Home > Tag Archives: Sodomy

Tag Archives: Sodomy

March 27th, 2017

Those Nasty Homophobic Russkis

Guess where this  piece of Political Correctness comes from.

 A troubling alliance of religion and nationalism is uncovered by Marcel Theroux in Russia, where state-sponsored TV and the Orthodox church promote an agenda of homophobia, anti-abortion and barely concealed misogyny in the guise of faith and ‘family values’.

My old alma mater The Guardian? The New Statesman? The RTÉ Guide, perhaps?  Or maybe our own lovely Irish Times, which we used to call the D’Olier Street Pravda (ironic, that, when you come to think of it).

None of the above. It’s from the television page of what used to be sneeringly called the “Torygraph” —the Daily Telegraph, which now allows its young officer class to defy what was, until recently that paper’s  policy of defending what remains of Christian civilisation in Britain. Week after week editor Charles Moore, a Catholic convert, still writes witty and very readable articles advancing the case for conservatism with a small c, but his features staff and some of his columnists are allowed a free hand in expressing their progressive prejudices.

Somewhat masochistically, I decided to watch the Theroux programme, and it was far more balanced than you would have expected from the above quotation.

It began with an Epiphany  ceremony on an ice-bound lake. A priest chanted prayers while men, women and children in swimming attire crossed themselves from right to left and then one by one jumped into a hole in the ice. This penance would probably have killed me, and it was impossible not to admire the penitential spirit of all concerned. Theroux interviewed one layman who recalled that as recently as the 1960s the Communist authorities would have banned such a display of faith. You don’t have to be a fan of Putin to think the Russians may be on to something these days.

Theroux gave the impression (possibly correct) that Orthodoxy has experienced an astonishing revival in recent years. It certainly  has no truck with the kind of modernism now undermining the Catholic Church throughout the western world.  One broadcaster was questioned about the Orthodox lack of tolerance for homosexuality which Theroux  regarded as reprehensible (the lack of tolerance, not homosexuality). Well,  replied the broadcaster, the Bible condemns sodomy, so we do too.

One inspiring sequence which clearly impressed Theroux concerned a middle-aged woman who had taken over the care of a few dozen children who’d been abandoned by their alcoholic mothers. She housed and fed them, and accompanied them to school. All this was done out of love, although she did receive a small state allowance for each child, some of whom had quite severe psychological problems.

What impressed me above all about the Orthodox, as portrayed here, is that they have no time at  all for aggiornamento. They see no reason at all to update their liturgy or to encourage any of the progressive prejudices acquired by so many Catholics in Ireland. At the present rate, Orthodox Christianity will be thriving in Russia when Catholicism is near to vanishing point with us.

March 20th, 2016

Abortion and Sodomy Solemnisation

Yesterday I received the following from Anthony Grealish of Glen o’ the Downs, whom I have known since the pro-life campaign of the 1980s. It was intended as a Comment, but as I lack the energy and initiative to transfer it to that category I’m making it into a blog post. Tony is right: today all right (left?) thinking people are both pro-abort and pro-sodomy.

Please forgive my  congratulations  on continuing to write your pieces after the passing of Joanna which must have been heartbreaking.

Thirty years ago Libel laws prevented my mentioning pro-aborts when I was on the radio with Loretto Browne of SPUC. The only one “out” was Dr Noel Browne, a rather embittered man. Now, to suggest someone was in favour of the 8th and opposed to Sodomy Solemnisation could be libellous. To suggest that someone in public life was posing as a sodomite rather than a posing sodomite (in the Oscar Wilde case)  could be libellous I suspect. “The only gay in the College” comes to mind.

I do hope it is not disrespectful to suggest that Pope Francis gives great glory to St. Ignatius of Loyola’s wisdom. Ignatius did not wish Jesuits  to have ecclesiastical preferment…..

June 3rd, 2015

Prepare for Persecution

In the fairly near future, it is  likely that Irish Catholics—I mean real ones, not those who voted Yes in the “marriage” referendum—will  face a degree of persecution amounting to “white” martyrdom.  Nurses and doctors who refuse to co-operate in abortions or euthanasia will lose their livelihoods; caterers and bed and breakfast  operators will be compelled to accommodate self-declared sodomites or face heavy fines;  anyone who publicly displays less than total approval  of  perversion will be fined and possibly imprisoned for “hate speech”.

