not gone unnoticed. My blog has come to the attention of another participant in the "Stand Up for Vatican II" coalition. Valerie Stroud, the contact given for "We Are Church (UK)" sent an email round to the We Are Church Yahoo groups.

In it, she stated that

"The Daily Telegraph, a respected newspaper in my youth, employs Damien Thompson to write a fundamentalist blog on its website. There is also a woman "in private vows" called Mac McLernon who writes a blog called Mulier Fortis. They are so outraged by Catholics for a Changing Church's spearheading of the Stand Up for Vatican II campaign that they have found the time to create a rather nasty website of their own.

Do visit http://gcc4vat2.co.uk/ ..."

I am extremely flattered to be linked with Damian Thompson and his blog in this way... I mean, wow, he's really big in the blogging stakes!! The CCC, WAC(UK) and IMWAC bunch must think I am a very talented writer... sadly, I cannot accept any of the credit for the spoof website. I wish I could. All I did was link to it... which, I think I'm right in saying, means that Valerie Stroud is indulging in libel. I hope she remembers to mention that in Confession...

She continues:

"It is highly offensive but mature adults are used to turning a blind eye to the juvenile antics of the young. I rather go along with the PR adage: "No publicity is bad publicity" You would have to be pretty stupid to give this spoof website any credibility.

The real CCC site will be found at http://www.ccc4vat2.co.uk/"

More (presumably unintentional) flattery. I haven't been called young for quite a while! And, personally, I'd have thought you'd have to be pretty stupid to imagine that the spoof website was supposed to be given any credibility...

The fact she felt the need to indicate that there is a real website made me chortle...

The defence of CCC by Valerie Stroud is interesting. WAC(UK) is a part of IMWAC... and IMWAC has wacky ideas about the direction the Church should take, as you can see:

We are Church: The Roman Catholic Church should accept the role of condoms in the prevention of HIV/Aids.

40 Years Encyclical "Humanae Vitae" – July 25th, 1968 "We Are Church" keeps calling for future-oriented Christian sexual ethics.

We Are Church Press Release on the decision of the Anglican Church to ordain women Bishops.

We are Church writes Letter to Pope Benedict asking for voluntary celibacy as a first step toward a renewed form of priesthood.

*yawn*

Support The Holy Father...

I have been very remiss with my blogging of late: both writing posts for my own blog and reading others. However, I noticed that Christopher Gillibrand of Catholic Church Conservation fame has started an online petition in support of the Holy Father:

"We, the undersigned, welcome, with all our hearts and souls, the visit of Pope Benedict XVI to the United Kingdom, for the liberty and well-being of the church in our country and most especially for the spiritual benefits and pastoral care to be offered to all, whatever their beliefs."

I was signature number 417... but I'm sure that we can get quite a few more...

England & Wales Ad Limina Visit...

It seems that the Holy Father has been keeping an eye on the legislation being produced by our government... and he has told the Bishops, in no uncertain terms, to stand up for the Truth.

I think there was a little veiled criticism in there:

"I urge you as Pastors to ensure that the Church’s moral teaching be always presented in its entirety and convincingly defended."

Too often have our Bishops presented the Church's teaching as if it was something divorced from reality... or damned it with faint praise.

Given the stuff I've been posting here on Catholics for a Changing Church, I was particularly encouraged by this paragraph:

"In a social milieu that encourages the expression of a variety of opinions on every question that arises, it is important to recognize dissent for what it is, and not to mistake it for a mature contribution to a balanced and wide-ranging debate. It is the truth revealed through Scripture and Tradition and articulated by the Church’s Magisterium that sets us free."

Mantilla-twitch to Fr. Ray Blake for both the video clip and the text of the Holy Father's address.

Septuagesima Sunday...

I love Septuagesima. I always found that Lent would catch me unawares, sneaking up early, and before I knew it, it was Ash Wednesday and I hadn't sorted out what I was going to do for Lent.

Septuagesima is like a two-week warning: time to give serious consideration to the areas of penance, prayer and almsgiving...

...as well as giving me time to finish up any meat products in the freezer, and treat myself to a couple of steak dinners.

Not to mention bacon sandwiches.

Stand Up 4 V2... If You Can...!

