PREAMBLE
A lengthy scrutiny, which we'd like to have written in just 15 words:
Fr Timothy Radcliffe OP should not have been
invited to speak in this archdiocese last week.
Sadly, we have to go to the lengths and methods below to demonstrate why.
Because, for whatever reason, it seems so patently beyond the grasp of so many.
Much further down in this post, we're going to include a deliberately de-activated web-link to an online source which provides information of the gravest, most shocking and most eye-opening kind imaginable. We cannot overstate that enough.
The facts conveyed by this respected (by British society at large, not us) web-source – which also enjoys the backing of the UK Government and the considerable largesse of both the British public and some of its most renowned charities, and probably the sympathy and support of many, apparently practising, Catholics in this land – are so telling and revealing that we'd rather you didn't avail yourselves of the detail therein. We'll let you know when we post it; so that you can bypass it.
Eh?
Forgive us that apparent contradiction. You'll eventually understand the reason for our careful phraseology. It's for the good of your soul. Trust us on that one.
Forgive us, also, for any levity in the first-post of this two-part mini-series. Admittedly, our first examination of the matter concerning the key speakers invited by His Grace to the – eventually cancelled (due to lack of interest) – conference due to be held in the archdiocese 10 days ago did include a touch of dark humour amid the disturbing subject matter (file under: ongoing coping mechanism). However, any such sportiveness ceases in this second instalment, which deals with an issue that is beyond-the-pale and off-the-scale in terms of comparative seriousness.
Quite literally it is: beyond a joke.
SECTION ONE
For those without background knowledge of the highly progressive English Dominican, Fr Timothy Radcliffe OP, or those who may need a refresher, we immediately offer four links which sufficiently provide: i) detail of the fall and rise of his star under the last two papacies; and ii) by means of a compendium of controversies, compiled by two of the most trusted online sources that any Traditional Catholic could ever wish to click into, an overview guide to the key dissent peddled by this turbulent priest.
• Under Pope Benedict: Vatican cancels Fr Timothy Radcliffe's speaking engagement at Caritas conference
• Under Pope Francis: Vatican appoints Fr Timothy Radcliffe as consultor to the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace
• John Smeaton: the Timothy Radcliffe Files (follow all the links if you need to - especially that to a video recording of a talk given by Fr Radcliffe in 2009 in Massachusetts)
• Rorate Caeli: the Timothy Radcliffe Files (follow all the links if you need to - especially that to a report in The Wanderer newspaper)
SECTION TWO
Here are some selections of our own which we wish to highlight directly. We note how Fr Radlicffe uses the phrase "we must..." to start his most dissenting noises.
Fr Timothy Radcliffe - Exhibit A (our bold emphases)
"We must avoid having a mechanistic or simplistic understanding of fertility. Jesus speaks a fertile word: This is my body, given for you. He is God’s fertile word. And surely it is in the kind and healing words that we offer each other that we all share in fertility of that most intimate moment.
"When Jesus met Peter on the shore after Easter, he offers him a word that renews their relationship. Three times he asks him; ‘Do you love me more than these others?’ He allows him to undo his threefold denial. Sexual fertility cannot be separated from the exchange of words that heal, that recreate and set free.
"How does all of this bear on the question of gay sexuality? We cannot begin with the question of whether it is permitted or forbidden! We must ask what it means, and how far it is Eucharistic?
Certainly it can be generous, vulnerable, tender, mutual and non-violent. So in many ways, I would think that it can be expressive of Christ’s self-gift.
"We can also see how it can be expressive of mutual fidelity, a covenantal relationship in which two people bind themselves to each other for ever. But the proposed legislation for ‘gay marriage’ imply that it is not understood to be inherently unitive, a becoming one flesh. [...]"
"We can also see how it can be expressive of mutual fidelity, a covenantal relationship in which two people bind themselves to each other for ever. But the proposed legislation for ‘gay marriage’ imply that it is not understood to be inherently unitive, a becoming one flesh. [...]"
(Submission to the Church of England Inquiry Into Human Sexuality [The Pilling Report], 2013: Link to quote in full context )
Fr Timothy Radcliffe - Exhibit B (our bold emphases)
"I would conclude with two profound hopes. That a way will be found to welcome divorced and remarried people back to communion. And, most important, that women will be given real authority and voice in the church.
"The Pope believes that the ordination of women to the ministerial priesthood is not possible, but decision-making in the Church has become ever more closely linked to ordination in recent years. Can that bond be loosened? Let us hope that women may be ordained to the diaconate and so have a place in preaching at the Eucharist."
("A New Way of Being Church", America magazine (2013): Link to quote in full context )
"I would conclude with two profound hopes. That a way will be found to welcome divorced and remarried people back to communion. And, most important, that women will be given real authority and voice in the church.
"The Pope believes that the ordination of women to the ministerial priesthood is not possible, but decision-making in the Church has become ever more closely linked to ordination in recent years. Can that bond be loosened? Let us hope that women may be ordained to the diaconate and so have a place in preaching at the Eucharist."
("A New Way of Being Church", America magazine (2013): Link to quote in full context )
Fr Timothy Radcliffe - Exhibit C
"We must accompany them [those with same sex attraction] as they discern what this means, letting our images be stretched open...this means watching 'Brokeback Mountain,' reading gay novels, living with our gay friends and listening with them as they listen to the Lord."