If things develop at the present rate , it is more than possible that “red” martyrdom will follow in the next few decades.  Quite some time ago  Cardinal Francis George of Chicago said:

I expect to die in bed, my successor will die in prison and his successor will die a martyr in the public square. His successor will pick up the shards of a ruined society and slowly help rebuild civilization, as the church has done so often in human history.

Yes, the situation is hotting up so rapidly that Michael Voris of ChurchMilitant.TV  believes that  only heroic Catholics will survive:

In short, in the times that are just ahead for Catholics, only the truly dedicated will not become apostates and thereby lose Heaven. This was the opinion of Fr. John Hardon, a very holy priest who died 15 years ago in Detroit—a man who was remarkable owing to his holiness. What he said has come even sharper into focus in light of the wholesale rejection of the Faith by an overwhelming majority of the Irish last week.

If you are not preparing yourself now, and your family now, bracing yourselves spiritually for the darkness into which civilization is descending, you will not survive. You will inherit Satan for your father. People do not suddenly decide to suffer for the Faith. They prepare themselves to suffer great hardships for the Faith, by undergoing little hardships and sacrifices in advance. You could think of it as a kind of dress rehearsal…

…We sometimes have this too-nostalgic thought about the age of martyrs in the early centuries. We see the drawings of heroic Catholics standing straight moments before the lions pounced. What we do not see, what is not memorialized in art, is the vast numbers who committed apostasy before the jaws of those same lions, or those in whom the Faith had turned cold. They were more than content to offer incense to the Roman gods.

Fr Brendan Purcell also believes that persecution is coming, but he’s rather more optimistic than Mr Voris.  Personally,  I greatly  prefer Fr Brendan’s gentler analysis, though perhaps not his rather complicated syntax:

From the end of the 16th century— after a century of executions, last one being St Oliver Plunkett in 1681 in Ireland we had the Penal Laws, some dating from James 1st, others from later in that century—till Catholic Emancipation in 1829, Catholics had to sweat it out in Ireland, which seemed to toughen them up rather than the opposite.

So, while we can expect cases against school teachers who refuse to teach homosexuality as an acceptable alternative, closing down of Catholic adoption agencies (as has happened already in Scotland and England), already the defunding of the Catholic marriage preparation agency has been announced, well, having to pay a big price for being Catholic goes with the territory, and we’re not getting it remotely like Catholics in Nigeria, parts of Cameroon, lots of the Middle East, Pakistan and parts of India, so let’s hope we can measure up to the challenge of being, as St Paul said we should be, like stars shining in the sky!

May 27th, 2015

The Noble Act of B——y in the New Ireland

An anonymous reader sums it all up….

Well,  Stramentarius…..
It’s surely time for hi-fives and trebles all round ! The Irish people have had their say and lead the world, but, Stramentarius, there’s a big job left to do for the likes of you and me. We have to clear our language box so that the now ennobled activity which formerly was the butt of jokes is given the respect which the Irish people know it deserves.
So, Stramentarius, out with demeaning language like ‘b—–er off ’, ‘well I’ll be b—–ed’, ’it’s all gone to ‘b—–y’ and so on. And in particular, we must all press for recognition of ‘informed consent’. For example, if an onlooker in an open space hears another citizen saying ‘Well. b—-er me’ or some such words they should be entitled to believe that informed consent has been given and that the activity so cherished by the Irish people can take place without further discussion.
Well, I suppose that I should keep up new Irish customs by asking you to ‘b—-r’ off to your study and start on the job ahead of us.
What better way to begin, than without more ado to “take a reality check” and then  share the above inspiring message with you all?