A short while ago I gave a fair amount of time and attention to the Stand Up for Vatican II crowd - despite my reluctance to give them the oxygen of publicity, I thought that it might help for people to realise that this meeting was being co-ordinated by Catholics for a Changing Church (CCC), a nasty, dissident group, which does NOT have the best interests of the Church at heart, and merely wants to re-create a church in its own image.

For anyone who missed it, the first post was HERE, with two more HERE and HERE. Don't read them if you have problems with high blood pressure...

The meeting was last Tuesday - I've been too ill to give it any consideration, but I will turn my attention to it shortly.

In the interim, I would suggest checking out the rival organisation, GCC4vat2, which, while similar in structure and purpose to CCC, has the advantage of declaring its aims and intentions in a manner devoid of the bureaucratic officialese so beloved of civil servants, bank managers and management consultants...

I particularly enjoyed reading about their Executive Committee...

Time For More Blondeness... !

This is a very girly blog post. If you are a man, I expect you to read the first four paragraphs (including this one) and then skip straight to the comments to leave a message of sympathy. If you happen to see the photos as you skip past, comments of admiration or commiseration* (depending on your point of view) may also be left. *Please be aware that if your comments are less than appreciative, I will hunt you down...

I haven't blogged since Tuesday - I've been ill with a nasty chest infection which has seen me curled up in bed with only my iPhone to remind me that there was a world outside my bedroom.

Today I realised that I had to bite the bullet and get myself to the doctor. I'd hoped it could be avoided, because there weren't any appointments available for the next two weeks, but after yet another sleepless night spent coughing my lungs out, I decided to try my luck with the "sit and wait" option.

Three and a half hours later, I left the surgery clutching a prescription. One visit to the chemist later, and I was ready for a nap, much to Sylvester's disgust: as far as he is concerned, my bed is his domain during the hours of daylight.

(Ok, men can skip to the end...)

In the evening, I woke up again, and remembered that I was due to have my hair done.

Now I have been battling to get my "ideal" blonde colour for some time; although I have liked the result, repeated applications of the same peroxide-based tint have gradually resulted in the shade becoming too light for my colouring... I do not wish to end up a platinum blonde!

So, I told my hairdresser that I wanted to go a shade or two darker. This caused some consternation... apparently, all the peroxide used previously would interact with my preferred new shade and go green... and I didn't like any of the more "honey and gold" options.

After a prolonged pow-wow among all the hairdressers in the salon (with me as the centre of attention, clutching a book of hair samples) it was suggested that I try to grow out the peroxide completely, prior to trying a slightly darker ash blonde shade, while disguising the growing-out roots with careful application of low-lights in a colour similar to my natural shade. I was a little dubious at first - dark roots look awful, and they'd be pretty obvious for about a year while my hair grew out - but then agreed to give it a go.

I expected to find that my hair was light blonde with darker blonde low-lights. In fact, it seems that the result has been more dark blonde with lighter blonde high-lights... and the roots have been completely disguised...

Communion In The Hand...

"Communion on the tongue" seems to be one of those phrases which, to the proponents of "the Spirit" of Vatican II, is the embodiment of all that is wrong with the pontificate of Benedict XVI.

It is cited as an example of how some people want to "turn the Church back." Conversely, Communion in the hand is explained as "more hygienic," "easier," "faster" and "a more adult way to receive Communion."

Curiously, for the "turning the Church back" brigade, there is often an appeal to the practice of the "early Church": how early is rarely made explicit.

Personally, I think that Communion on the tongue is a far more reverential way to receive Communion. I didn't always think this way. When I first returned to the Church, I was on crutches, and so had no choice in the matter (unless I wanted to fall over!) As soon as I was off the crutches, I hastened to avail myself of the opportunity to receive Communion on the hand, encouraged, I might add, by my Parish Priest (not my current PP, I hasten to add!)

However, I soon became uncomfortable with this. First of all, there was the matter of making some sign of reverence: if I waited until I reached the priest, I held up the queue (genuflecting is difficult for me, if I have nothing on which to hold) and if I genuflected while in the queue, I risked being trampled by the person behind me. Secondly, I became acutely aware that, by failing to move away until after I had placed the Host in my own mouth, I was holding up the queue (albeit for only a few seconds), and quite a few priests seemed to want to hurry me along.