("Come Out, Lazarus! The Church as a Sign of Hope and Freedom"; Los Angeles Religious Education Conference [LAREC], 2006 – the same conference was attended by Fr Radcliffe's fellow Dominican, the then Bishop of Nottingham, but now His Grace The Most Rev. Archbishop Malcolm McMahon of Liverpool, who has been a regular attender at LAREC, including as recently as February 2015, for many years, as chronicled here and here).
("Come Out, Lazarus! The Church as a Sign of Hope and Freedom"; Los Angeles Religious Education Conference [LAREC], 2006 – the same conference was attended by Fr Radcliffe's fellow Dominican, the then Bishop of Nottingham, but now His Grace The Most Rev. Archbishop Malcolm McMahon of Liverpool, who has been a regular attender at LAREC, including as recently as February 2015, for many years, as chronicled here and here).
SECTION THREE
Right, that's enough from Fr Radcliffe. If you must read further about his views, just simply tap his name into any search engine to find his stagnant dissent all over the Internet. Whilst we don't wish to hear any more from him, "we must..." (to use his phrase) accept his invitation, as given in the repugnant Exhibit A above, in order to expose his barely concealed filth. For it's time to call his bluff and to see "how far it" (i.e. "gay sexuality", his generic, catch-all phrase) can be "Eucharistic".
Again: how...far...can..."gay sexuality"...be..."Eucharistic"?
Just simply staggering that any Catholic, never mind a religious priest, could say those words and issue that query and challenge.
You know when blasphemy, as a word and concept, doesn't quite cover it? No, nor did we until we first read Fr Radcliffe's words in 2013.
That's the point, though. We read those words over two years ago, like many across the Catholic world did. That should have been the point-of-no-return for Fr Radcliffe. See how he pushed the boundaries with his utterances in 2013 compared to his assertions of 2006? His dissent in 2006 – let's all watch Brokeback Mountain – seems almost quaint in contrast to his outright corruption of seven years later.
Yet, for all that, they are the un-retracted words of a man whom His Grace believed was still a fitting key-note speaker for a major archdiocesan conference. A priest who clearly suggests that it is possible for "gay sexuality" to indeed be "Eucharistic". It's just that he doesn't really know, yet, to what degree. Presumably, then, nor does His Grace.
So given the ratcheting-up of his vile rhetoric between 2006 and 2013, who knows what the next stage in his deviance is and where it will reveal itself? Who's to say that it wouldn't have been in Liverpool? The time would have been prime for him, in the immediate wake of the Synod of Stealth that we all witnessed last month. The liberal setting of Liverpool would have been ideal for him, also, as we'll demonstrate later.
Loath though we are to do so, let's take Fr Radcliffe at his fetid word and explore the nauseating challenge he has set us all since 2013. In doing so, we must here repeat the warning we gave at the top of this post: something very unpalatable – but we believe very necessary, to finally hammer some truth and the Truth into perennially dissenting heads like Fr Radcliffe's and those who applaud him – will be referenced to below. But we'll tell you when we do so.
Again, so that you can skip right past it.
Because it is our hope that you will have no need of any such information.
SECTION FOUR
We believe that we must take this course of action which we also believe is in keeping with the clarion across the Traditional Catholic world in the wake of last month's appalling Synod on the Family in Rome (following the diabolically disoriented preliminary Synod in autumn 2014): it is time to start speaking clearly and unequivocally. For we have reached a point where the eggshell-treading, pussy-footing and sugar-coating must stop. The Church is beyond crisis. It's time to start calling evil for evil. Heresy for heresy. Blasphemy for blasphemy. Sacrilege for sacrilege. Scandal for scandal. Time for straight talk being just that. No pun.
We'll link here to Michael Voris speaking one month ago.
Moreover, it's in keeping with the Vatican II ideal for the laity to have an increased voice (remember that?), and surely in keeping with His Holiness Pope Francis' now (in)famous "Hagan lio" call. Therefore, this blog will do so whenever necessary. Like now.
Now, of course, we can't know for certain what Fr Radcliffe might have said in this archdiocese last weekend. It's a fair bet, though, given his previous form, that he would have, at some stage, either coyly or not so coyly (for we know all his little codes: "Come Out, Lazarus!" indeed!...he must think we're all thick!), folded the subject of, in his words, "gay sexuality" or some form of LGBT agenda activity into his open programme of dissent (oh and women priests probably, and the question of Holy Communion for those who are divorced and remarried without annulment – and possibly all of the other items on the standard liberal Catholic bingo card).
His views are toxic. A danger to souls. Accordingly, orthodox Catholics should know to have the good sense to swerve him like the plague – especially if, for instance, one is arranging a programme of conference speakers.
To invite Fr Radcliffe to speak at a conference indicates, beyond-a-shadow-of-doubt, that his views are judged to be acceptable.
SECTION FIVE
We again issue a reminder that we will flag-up an information source that you may not have the stomach for. We trust, though, that your intelligence, your basic sensus Catholicus is such that you'll have absolutely no need to be appraised of certain realities. For others, though, that might not be so.
To our mind, it is beyond reasonable dispute that Fr Radcliffe sees no problem with same-sex-activity. However, just for the purposes of this exercise, we'll issue a (probably entirely unnecessary) benefit-of-the-doubt, on the basis that Fr Radcliffe only refers to "gay sexuality". What does he mean and not mean by that? Leaving aside his use of the term "gay" (and we refer you again to an article "Sustainable Sexuality" by Fr Armand de Malleray, of the Priestly Fraternity of St Peter, as linked to in our previous post, which properly examines the use of correct terms when it comes to this deeply vexing subject), is he simply referring to those souls who experience same-sex attraction but do not act on this with disordered desire? If so, he should say so. Whilst he's at it, he could also issue some essential catechesis about why it would be gravely sinful for those who are tempted in that manner to indulge such base passions, and furthermore why those brothers and sisters of ours who do courageously and chastely stay true to Church teaching in this regard deserve the pastoral support of us all in the Church in their lifelong struggle.