May 26th, 2015

Our Dark Age of Unrepented Mortal Sin

The endorsement by the Irish people of sodomistic pseudogamy is part of a continuum that began with the wholesale rejection of  Humanae Vitae in 1968.  The rot might have been stopped, or at least mitigated, if priests and bishops had been brave enough, or convinced enough, to back up Pope Paul’s encyclical, vigorously,  in their preaching and in the confessional. Even if they had failed,  they would have done their duty to their flocks and to Almighty God. But the overwhelming majority of them kept silent, and our present predicament is the result.

Here’s Fr Hunwicke’s take on where the Church is now at:

Well, we all know what happened in the twentieth century. Divorce got its toe in the door … and within decades the door was wide open. Unnatural and disordered sexual practices corrupted Marriage. Fornication gradually ceased to be furtive and, after being ‘Free love’ in the 1930s, had by the end of the century become the natural assumption of Western societies. Homosexuals … no; some homosexuals … ceased to enjoy inhabiting an amusing subculture and became aggressive public ideologues. The mortal sin of missing Mass without good cause ceased to be a matter of guilt. You know all this, and much more.

My analysis, and suggestion, is this. Society has in effect regressed to the superficially christianised state it was in during the ‘Dark Ages’. We are, in other words, in a new Dark Age of widespread unrepented mortal sin. In fact, ours is an even darker age, because people do not even accept that they are in a state of sin, and do not repent, not even once a year. Nor, probably, even when they die.

Unhappily, however, we have inherited the ecclesial sacramental culture, to which the reforms of S Pius X have led, in which it appears that a General Communion is the normal custom at every Mass. It is not commonly preceded by Confession; that sacrament has become so uncommon that, at the beginning of the Year of Faith, I heard (yes, I heard this with my own ears) one priest in a mainstream church, say this to his congregation:I have decided to use the Year of Faith to revive confession. As you all know, in this church we have for long used the Confessional for storing what gets left unsold after a Parish bring and buy sale. It’s pretty full, and we need to get rid of all the stuff so as to use the Confessional for confessions again. There are a lot of books … I invite everyone to come and help themselves to any thing at all they can take away and use; and then we’ll have a Work Party to clean it out.’

So people who have not been to their duties for years receive Communion when, at family events, they have the rare experience of being at a celebration of Mass. People who have committed sexual sins for which they feel no repentance, which they have no intention to strive to avoid in future, naturally troop up to the Altar and receive Communion. As a product of Anglican culture, I am still horrified by the widespread Catholic custom of receiving communion into the hand and then walking nonchalantly away putting the Host into ones mouth as one walks.

March 3rd, 2015

Archbishop Takes on the Sodomites

Spare a thought and a prayer for the brave Archbishop of San Francisco, Salvatore Cordileone, who has defied the wealthy and powerful homosexual lobby in that latter-day city of Sodom.   His offence is to insist that teachers in Catholic schools should adhere to Catholic doctrine when teaching about matters concerned with sex.
The “gay” lobby and their allies, purporting to represent Catholic parents, have hired a dodgy but highly successful PR consultant named Sam Singer, who has launched a media blitz against the archbishop.
To give you just one example of Singer’s usual modus operandi: when a tiger killed a teenager and mauled several others in San Francisco zoo,  the PR wizard was hired by San Francisco Zoological Society to put the best possible spin on the incident. He planted stories that two of the injured had been drinking, smoking pot and behaving badly before the tiger attacked them.
He then encouraged the zoo to put up signs urging visitors not to tease the animals, although there was no evidence that the boys had ever teased the tiger.  Singer admitted: “We knew journalists would ask if they taunted the animals. And we’d say ‘We don’t know, but we have enough information that we believe it was a possibility.’”
 Now he is using the media in just the same way to denigrate the Church, feeding them stories of “concerned Catholic parents” and oppressive clergy. One of the falsehoods he is peddling is that Archbishop Cordileone is going to purge Catholic schools of  “gay, lesbian and  ‘pro-choice’ teachers”. The Archbishop has insisted several times that he has no intention of firing teachers simply because of their sexual orientation or beliefs. He is merely insisting that they teach Catholic truth—through their actions and words.
Predicting the outcome of Singer’s campaign, the San Francisco Weekly says Archbishop Cordileone probably doesn’t have a prayer.
“That’s false,” retorts Anne Hendershott of the Veritas Centre for Ethics in Public Life at the Franciscan University of Steubenville, Ohio.  “Archbishop Cordileone has an abundance of prayers—of countless Catholics across the country who are increasingly alarmed by the attacks on their Church. Faithful Catholics are beginning to mobilize under the leadership of their own courageous bishops and priests. Prayer is powerful. When combined with a willingness to fight back, it can be unstoppable. This war is not over. The fight has just begun.”