Finally - and this was the clincher - I became conscious of a grainy, gritty feeling where the Host had been on my hand and my fingers. Where there is a grainy, gritty feeling, there are particles which are causing that grainy, gritty feeling... and Our Lord is present, whole and entire, in His Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity, in even the smallest of particles of a consecrated Host. Licking my hand and fingers after placing the Host on my tongue seemed to negate the whole "it's more adult" argument, and I decided to cut out the middle-man, so to speak, and returned to receiving Communion on the tongue.

As I said, I think it is more reverent to receive this way. However, while the Church allows people to choose how they receive, then I have no problem with someone who chooses to receive in the hand. I cannot understand, though, why anyone who truly believes that Our Lord is present in the Blessed Sacrament would find kneeling at altar rails to receive Communion objectionable. I would dearly love to be able to kneel in adoration, but I physically can't manage it.

Anyway, Bishop Schneider has some very interesting reflections on the reception of Communion:

With the Swine Flu scare we had here in England, some dioceses actually went as far as banning Communion on the tongue - they also ditched Communion under both kinds, the Sign of Peace and holy water. It seems to be acknowledged that these draconian precautions were rather an overreaction. I heard, through a friend of mine, that, at Sunday Mass in a church in the diocese of Portsmouth, the precautions were to be rescinded from the beginning of February.

But the priest pleaded with the congregation to continue to receive Communion on the hand. The reason given was that it was so much easier for the ministers to give Communion on the hand than giving Communion on the tongue. I have to say that this really beggars belief.

Twitch of the mantilla to His Hermeneuticalness (and Diane) for the video footage.

Another Priestly Blogger...

A twitch of the mantilla goes to Fr. Michael Brown, for bringing a new blog to the attention of the Catholic Blogosphere.

As he so rightly points out, the Holy Father has encouraged priests to use the blogging medium as a way of evangelising the world. Fr. Wilfrid Elkin is doing just that in his blog "Let the Welkin Ring." It's a fascinating read, especially as he explains how enthusiastic he was when Vatican II was called, and how disillusioned he became with what people have called "the Spirit" of Vatican II.

It's exactly the sort of testimony that the Stand Up for Vatican II crowd ought to take to heart... but somehow, I don't think it'll happen!

In the meantime, pop on over and say hallo.

A Little Light Relief...

I was given the following quotes from various children by a friend of mine... I have no idea where he got them from, (they're probably apocryphal) but they are just so funny, I had to share...

Q1. How do you decide who to marry?

Kristen (Age 10) - No person really decides before they grow up who they're going to marry. God decides it all the way before, and you get to find out later who you're stuck with.

Alan (Age 10) - You've got to find somebody who likes the same stuff... like, if you like sports, she should like it that you like sports, and she should keep the chips and dips coming.

Q2. What is the right age to get married?

Camille (Age 10) - Twenty-three is the best age because you know the person FOREVER by then.

Q3. How can a stranger tell if two people are married?

Derrick (Age 8) - You might have to guess, based on whether they seem to be yelling at the same kids.

Q4. What do you think your mum and dad have in common?

Lori (Age 8) - Both don't want any more kids.

Q5. What do most people do on a date?

Lynnette (Age 8) - Dates are for having fun, and people should use them to get to know each other. Even boys have something to say if you listen long enough.

Martin (Age 10) - On the first date, they just tell each other lies and that usually gets them interested enough to go for a second date.

Q6. When is it ok to kiss someone?

Pam (Age 7) - When they're rich.

Curt (Age 7) - The law says you have to be eighteen, so I wouldn't want to mess with that.

Howard (Age 6) - The rule goes like this: If you kiss someone, then you should marry them and have kids with them. It's the right thing to do.

Q7. Is it better to be single or married?

Anita (Age 9) - It's better for girls to be single but nor for boys. Boys need someone to clean up after them.

Q8. How would the world be different if people didn't get married?

Kelvin (Age 8) - There would be a lot of kids wondering who owned them, wouldn't there?

Q9. How would you make a marriage work?

Ricky (Age 10) - Tell your wife that she looks good, even if she looks like a dump truck.

Under Attack...