For some reason, though (like we don't know!), Fr Radcliffe chooses to leave the precise meaning of his term "gay sexuality" wide open; it is ambiguous enough, therefore, to mean whatever his listeners assume it may mean. It would seem clear that this is not an oversight of his; a simple, albeit highly dangerous, omission. For Fr Radcliffe may be incendiary but he's no fool. In fact he is a master of guile. Therefore, his generalised phrase may indeed cover those who stay chastely close to Christ's Cross through the so-called "Third Way" (we link you to a truly humbling and very instructive video offering there - it's well worth watching; and here's what Life Site News had to say about it). But "we must..." also assume (in the absence of any clarification from Fr Radcliffe) that it equally covers those who are involved in same-sex activity, including genital relations. We don't see any other way around that conclusion.
We said it was time for plain talk. So by now you may be sensing a clear direction that this carefully structured and phased post is heading towards.
It is also beyond dispute that a significant number of Mass-attending Catholics in this archdiocese also see no contradiction between the Faith and their support (whether overtly or not) for same-sex activity and, yes, genital relations. We couldn't really say whether they are a majority; we wouldn't be surprised, though. We're realists here, and it's pointless trying to pretend that it's only a few Mass-attenders from this territory who are liberal in their attitudes towards the whole same-sex agenda and how it can be somehow, via some truly tortured mental gymnastics, be reconciled with orthodox Catholicism.
Yet, despite that simple impossibility, there are a great number locally who subscribe to this contradictory view. For this is a rampantly liberal archdiocese which has been strangled by "The Easter People" progressive elite at least since 1980 – but more truthfully since four years prior to that.
And some of us have had enough of it.
Here's an example text (awkwardly it's a .doc download, via the media feed of the liberals at Liverpool Hope University – who incidentally, though not surprisingly, co-organised the cancelled Vatican II conference in conjunction with the Archdiocese of Liverpool – but it's quite safe for your computer). It gives an insight into how long ago "the agenda" was was formed and framed in the Archdiocese of Liverpool. The article appeared in The Month, in April 1996, six weeks after the death of His Grace the Most Rev. Derek Worlock, seventh Archbishop of Liverpool (requiescat in pace):
"From Vatican II to the Millennium: Blueprint for a Contemporary Parish"; 1996
If you have read the above linked article, then you will have noted the clearly stated decades-old ambition for the Archdiocese of Liverpool to foster "an Inclusive Church". Whenever they considered (we use the word loosely) the Church's response to the issue of those who experience same-sex attraction, the "Easter People" liberals always managed to reach their illogical and sentimentally-charged conclusions, dripping with notions of false mercy, via the convenient omission of two key aspects: the Natural Law and all that it demands; and the very stomach-churning reality of same-sex activity and genital relations. Most people do. It's understandable as to why many people seek to gloss over that reality; but it's actually a mental act of evasion which of course directly proves the reality of the disorder. Try raising the subject whenever you encounter the proud Church-lib who openly proclaims support for the Catholic rainbow-culture (which screams its Kasperite-sponsored theme right across our archdiocese if you've eyes open wide enough) and see how far you get. Not very.
To avoid this, like a child sticking fingers in its ears and humming la-la, they have a tiresome code-phrase blocker, which they passively-aggressively proclaim, with brick wall repetition, through their faux-calm, Cherie Blair fixed-smiles, which belie the true indignation they feel deep down towards you. It's a verbal tic. A deliberate tactic. Those with sharp ears often cotton-on to the same phrase doing-the-repetitive rounds in Church circles and you always know it can't be coincidence. For example, just to digress for a moment, there's a glib one currently looping around the episcopal circuit regarding the locations of Extraordinary Form Mass provision in England and Wales: "Everyone travels anyway" (yeah, you've noted that one, too! so much for the environment and Laudato si'). Anyway, we started to note, just far too many times for it to be coincidental, the same phrase being repeated in certain circles whenever the subject of Catholicism and the LGBT agenda cropped-up. It's an illogically formed and theologically redundant patter designed not only to shut you up but also expose your mean-spiritedness and distinct lack of charity (tick √) whenever you raise orthodox Church teaching:
"I/We believe in a merciful God...(repeat)...I/We believe in a merciful God...(repeat) I/We believe in a merciful God..."
And on and on it goes. It's straight out of the Kasperite bottom drawer.
It's impossible to engage them. Ever. For they are utterly entrenched in "the agenda". Still searching for, drumroll, "the fruits of Vatican II".
Hence we reached 2015 and this all-encompassing denial led to the arrangement of a vibrant NuChurch conference (as advertised liberally throughout the archdiocese on parish bulletins and notice-boards aplenty, which was designed to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the very event which apparently gave us the vibrant NuChurch) finally having to be cancelled just four days beforehand ... because the NuChurch really isn't vibrant at all. Everyone left. Except die-hard dissenters like Fr Radcliffe and his ever-dwindling band of "Easter People" groupies, who still lap-up every sickly word that he and his ilk spew.
It's the perfect collusion. Radcliffe uses sugary code words to hide his sinister agenda, and his hearers are the useful idiots who never wish to drill down anyway beneath the syrupy crust in order to explain the realities of what they really might mean...you know when it really comes down to it.