November 11, 2014

When Is a Sin Not a Sin?

There’s been a lot of good stuff on the blogosphere about the casuistical  manoeuvrings of the modernist cardinals at the synod on the family. The best debunking job I have seen–you will not be surprised to learn–comes from Fr John Hunwicke  of the Anglican Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham.  Here it is, in full:

In Mgr Ronald Knox’s brilliant collection of Essays in Satire, there is a piece about a ‘Professor’ who invents a new sin. Now, even Knox’s brilliance has been quite superseded. Now, you see, we have completely new types, genres, of Sin. The Third Millennium has branched out into a whole novel taxonomy of Sin. Earlier this month I approached this subject and asked three simple questions, as tests to apply to any newly fashionable theory about Sin. Here they are again:
(1) Can you square it with the Sermon on the Mount and the ethical teaching of S Paul?
(2) Can you square it with the Lord’s parables about not knowing ‘the Day or the Hour’?
(3) Does it apply to murderers and paedophiles?
Let me remind you what the New Casuistries teach about Sin.
(a) Graduality. “People cannot give up their Sin instantaneously. They should be given the time, and the grace of the sacraments, to wean themselves off it gradually.”
(b) Acceptance without Approval. “Remarried divorcees may be in a position to which the Church cannot give formal approval; but she may welcome them as they are into her Sacramental life.”
(c) Elements of truth. “Outside the relationship of heterosexual monogamy, other models of relationship exist in which important elements exist of the values proper to Marriage itself: and it is these elements which we should emphasise (permanence; self-sacrificing love …).”
Now apply Fr Hunwicke’s Question (3).  Would you accept that, since a paedophile has very strong inclinations, his aim should be to work hard to abuse children less and less frequently? How do you feel about the Church accepting that some paedophiles are gentle and affectionate to the children they abuse, and that we should concentrate our attention on those good elements of gentleness and affection? Take someone with a pathological impulse to murder: would you want the Church to continue to maintain the teaching of the Ten Commandments about Murder, but, without approving of the murders, to accept the unrepentant murderer as he is?Probably you wouldn’t. Probably most people, even very liberal Catholics wouldn’t, unless they are themselves paedophiles or murderers or both. Why not?

What we have is, in fact, the adoption by liberals of two quite distinct categories of Sin. There are sins which (most people would agree) are really sinful. Such as abusing and/or killing children. The clever little games (a), (b), (c), would never be acceptable here. If somebody suggested that it really is in accordance with a nuanced Christian morality for a paedophile to abuse children as long as he does it gradually less frequently, most of us would probably kick him. However they contrive to control their behaviour, paedophiles should just give up, or genuinely try to give up, their vice. They should receive Absolution and then ‘Go and Sin No More’.But there is now, for the Liberals, an additional, quite different category of Sin.It consists of things which, because they are condemned by Christ or by long centuries of Christian Tradition, liberals might agree are in some sense technically sinful. But liberals do not feel that they are really wrong. So they devise sophisticated ways of avoiding the requirement of the Gospel: repentance and a firm purpose never to offend again and to avoid the occasions of Sin. Like children who have cheated and found out the answer to a sum, they start with the conclusion and then try to find the right ‘workings’ to get to the answer. ‘I want to argue that a homosexual couple may continue to live in a genitally sexual relationship: where can I find clever arguments to support that conclusion?’SO WE NOW HAVE

(I) REALLY WRONG SINS; they really turn me upside down in my tummy.

(II) SINS WHICH ARE ONLY TECHNICALLY WRONG; my tummy feels completely OK about them. We’ve just got to find a way for the Church to shift her line without completely losing face.