The Bishops of England & Wales are failing to protect their flock. John Smeaton has an excellent post on the need to stand up for the family and other pro-life issues, and examples of how bishops in other countries are protecting the people in their care... Meanwhile, Fr. John Boyle records his disquiet at the direction being taken by Catholic education...

Caption Competition...

This is crying out for a caption...

Zephyrinus sent it to me with his own version - "When I find the @@##@?!!! who moved our %#@??!! spectacles, I'm gonna @$$@##??!! them."

I'm sure you can do better...

The Shroud Of Turin

I love stuff like this. Just as for the tilma showing the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe, the relics of St. Philomena, and the "legend" that St. Peter's Basilica was built over the tomb of St. Peter, here we have an example of something believed in by the faithful for centuries, dismissed by so-called "enlightened" sceptics, and then confirmed by scientific analysis...

Mantilla twitch to Matthew at Creative Minority Report.

Experienced Enough...?

The Crescat has an excellent post on attitudes towards her 17 year-old cousin, who recently received a promise ring from her 18 year-old boyfriend. She points out that girls are being encouraged to delay marriage until they have had the opportunity to have "fun" and have "more experience."

I was particularly struck by the Crescat's comment that her cousin's parents "...have been praying about their daughter’s relationships since she hit puberty."

It really is a very good post. Read the whole thing.

Back Again...

Apologies for the lack of posts this week: a combination of a heavy workload (not helped by having my school laptop die on me, rendering me unable to use any of my prepared lessons on the interactive whiteboards), the remains of a bad cold taking a while to clear up and the beginnings of a chesty cough and sore throat (making me more tired than usual) and the arrival of my new iPhone...

I haven't really had much free time in which to explore the phone's capabilities. I have succeeded in ditching Outlook - after it tried to add a third copy of the same appointment to my calendar, I remembered why I hated it so much - and have managed to transfer everything to Google Calendar, and tie that into the phone's calendar application. I have lost all the colour coding, though, which is a pain. No doubt I will soon get to grips with the niceties of Google Calendar, but I shall be sorry to lose Calendarscope.

I took everyone's advice, and decided to check out some of the apps. I am very impressed by iPieta - it has calendars for both the Extraordinary and Ordinary Forms of Mass, in Latin and English, and it even has the option of side-by-side Latin and English text for prayers and Bible readings.

I also found that Tweetdeck and Facebook have iPhone apps, and Google for mobiles has a voice search option. I downloaded a Tube Map (not that I use the tube much, but it's useful to have a copy of the map which doesn't need an internet connection... as the underground stations are connectivity black holes!) I have also set up a few internet bookmarks for my favourite websites, but I've still not done very much in the way of exploration.

However, on Thursday, I had the opportunity to check out the iPhone's camera, in a situation where I have taken plenty of other photos. I had problems adjusting to the button on the screen being used to snap the scene - I kept pressing the "home" button, shutting the camera application instead - and the photos were not as sharply focussed as usual because I hadn't worked out the best way to hold the phone for photo shoots...

His Hermeneuticalness and Jonathan (our Senior MC) were keen to demonstrate that they too had personal organisers... otherwise known as early versions of "notepad"...

Despite this, Fr. Tim declared himself impressed by the speed of the phone's internet access as well as the speed for loading apps. At one point, as he was exploring its contents, (far more thoroughly than I had succeeded in doing) it occurred to me that I might not get the phone back...

Exciting Stuff...

Well, my iPhone finally arrived... but only after I had made several phonecalls to the courier, and given them a piece of my mind (politely, but I think I made my point!)

The package was supposed to be delivered on Monday. I had my neighbours on standby all day, but the courier didn't show up. Parcel tracking via the internet showed that it had arrived safely in Dartford at 7am on Monday morning, and I live only 20 minutes away... it was a case of the package ending up in the wrong bag, and nearly being sent back to O2, but disaster was averted, and the branch manager delivered it personally this evening.

The box was a bit of a shock: it was smaller than the one my camera had arrived in! And then there was an even smaller box inside the outer box... and then the iphone was just in the top of the box, with a plug, data cable and earphones... and a couple of bits of paper explaining how to use the phone, and warning me not to let it get wet.