Thus the liberal elite in this archdiocese has gone round-and-round in wooly and ambiguous word circles for decades, like NuCatholic Daleks, generating nonsense barrier talk from their constantly turning tombola of specially vacuous post-conciliar phrases: "pathways", "merciful God", "Easter People", "the Kingdom", "empowerment", "inclusion", "the Sign We Give", "The Sign We Receive"... and on and on it painfully goes and has done since the mid-1970s.
So let's drill down into what Fr Radcliffe really means (because, let's be honest, that benefit-of-the-doubt exercise further up was unnecessary really).
Before we do so, you should be able to sense even moreso by now that our words have started to become gradually more physiologically graphic. They must be if we're to slice through the viscid veneer that has protected and prevented the real issue being discussed openly for decades now. Because, well, there's polite society to think of. This is England and it's not quite cricket.
However, we surely do have to address this issue head-on; in order to expose the vile reality of Fr Radcliffe's words: which are, again, about how far "gay sexuality" can be considered "Eucharistic" (it's utterly abhorrent to even have to type that ... really, just think for a second about what he's trying to say there! Disgusting!).
So, if you're one of those mental contortionists, or one of the "Easter People", or one of those who still thinks that Fr Radcliffe is a suitable speaker to invite to a Catholic conference presumably because, based on his track record, you believe he has something challenging to say, then we say that the information source that we will include further on in this piece is precisely for you. Many others will be sensible enough to swerve it.
If you're a proud Catholic-libber, then why not accept Fr Radcliffe's challenge with us? Let's see, together, shall we, how far "gay sexuality" can be "Eucharistic"?
We have reservations about what we intend to do further into this post. Of course we do. But we stop short of apologising, for we believe, to the very best of our discernment, that we are going to follow the most prudent method of exposing something quite serious that, sadly, needs to be laid bare in order to finally jolt certain people, especially liberal and rainbow-casual Catholics, from either their slumber or their denial. As already stated, we are going to post a deliberately de-activated link (which means that you'll have to do the technical work to activate it – that's if you will feel you need to). It links to a bluntly-written publication, freely available on the web, produced by the Terence Higgins Trust (THT) and it's one which completely unmasks the real, sinister, hypocritical and publicly dangerous agenda that menacingly lies beneath the outward facing flamboyancy of the whole LGBT culture that is deliberately pitched as benignly as possible to the gullible masses.
So, for some Catholics, like Fr Radcliffe and the rest of "Easter People" – and, as said, this rainbow-laced archdiocese is riddled with them and has been for decades – it's time to put Brideshead down and face-up to a reality. And if you're a Catholic bloke, especially, then it's time to man-up to the actuality of things that you may have been unthinkingly (the inoperative word, there) supportive of. In fact, why not start by reading Fr. Dariusz Oko's shatteringly-sobering read from 2012 concerning the trials faced by Pope Benedict XVI in (what we now know to be) the last period of his papacy: "With the Pope against the Homoheresy". Rorate Caeli asked its readers to circulate that article as widely as possible. We here do so willingly.
No, the nexus where Catholicism meets the subject of same-sex attraction can't forever remain ambiguously on the Sebastian Flyte-path, all teddy-bears, dreamy days, esoteric code and camp aesthetes. Et in Arcadia Ego, indeed. But that's exactly how this archdiocese, at least, has treated of the subject for decades – masking the pernicious reality – and it's exactly how we end up with the likes of Fr Radcliffe being seen as a perfect fit for an archdiocesan conference, despite his previous repulsive utterances. Dare to object to any of this and you're instantly branded a homophobe (√ tick). Whatever that is. That, though, is how the closed-Church-circle has operated, certainly in this archdiocese since the mid-1970s on the vital subject of same-sex attraction. An ambiguity, wrapped-up in denial, inside a feigned stigma.
It's also the method that the THT largely operates on, at least as far as its outward face goes, i.e. to the unsuspecting public, to the useful idiots, and to the "I believe in a merciful God" crew of Easter People Catholics. You may have heard of the THT. You may even have donated to it. You may actually well approve heartily of its campaign. If so, then why not peruse its well-financed communications output for a bit? Bear in mind that it's all legal and above board. If you're not from the UK and don't know much about this charity, then here's the Wikipedia link to show the approved good-standing that British society holds the THT in. So, to be clear, the "information source" that we referred to at the top of this post, that we will provide a deactivated web-link to, is that of an online publication produced by the THT. That organisation is a UK-approved charity i.e. one which enjoys state approval under the auspices of the Charity Commission and is supported by the usual big charity suspects that have come to dominate British life, culture and thinking over the last few decades, among them being The National Lottery, Comic Relief and Children in Need (it's hard to over-estimate the stranglehold that the last of those two organisations have on the charitable landscape of the UK). You can check all that out here.
Before we get to that stage, though, we first offer you two primers, which should certainly serve to inform you of the ever-narrowing focus of this post of ours, and also to some very critical realities connected to the whole matter of the LGBT agenda.
See this as a checkpoint before pressing on.