Those are the two radically distinct categories of Sin in which Liberals now believe.

Neither in the Bible nor in two Christian millennia is there evidence for (II).


Bibliography: the important discussion here in the Church’s Magisterium is paragraphs 79-83 of the Encyclical of S John Paul II Veritatis splendor, together with its footnoted sources. The Holy Pontiff quotes (para 81) a passage of S Augustine in which that Doctor discusses the ‘absurdity’ of any notion that sins done for good motives (causis bonis) might be thought of as ‘sins that are justified’ (iusta peccata: I think this would have to be S Augustine’s Latin term for what my account above calls (II) SINS WHICH ARE (in the view of Liberals) ONLY TECHNICALLY WRONG).

The Holy Pontiff cleverly takes (para 80) the list of sins in para 27 of Gaudium et Spes and says that they are good examples of acts intrinsice mala, that is, always wrong, independent of circumstances. What is neat about this is that it includes sins which Liberals would consider (I) REALLY WRONG SINS (such as genocide, trafficking in women, slavery) and mixes them up with (II) SINS WHICH ARE (in the view of Liberals) ONLY TECHNICALLY WRONG (such as abortion). He then goes on to the intrinsically evil contraceptive acts and, in para 81, includes S Paul’s condemnation (I Cor 6:9-10) of categories including the sodomised and the sodomites (malakoi, arsenokoitai; molles, masculorum concubitores).

I’d like to see what answer Cardinal Kasper and his co-conspirators would make to the above.

October 4, 2014

Sodomy More Risky Than Smoking

One of the mysteries in today’s Church is why the appalling Fr Timothy Radcliffe OP is able, with impunity,  to travel from diocese to diocese around the world, openly defending and extolling homosexual activity. Can’t his fellow Dominicans put a stop to these peregrinations? Why don’t the bishops, in every diocese where Fr Radcliffe is due to visit, just bar him from speaking on Catholic Church premises?

Could it be that Fr  Radcliffe knows rather too much about the Lavender Mafia  at the highest level in the Church, and they fear what dirty secrets he  might reveal?

Anyway,  it is fortuitous that Ignatius Press  has recently published  Making Gay Okay: How Rationalizing Homosexual Behavior Is Changing Everything, by Robert Reilly. This book illustrates  over and over again that homosexual activity, far from being “loving” as Fr Radcliffe would have us believe, is not merely insanitary but desperately dangerous not just to the soul (which should go without saying) but to physical health as well. In a devastating chapter “The lessons from biology” , Reilly writes:

Today we seem to know the purpose of every part of our bodies except our genitals. As unpleasant as the subject matter may be, it is necessary to report on the physical effects of sodomitical behavior and of other homosexual acts. Their consequences are significantly more injurious to health than smoking, so much so that ignorance or denial of these effects is one of the most remarkable barometers of the strength of the rationalisation that insists this behavior is normal and normative. During homosexual intercourse the human body is subjected to an activity for which it is not designed.  If one insisted on using a highway exit as an entrance, one would be told that this is extremely hazardous to one’s health and safety and to that of others. Why is this so difficult to state when it comes to human anatomy?”

Ah yes, as Shakespeare noted in As You Like It , we have our exits and our entrances. Or, as the late great Fr George Duggan of New Zealand once put it ( I paraphrase), sodomy is like putting petrol in the exhaust pipe.

Here are some of the facts Reilly cites:

* A study in Vancouver showed that “life expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is eight to 21 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality continued, we would estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 years would not reach their sixty-fifth birthday.”
* Dr. Jeffrey Satinover, a psychiatrist and the author of Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth, said in 1996 that “the incidence of AIDS among 20 to 30-year-old homosexual men is roughly 430 times greater than among the heterosexual population at large.”
* According to Dale O’Leary, author of The Gender Agenda, while men who have sex with men make up for only a tiny percentage of the population, they account for 72 percent of primary and secondary syphilis cases plus 79 percent of HIV diagnosis among men and the significant percentage of other STDs.