It was just as well that I examine all packages carefully, as otherwise I might have missed the little paperclip thingy which is supposed to release the doobrey-whatsit for the SIM card. When I checked the online help, it said that the end of an ordinary paperclip could be used instead, which is just as well, as, in two years' time, I am not sure I'll still have the original clip. The charger is also a little weird: just a plug... into which you have to insert the data cable. This is a pain, because I will want the phone to re-charge near my bed (overnight) but I don't want to have to keep getting the data cable in order to sync with my PC in the sitting room. I might get myself an extra data cable.

I had to download iTunes onto my PC before I could activate my phone, and that took quite a bit of time because it was trying to organise the music I've copied from my CDs. I also backed up my calendar and tried to sync my old mobile with Outlook... I am very disappointed that Calendarscope doesn't sync with iPhone at all - I don't like Outlook, but it might be a case of making do: having the calendar on the phone is just too useful.

I did like the fact that the phone appeared to have been charged. That saved a fair amount of time. The camera is 3.0 MP, the same as my current Xda Orbit 2, but it doesn't appear, at first glance, to allow any settings to be changed on the phone itself... and it doesn't have a flash. That is better than having a flash I can't turn off, though, and, as I mentioned before, I have a dedicated digital camera now, so the phone camera isn't such an issue.

I was a little surprised by how big the iPhone appeared compared to my current phone - it's much slimmer, but is both longer and wider... and there's not much difference in weight. It feels much more "touchable" than my old phone, and I am impressed by the oil-resistant finish on the front of the phone (a shame it doesn't have it on the back as well!)

I'm not ready to download any apps just yet - I need to wait for payday - but I have already spotted that Apple have a set of apps categorised under "Catholic", including iPieta which comes highly recommended.

Overall, I'm not entirely sure if I've done the right thing in moving over to the iPhone: the Xda Orbit is more like a hand-held PC as it had a stylus for handwriting recognition and I could create Word documents, and read Excel and PowerPoint files... as well as it supporting my preferred calendar format. I have two weeks in which to decide...

Monday Madness...

A Sense Of Anticipation...

Those of you who have been following the blog for a while will realise that I'm a bit of a geek-wannabe. I like gadgets, especially my computer, my digital camera and my mobile phone.

Particularly the mobile phone.

Paradoxically, I don't actually make many phonecalls.

However, I have a reputation to maintain. My Year 11 students were flabbergasted to note that someone as middle-aged and un-hip as me could possibly be in possession of a snazzy mobile phone, even if it wasn't an iPhone... and I fully intend to keep them confused.

And it's time for my upgrade.

Some of my requirements have changed since my last foray into mobile technology: I now have a proper digital camera, so the camera function on the mobile is less important than before. However, I still believe in checking out how a phone feels, so, I popped into an O2 shop.

I was particularly interested in the Android operating system. Only one of the phones from O2 has this. I played around with it, but, compared to my Xda Orbit 2, it was clunky in the extreme, and, try as I might, I couldn't get the keyboard to respond correctly to my finger taps. Admittedly, my texting technique is rather rusty as I rely on my stylus at present, but I was really struggling. The loading speed was also rather disappointing.

The Xda seemed to have been discontinued, and I couldn't see any other stylus-operated phones. So, I settled down to explore the other phones on offer. Nothing really captured my imagination until I looked at the newest iPhone, the 3G(s).

My first experience of an iPhone had been when the incomparable Fr. Z let me have a look at his phone over lunch. I liked it a lot. However, when I came to actually considering an upgrade, I found that the camera was a lower spec than the one I had, there wasn't a stylus, and the cost of the phone was a little on the steep side.

The first two "issues" were no longer relevant, and the number of "Catholic" apps I'd seen advertised made the iPhone very attractive. The price, on the other hand, was still not to my liking. On my current tarrif, apparently, the phone would set me back £279 if I signed up for 18 months.

I looked. I definitely coveted... but not quite that much. I smiled, thanked the assistant, and left the shop...

...and promptly phoned customer services. There was a very nice chap on the end of the line, and I explained that I wanted a nice, new phone, but I wasn't willing to pay anything for the handset, not even if it had an app for making afternoon tea... and I was even less keen on paying anything extra on my current tarrif. He was a very, very nice man, and very helpful.

My nice, new, free, 32GB iPhone 3G(s) will be delivered on Monday...