The first is a secular link (actually to a UK Government web-page; so it's nothing to be disturbed about, surely, if you're a progressive, rainbow-culture Catholic?). It demonstrates the perceived "health-based" (we use that phrase loosely also) partnership between the THT and Her Majesty's Government, all about the issue of the disease known as shigella flexneri. Never heard of that? Well, sadly, every day's a school day where the reality of LGBT matters are concerned. In fact, we're helping to spread awareness of this disease which is surely something that the UK Government and the THT would have to applaud. If you already find that you can't stomach (again, no pun intended) the contents of the above governmental bulletin, then we suggest that you certainly won't be able to deal with de-activated link that we'll provide much further below to the THT publication. Furthermore, if your sensus Catholicus is in good order and you don't need to be convinced about the incompatibility of disordered same-sex activities and rightly ordered Faith in the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, then you've no need to. If, however, you found your stomach churning a bit there, and you still believe that there is room within the ambit of Church teaching to approve of same-sex activities (genital relations; sodomy-plus), especially if you think there is scope to consider, like Fr Radclife does, how much such "gay sexuality" could be considered "Eucharistic", then you have some serious questions to answer of yourself when your head hits the pillow and it's just you, God and the darkness. For if you find that even a basic governmental health bulletin is just too much, then ask yourself why, and what it means about what you really believe about your liberal outlook. You know, deep down.
The second link is a Catholic one. To an article produced only last week by the excellent Crisis magazine. It is titled "Public Health Ignored as HIV Spreads". Everything we said in the previous paragraph concerning the reactions of the various camps who read the above governmental bulletin also applies here. Save to say, though, that if you're still in denial, even after reading everything we've offered so far, then know that the sightlines of this piece are tapering ever narrower to lead you to a point you must surely confront. If you are still somehow in denial, then you are exactly the type of person we had in mind when we structured this piece. You are indeed the type of Catholic who needs to re-activate the dormant link that we will provide a little further below. For if all the above, including Fr Oko's piece, still hasn't yet made you sit bolt upright, then surely the THT brochure will finally, finally do so.
If that fails then, truly, God help you.
We assure you that if you do activate the dormant link that we will provide it will not damage your computer in any way. Really, how could it? For it's a link to a page on an approved UK-charity website. Indeed, we stress that, from a secular viewpoint, this publication is to be considered quite casually, to be taken easily in your stride and quite matter-of-factly. No big thing. Just routine "health-based" information. And if you're one of those who sees no contradiction between the Natural Law and same-sex genital activities then you obviously won't have a problem with reading the publication.
Whilst it may not harm your computer, it may – we stress may – harm your soul. Then again, it might actually help. Let's put this under the microscope. We take our grave responsibilities very seriously here. We are aware of the need to consider the matter of certain species that can be powerfully lodged into the imagination (e.g. data either really witnessed or mentally conceived). We are aware of the need to tread carefully around the subject of the Three Powers of the Soul – memory, intellect and will – and specifically the first of those. Without travelling too far from the realms of routine philosophy and metaphysics and into the territory of theology, it is suggested, in this precise case, that any information retained in the memory as a result of reading the THT material could be both detrimental and beneficial. It's a fine line, to be sure. On the one hand, if your sensus Catholicus is correctly ordered, then we suggest that your memory doesn't require the information from within the publication that we will advert to and it would very likely be detri-mental were you to avail yourself of it (although we do make one pointed and possible exception further below). However, on the other hand, if your sensus Catholicus is so utterly disordered and corrupted that you really need to be appraised once-and-for-all about the physical realities behind the LGBT agenda, then you certainly do need this information lodged firmly into your memory; further, you need it to be acting as a power of the soul, for good, literally, to remind and jolt you, every single time you feel yourself being seduced again by the saccharine outface of the LGBT agenda.
Only you can decide which camp you fall into.
But here's a hugely important point to bear in mind. The "health-based" publication we speak of, again as produced by one of the nation's leading charities, is clearly aimed at young, adolescent men who may be experiencing same-sex attraction. Indeed, one of its early page headlines proclaims: "Here's What They Never Told You At School". Not only is it meant to be educational and healthy, it's also designed to be helpful. Further, it has been produced to "help" in the fight to prevent the spread of AIDS, HIV and other sexually-transmitted diseases – all aims which form the mission core of the THT. Apparently.
Just like Fr Radcliffe uses code phrases and seemingly innocuous veneer-speak to mask what he's really talking about, and knows full well that the straining-to-be-fashionable useful idiots who nod along with him really don't want to go too deeply into things but will happily push his agenda forward with him, well so does the THT use that same double-tactic. The THT, too, presents a seemingly wholesome charitable facade, built on care and compassion, but also knows that the just-aching-to-be-lib-lot will keep funding it either directly or indirectly via channels like Comic Relief or Children in Need.
So, you will have the chance, if you feel you need it, to see what really lies behind the apparently acceptable front of the THT, and therefore the whole LGBT culture. What lurks behind the rainbow flag. And it is exactly the same as what lurks behind the sentiment and false-mercy speak of Fr Radcliffe.
The THT publication we refer to is called: "The Bottom Line".
Ironically, we find ourselves in agreement with the THT on one aspect.
The publication title couldn't be more repulsively apt.
So, if you see no problem in a Churchman like Fr Radcliffe spouting his open support for same-sex activity, then you'll obviously be able to brush aside the contents of the THT publication we refer to equally as casually. We've delayed our direct reference to it deliberately, and admittedly cumbersomely (but this is deadly serious stuff), to get you thinking. If you need to that is.
If, though, you still consider yourself to be progressive enough to think it's appropriate for someone like Fr Radcliffe to be invited to address an archdiocesan conference to celebrate all things Vatican II – and therefore implicitly send a signal that you are supportive of his dissent – then this is a publication for your express attention.
It's time that you finally awoke and came to your senses; if necessary by this online version of a very cold glass of very necessary water in the face that awaits you in but a few more paragraphs.