Imagine trying to get facts like these into the mainstream Irish media!   Reilly  asks:

How is it that there can be warning labels on cigarettes and alcohol and on almost every package of food; health alerts for the level of air pollution, mandatory use of seat belts in cars, and yet no cautionary admonitions regarding homosexual practices?…Why are we counselled to change our dietary habits if we tend toward obesity because of the health hazards it presents, but not asked to modify our behaviour if we engage in sodomy which can be far more lethal? There are no warning labels because they would disturb the rationalisation for homosexual behavior by inviting the observation that there is something in Nature itself that rebels against it. Rather than face the clear implication that what they are doing is unnatural to their own bodies, active homosexuals evade or even deny the overwhelming evidence of the health dangers to which they subject themselves…. This is like fighting lung cancer while remaining silent about the dangers of smoking.

Reilly cites studies showing that some homosexuals have as many as a thousand sex partners, and says it’s as though they keep on searching for satisfaction that they cannot find. I well remember Professor Charles Rice, on a visit to Dublin, pointing out that if one even shook hands with several hundred people, the chances are one would pick up a disease of some sort. “And when you think what these fellows get up to…”

Reilly insists that there is no “gay gene”. But even if homosexuals were born with a predisposition to such destructive behaviour, that would not excuse it.   Alcoholics may well have a genetic predisposition, but that doesn’t excuse their getting drunk. They still choose to do so.

In a recent interview he has also tackled the question of whether homosexuality can be cured:

Homosexuals who do want to change have a significant rate of success in changing with the right therapies. It is a sign of how far the rationalisation for homosexual misbehavior has gone that two [American] states now forbid therapists from treating teenage homosexuals who want to change their orientation. That’s like telling a teenager that if they injured their eye, they can’t go to an ophthalmologist! The denial of reality has gone that far.

However, Reilly doesn’t see homosexual activists as entirely at fault. Often they are themselves the victims of sexual abuse, or they suffer from an absence of love from their fathers. They have also built on earlier social decisions, such as the approval of contraception and no-fault divorce. They take those precedents to their logical conclusion.

When sex was detached from diapers, the rest became more or less inevitable. If serial polygamy is okay, and contraceptive sex is okay, and abortion is okay, what could be wrong with a little sodomy? First, short-circuit the generative power of sex through contraception, then kill its accidental offspring; and finally celebrate its use in ways unfit for generation. Contraception used to be proscribed, then it was prescribed, and now has become almost obligatory…

September 15, 2014

Let’s Queer SVP’s Pitch

More about that €45,000 which the Society of St Vincent de Paul is giving to help set up a homosexual “resource centre” in Galway City about which I expressed great indignation more than  a week ago….

When it was announced at the Mass I attended last Sunday that the money was in fact coming from a particular bequest–and not from public donations or church-gate collections–I was greatly relieved and gave a modest sum to one of the dedicated SVP collectors outside the church.  After all, I thought, the local SVP have had nothing to do with this appalling decision, and the poor of the parish still need help.

But I wish now that I had given the money to Simon, or Aid to the Church in Need, or some other charity. Anything but the SVP.

Why the sudden change of mind?

Well,  when I returned to the car park  after Mass I got chatting to a friend who argued most cogently that it is precisely because the SVP is known to be  a Catholic organisation that people support it week by week and leave money to it in their wills. This sum now earmarked for the “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender” group called Amach! (which I think means “Out” –correct me if I’m wrong) was left to them by a lady publican in Galway. It is a safe bet that this good soul believed her bequest  would be used to relieve poverty, and that she would have been disgusted at the very thought of its  being  handed over to provide a social club for  sodomites. The SVP, whose higher echelons seem to have been taken over by  people with no respect  for the church’s perennial teaching on sexual morality, has presented the militant homosexuals not just with money, but with a propaganda coup which can only provide them with yet more undeserved respectability.

And the SVP can spare us  the bit about being “non-judgemental” as a part of their “Christian ethos”.  They know very well what Blessed Frederic Ozanam would have thought of  this pathetic expedient.

We are told the centre   is intended to be a “safe space” where “LGBT people” can “address issues and concerns such as prejudice, isolation, loneliness, depression and the lack of opportunities to network with peers”.  The “gay Masses” in London were intended to achieve the same purpose, and the kind of  “networking” that went on there was nothing short of scandalous.