"Stand Up" Update

First of all, there is a poll on the Stand Up for Vatican II website, asking whether the Church has abandoned Vatican II.

There isn't an option for "No, she merely supports what Vatican II really said, not what people wish it said" and so I had to opt for a simple "no."

Be careful - it's not the petition we want to sign. The poll is in the sidebar below the petition.

There's also a great "Testimonials" page, where people can say why they're standing up for Vatican II. Quite a few of the testimonies are rather different in character to that intended by Bernard Wynne and friends, I suspect...

Finally, it seems that the meeting is no longer to be held at the Convent, but has been transferred to the Combined Suite at the Westminister Thistle Hotel, 49 Buckingham Palace Road (corner of Bressenden Place and Buckingham Palace Road.)

UPDATE: Heheheheheh... it would seem that the authors didn't appreciate losing the poll - it's been removed, and no record of the results has been left (jolly lucky that Fr. Z had the foresight to get a few screenshots!) and the testimonials page also didn't appear to please them, as this has now been taken down... a little churlish of them, but only to be expected...

More Standing Up...

This week has been a little busy, so apologies for the lack of posts. I want to return to the Stand Up for Vatican II campaign, being coordinated by Catholics for a Changing Church.

Once again, I want to make it quite clear that I believe that Vatican II was one of the councils of the Church. I am not of the opinion that Vatican II should be "ditched." However, I do believe that there has been an orchestrated campaign to present the teachings of the Second Vatican Council in such a way as to indicate that there was a break from the "bad old days" prior to the Council.

I say orchestrated, because it cannot be accidental that the same themes are mentioned again and again as examples of the changes demanded by the Council (Mass in the vernacular, Mass "facing the people," the primacy of conscience, the need for the Pope to consult with his fellow Bishops and collaborative ministry are the most obvious examples which spring to mind) while examination of the actual documents reveals that, in reality, the Council had very different ideas.

I have already explained, at great length, (sorry!) about the Council's actual statements on the primacy of conscience and on papal infallibility. The inability of the self-professed "champions" of the Spirit of Vatican II to abide by the actual statements of Vatican II is quite striking.

Which brings me back to the Stand Up for Vatican II conference.

The groups which are supporting the campaign all object to some aspect of the teachings of the Magisterium. This puts them in the same camp as Martin Luther - only they are less honest than Luther, because they dress up their dissent as "what was really intended by the Spirit of Vatican II."

Reality check: what was really intended was what was promulgated... and we have it in black and white (or brown on yellow ochre if you're reading it off the Vatican archives!)

The three main speakers demonstrate how much dissent from Church teaching is involved here.

Sr. Myra Poole is a campaigner for women's ordination, and heads the Catholic Women's Ordination group. Her attitude to obedience is interesting (she's a Religious who has taken a vow of obedience.) On being instructed, by her Superior, not to attend the first meeting of Women's Ordination Worldwide in June 2000, she initially complied, staying nearby instead. The Tablet reported that:

"Sources close to Sr Myra say that this put an intolerable burden on her and that the struggle to choose between obedience to her superiors and her own deeply held convictions put her under enormous emotional strain. After much agonising, she withdrew. In the end, though, conscience did prevail, and she slipped quietly into the hall towards the end of Saturday afternoon's business..."

What??? Conscience? Her conscience told her she had to attend a meeting which defies the teaching of the Church?? And so she broke her solemn vow of obedience??

That doesn't sound much like the Holy Spirit at work. St. Joseph of Cupertino would go into ecstasies before the Blessed Sacrament, levitating... however, when given an instruction by his Superior, the levitation (and the ecstasy) ceased, simply because of the vow of obedience... make of that what you will.

Robert Nowell was a reporter at the time of the Second Vatican Council. He was a sub-editor at The Suppository, and translator of many of the works of leading dissident, Hans Kung, so it comes as no surprise to hear that he is highly critical of the Church.

Finally, Michael Winter is a former priest, who founded the Movement for Married Clergy. Putting aside any arguments that a married priesthood is more a matter of discipline than doctrine, not to mention red herrings about former Anglicans, we are again faced with someone who wants to change the Church because he hasn't found its teachings to his taste.

So far, I haven't heard any word of protest from our Bishops about this conference being held in a convent next to Westminster Cathedral...