You're progressive? You're liberal? You're casual and broad-minded? Test yourself, then, to see how much you really are. Discover how broad are your Radcliffian stripes. Indeed, use this method to see how "Eucharistic" the healthy and good activities, that the THT educates young men with same-sex attraction about, really are.
The publication that we refer to first came to our attention two years ago after it was courageously linked on a UK priest's famous blog. That good priest later came under some understandable pressure to remove it; the com-box debate boiled down to the matter that it really wasn't suitable material for a priestly blog. We had some sympathy with that. At this same time, we had great respect for the courage of the priest in question who stuck to his guns and retained the link. Good on him. Well this is a lay-run blog, so no such clerical sensitivities apply. Therefore, we'll follow the good priestly blogger and include it also - but in slightly modified fashion. As we've said, this is a publication that is freely available on the Internet. We're just bringing it all-but-two-steps directly closer to you. We really don't wish to do this. But it's become necessary because we've reached a maddening point where so many, including our archbishop, are so blithely supporting and approving something that they, we'll give another benefit of the doubt here, must simply be completely ignorant about.
For a valid, final comparison, think about the pro-life v pro-abortion debate for a moment. How many pro-abortionists, and Catholics at that, do you know who claim to have a fixed and informed position about their opinion – but crucially refuse to watch the hundreds and hundreds of examples of online footage which demonstrate the true barbarity of abortion and the very real human lives that are being destroyed in their millions? Why? Because they don't want to face the graphic truth and the reality that they might have to change their minds, or that they might have to decide once and for all that there are only two positions you can have on abortion: that it is acceptable (for whatever secondary reason) to butcher human lives in the womb; or that it isn't.
Well, this is the same scenario of sin. How many Catholics do you know who profess to be fashionably "right on" about the aberrosexual agenda but simply refuse to consider the "biological realities" that are right at the heart of the matter?
If you're a rainbow-Catholic-liberal, then ask yourself one last time, before we half-link to the THT publication "The Bottom Line", if you're still certain that same-sex genital activity is compatible with the Natural Law and Catholicism and that the whole LGBT agenda should be welcomed into the Church under the pastoral banner of "mercy".
If you've answered in the positive to the above questions then you really should have no bother in reading the "health-based" information provided by the THT only one section below. Very cautiously, we would also venture that a certain type of Catholic man might (emphasis) be able to withstand its contents without detriment to his soul. But hey, just to head off any accusations of misogyny (√ tick), if you're the type of Catholic woman who likes her beer by the pint, then go ahead also. You might well need one. Basically, though, if you're the type of bloke who considers himself to have "been to sea", as it were, and can handle, shall we say, "certain things", then the following information may (we stress may) be unwanted but all-the-same vital armoury for you whenever you find yourself on the battle-field. So we'll leave it up to you. Only you can know yourself best. However, even if you are a robust chap in that regard, then we would only offer you the following advice: the material that the THT offers-up will temporarily send you mentally to a very dark place. If you're vulnerable at the moment then it's best avoided. For your well-ordered sensus Catholicus will rein-in the unremitting bleakness in a blanket of black cloud. Prayer will restore your equilibrium of course, as it always does. But the temporary gloom will hover over you like one of those long Good Friday afternoons spent looking at Him on the Cross of Salvation and thinking about the appalling ocean of sins that we (all of us) flood the world with and from which He came to save us.
Here we go, then. Just below is the de-activated link which, as you can plainly see from its URL (i.e. the first bit which starts www.tht.org.uk) is indeed part of the online communications output of the very publicly reputable and very well-financed and very well-trusted Terence Higgins Trust. Okay, here's the dormant link:
http://www.tht.org.uk/~/media/132C90B69AAF43C7AFE01E0F71E96D51.ashx
Do with that what you think best.
So?
You know when sodomy, as a word, doesn't quite cover it? Well, no, nor did we until we first read that in 2013.
If you have read the material that we all but linked-to above, then just how "Eucharistic", in the vile and evil suggestions of Fr Radcliffe, do you think that "gay sexuality", in his maddening words, could ever be?
If you're a liberal, just how far did you get? Bailed on Page 1? Or was it Page 3 and out?
For those who did stick it out, then maybe you made it to Pages 31 onwards and read the harrowing litany of seemingly endless sexually-transmitted diseases listed there, the clinical names of which seem to have been formed at random from an endless churning factory of screeching vowels straight out of Hades.
And that's a publication that's designed to prevent AIDS, HIV and disease? We'd hate to see something that was hell-bent, literally, on directly promoting abberosexual sin.
So, how progressive do you feel now?
Have you changed your mind about a few things, not least your views about how NHS budgets are allocated? Have you reconsidered how the abberosexual agenda is simply incompatible with Church teaching? Good. At last! Welcome home.
You may understand now that those amongst us in the pews who carry the Cross of same-sex attraction need so much better than that. They also need far better than Fr Radcliffe's scandalous nod of ambiguous approval. And they certainly need better than Pope Francis' hideously ill-judged "who am I to judge?" treacle.
If you haven't changed your mind, though, and you still think you're staying true to Christ and the Catholic Church, then that sand you're forcing yourself to chew really isn't good for tooth enamel.
At the very least, even if you're a committed secularist, you should have altered your thinking about the so-called "Antibiotic Armageddon" that is surely heading humanity's way, and was making world headlines only days ago.
Truly, global disaster lies that way and it's pushing ISIS hard on the rails.
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.
To the nub of our question, then.