I too belong to a group which frequently experiences prejudice, isolation and a lack of opportunity for networking with peers–those who prefer the Church’s traditional rite of Mass . Sometimes it seems to me that many bishops have more time for homosexuals than they have for Traddies.  Do you think it would benefit  the Latin Mass Society of Ireland  to ask the SVP for a few thousand Euros to combat  the lack of opportunities to network with our peers? We can get quite depressed too.

Anyway, if we want to prevent  similar outrages, we must refrain from  contributing to the SVP until they listen to their grass roots and come to their senses. As the Holy Father says, hagan lio! (make a fuss.)


September 8, 2014

Atheists Have the Whip Hand

Militant atheists in Ireland are flexing their muscles–to considerable effect.

Although  still a tiny minority, they are working hard to ensure that their own point of view comes to dominate the public discourse, that theirs is the “default position” which should always prevail in controverted issues. And they are making good progress  in achieving just that..

Their latest triumph concerns people who donate their bodies for medical research. There is a plot in Glasnevin  cemetery, administered by the three Dublin medical schools, with the following inscription: “Here lie those who have assisted us in the study of man. Pray O traveller for their souls that they rest in the peace of God.” Nothing offensive in that, I should have thought. It is be perfectly acceptable to both Catholics and Protestants–and why should atheists make a fuss about it?

Anne Holliday, wife of Michael  Nugent of Atheist Ireland, who died in  2011, left her body to Trinity medical school for research–a very laudable stipulation.  A few months ago the school contacted Mr Nugent to say his wife’s body was ready for burial. He then discovered the plot had a memorial stone with the above inscription, and asked them to change it, to remove the religious reference.    Officials  of the three Dublin medical schools met twice, in June and July, and discussed the matter. They decided on a “secular approach” so that the inscription will now read: “This ground is dedicated to the memory of all those who have contributed their bodies to medical education and research.”

So  now the “inclusive” attitude is that religion should not be mentioned at all.  The  beliefs of those who, over the years, from religious  motives, have left their bodies for research are not to be respected.  Prayers which might have been offered for the repose of their souls may now not be offered at all, just in case a small minority of atheists, for some inexplicable reason,  might be offended. This is an injustice.


A Farcical, Hateful Parade

More on that appalling decision by Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York to head up  next year’s  St  Patrick’s Day parade,  which is to include a group of militant homosexuals. Shortly after the news was announced, a Mgr  Charles Pope posted the  following blog post (which we have edited slightly) on the Archdiocese of Washington’s website.

The time for happy-clappy, lighthearted engagement of our culture may be nearing an end. Sometimes it takes a while to understand that what used to work no longer works. Let me get more specific. Now the St. Patrick’s Parade is becoming of parade of disorder, chaos, and fake unity. Let’s be honest: St. Patrick’s Day nationally has become a disgraceful display of drunkenness and foolishness in the middle of Lent that more often embarrasses the memory of Patrick than honors it. In New York City in particular, the “parade” is devolving into a farcical and hateful ridicule of the faith that St. Patrick preached. It’s time to cancel the St. Patrick’s Day Parade and… all the other “Catholic” traditions that have been hijacked by the world. Better for Catholics to enter their churches and get down on their knees on St. Patrick’s Day to pray in reparation for the foolishness, and to pray for this confused world to return to its senses. Let’s do adoration and pray the rosary and the  Divine Mercy Chaplet unceasingly for this poor old world… [I]t’s time to stop wearin’ the green and instead take up the purple of Lent and mean it. Enough of the celebration of stupidity, frivolity, and drunkenness that St Paddy’s day has become. We need penance now, not foolishness. We don’t need parades…with people who scoff at our teachings, insist we compromise, use us for publicity, and make money off of us. We’re being played for (and are?) fools. End the St Patrick’s parade. Enough now, back to Church! Wear the purple of Lent and if there is going to be a procession, let it be Eucharistic and penitential for the sins of this age. For the sake of His sorrowful passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world!

Later that day, the archdiocese removed the post.