Why did His Grace, given Fr Radcliffe's clearly publicised track record, and his abhorrent belief that the type of activities laid out above could, to some extent, be "Eucharistic", deem his fellow Dominican fit enough to be a keynote speaker for a conference in this archdiocese (although the irony is not lost on us that he is possibly one of the the best-worst living adverts for how dysfunctional the post-conciliar Church is; maybe that's worth celebrating)?
Let's put it as bluntly as it needs to be. It was an absolute disgrace and a scandal – in the true Catholic understanding of that word – that His Grace invited Fr Radcliffe to the archdiocese.
That needed saying.
Then again, it's also an outrage, a bigger one, that Pope Francis has appointed him as consultor to the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. A case of shepherd simply following chief shepherd, then?
It's just not enough to accept that it might simply have been a case of fellow Dominican inviting fellow Dominican. For Fr Aidan Nichols OP is also a Brother of His Grace's, and a man that many would say is possessed of the finest intellect currently to be found amongst the Order of Preachers. In fact, if you want to cleanse your mind after the filth you've either just read, or imagined, then do so with the very best of English Dominican thought and soak yourself in this magnificent lecture by Fr Nichols from 2012. Perhaps with a strong recovery scotch while you're at it.
No, there can be only two explanations as to why His Grace invited Fr Radcliffe to speak in our archdiocese. Either he was completely unaware of his track record and his revolting dissent and invited him simply because he's a noted academic - and, of course, that he's a fellow Dominican. Or he knows full well about the Radcliffian Rebellion and has sent a very clear signal that he implicitly agrees with him by inviting him to co-headline a landmark archdiocesan conference.
You choose the most preferable explanation.
Sadly, given that His Grace is a clear devotee of the Los Angeles Religious Education Conference (as linked to above), and is also a known supporter of ACTA, is a thinly-veiled supporter of the Kasperite Proposal and wanted Eucharistic doctrine to be "developed" at the recent Synod, and surely gave his approval for the internationally broadcast blasphemous festival of rainbow-hued Catholicism that passed for the funeral, in these parts in late summer, for the soul of a globally-renowned celebrity (Cilla-gate, as we've heard it perfectly described: see our links here, here and here), we have to conclude that His Grace knew exactly what he was doing when he invited Fr Radcliffe. He surely knows Fr Radcliffe's history. And he surely knew precisely what signal he was sending when he invited his fellow Dominican. And once again, we have to conclude that we'd have to be idiots not to receive and process the correct message.
It was His Grace's publicised support for ACTA in autumn 2014 that gave a slew of parishes in this archdiocese the confidence to publicise that dissenting organisation's aims in their newsletters. Similarly, it was His Grace's invitation to Fr Radcliffe which gave scores of parish newsletters in this archdiocese (including the very same one from the "parish cluster" that the Priestly Fraternity of St Peter has just moved into) the confidence to proclaim the implied good-standing of this Disreputable Dominican.
In the same way that Fr Radcliffe can – quite legitimately – claim that his open dissent is firmly in line with Pope Francis' deeply destructive manipulations, and in the same way that His Grace can claim to be simply toeing the papal line regarding the positive restoration of Fr Radcliffe in the eyes of the Holy See, those parishes who have liberally advertised both the aims of ACTA over the last year and the intended presence in this archdiocese of Fr Radcliffe, can easily and confidently point to His Grace as having given the lead.
We have God's grace to thank for the utter failure of last weekend's intended dissent fest in this archdiocese. That and fact that hardly anyone in these parts (save for a dwindling band of Wimmin and Bob-On Fey-Rays, all joined at the un-hip, and still clutching gamely to their Liberation Theology manuals, for whom the 1970s will truly never die) gives two hoots about what the Novus Ordo Church purportedly has to offer their souls beyond the box-ticking and tribal attendance at St Left Harbour each week.
Sure, it may have raised a fleeting mirthful smirk to note that the archdiocesan celebration of Vatican II had to be cancelled because there's nobody left to celebrate it, but that was all. For it was no cause for sustained merriment. Because the lasting feelings were ones of intense sorrow and exasperation and deep scandal.
Sorrow for the mess that the Church-in-denial is in.
Exasperation that an archdiocesan conference like that was arranged and pre-intended to be so deliberately skewed to fit one agenda and one prevailing interpretation only.
And scandal that a thoroughly discredited dissenter like Fr Radcliffe, except in Pope Francis' and His Grace's eyes, was given prime billing.
The invitation of the two key-speakers chosen by His Grace has sent us a clear signal. However, whilst Prof. Massimo Faggioli is simply a sophist, Fr Radcliffe is frankly a filth-peddler.
It was an abomination that the latter was invited by His Grace to address such a key milestone conference in our archdiocese. It was also a clear indication of his wider thinking about the post-conciliar Church, both globally and locally.
"Yes, but he's been good enough to invite the Fraternity of St Peter to Warrington. Really, does nothing please you?"
Sigh.
We'll link here to Michael Voris speaking one month ago.
Moreover, it's in keeping with the Vatican II ideal for the laity to have an increased voice (remember that?), and surely in keeping with His Holiness Pope Francis' now (in)famous "Hagan lio" call. Therefore, this blog will do so whenever necessary. Like now.
Now, of course, we can't know for certain what Fr Radcliffe might have said in this archdiocese last weekend. It's a fair bet, though, given his previous form, that he would have, at some stage, either coyly or not so coyly (for we know all his little codes: "Come Out, Lazarus!" indeed!...he must think we're all thick!), folded the subject of, in his words, "gay sexuality" or some form of LGBT agenda activity into his open programme of dissent (oh and women priests probably, and the question of Holy Communion for those who are divorced and remarried without annulment – and possibly all of the other items on the standard liberal Catholic bingo card).
His views are toxic. A danger to souls. Accordingly, orthodox Catholics should know to have the good sense to swerve him like the plague – especially if, for instance, one is arranging a programme of conference speakers.
To invite Fr Radcliffe to speak at a conference indicates, beyond-a-shadow-of-doubt, that his views are judged to be acceptable.
SECTION FIVE
We again issue a reminder that we will flag-up an information source that you may not have the stomach for. We trust, though, that your intelligence, your basic sensus Catholicus is such that you'll have absolutely no need to be appraised of certain realities. For others, though, that might not be so.
To our mind, it is beyond reasonable dispute that Fr Radcliffe sees no problem with same-sex-activity. However, just for the purposes of this exercise, we'll issue a (probably entirely unnecessary) benefit-of-the-doubt, on the basis that Fr Radcliffe only refers to "gay sexuality". What does he mean and not mean by that? Leaving aside his use of the term "gay" (and we refer you again to an article "Sustainable Sexuality" by Fr Armand de Malleray, of the Priestly Fraternity of St Peter, as linked to in our previous post, which properly examines the use of correct terms when it comes to this deeply vexing subject), is he simply referring to those souls who experience same-sex attraction but do not act on this with disordered desire? If so, he should say so. Whilst he's at it, he could also issue some essential catechesis about why it would be gravely sinful for those who are tempted in that manner to indulge such base passions, and furthermore why those brothers and sisters of ours who do courageously and chastely stay true to Church teaching in this regard deserve the pastoral support of us all in the Church in their lifelong struggle.
For some reason, though (like we don't know!), Fr Radcliffe chooses to leave the precise meaning of his term "gay sexuality" wide open; it is ambiguous enough, therefore, to mean whatever his listeners assume it may mean. It would seem clear that this is not an oversight of his; a simple, albeit highly dangerous, omission. For Fr Radcliffe may be incendiary but he's no fool. In fact he is a master of guile. Therefore, his generalised phrase may indeed cover those who stay chastely close to Christ's Cross through the so-called "Third Way" (we link you to a truly humbling and very instructive video offering there - it's well worth watching; and here's what Life Site News had to say about it). But "we must..." also assume (in the absence of any clarification from Fr Radcliffe) that it equally covers those who are involved in same-sex activity, including genital relations. We don't see any other way around that conclusion.
We said it was time for plain talk. So by now you may be sensing a clear direction that this carefully structured and phased post is heading towards.
SECTION SIX
It is also beyond dispute that a significant number of Mass-attending Catholics in this archdiocese also see no contradiction between the Faith and their support (whether overtly or not) for same-sex activity and, yes, genital relations. We couldn't really say whether they are a majority; we wouldn't be surprised, though. We're realists here, and it's pointless trying to pretend that it's only a few Mass-attenders from this territory who are liberal in their attitudes towards the whole same-sex agenda and how it can be somehow, via some truly tortured mental gymnastics, be reconciled with orthodox Catholicism.
Yet, despite that simple impossibility, there are a great number locally who subscribe to this contradictory view. For this is a rampantly liberal archdiocese which has been strangled by "The Easter People" progressive elite at least since 1980 – but more truthfully since four years prior to that.
And some of us have had enough of it.
Here's an example text (awkwardly it's a .doc download, via the media feed of the liberals at Liverpool Hope University – who incidentally, though not surprisingly, co-organised the cancelled Vatican II conference in conjunction with the Archdiocese of Liverpool – but it's quite safe for your computer). It gives an insight into how long ago "the agenda" was was formed and framed in the Archdiocese of Liverpool. The article appeared in The Month, in April 1996, six weeks after the death of His Grace the Most Rev. Derek Worlock, seventh Archbishop of Liverpool (requiescat in pace):
"From Vatican II to the Millennium: Blueprint for a Contemporary Parish"; 1996
If you have read the above linked article, then you will have noted the clearly stated decades-old ambition for the Archdiocese of Liverpool to foster "an Inclusive Church". Whenever they considered (we use the word loosely) the Church's response to the issue of those who experience same-sex attraction, the "Easter People" liberals always managed to reach their illogical and sentimentally-charged conclusions, dripping with notions of false mercy, via the convenient omission of two key aspects: the Natural Law and all that it demands; and the very stomach-churning reality of same-sex activity and genital relations. Most people do. It's understandable as to why many people seek to gloss over that reality; but it's actually a mental act of evasion which of course directly proves the reality of the disorder. Try raising the subject whenever you encounter the proud Church-lib who openly proclaims support for the Catholic rainbow-culture (which screams its Kasperite-sponsored theme right across our archdiocese if you've eyes open wide enough) and see how far you get. Not very.
To avoid this, like a child sticking fingers in its ears and humming la-la, they have a tiresome code-phrase blocker, which they passively-aggressively proclaim, with brick wall repetition, through their faux-calm, Cherie Blair fixed-smiles, which belie the true indignation they feel deep down towards you. It's a verbal tic. A deliberate tactic. Those with sharp ears often cotton-on to the same phrase doing-the-repetitive rounds in Church circles and you always know it can't be coincidence. For example, just to digress for a moment, there's a glib one currently looping around the episcopal circuit regarding the locations of Extraordinary Form Mass provision in England and Wales: "Everyone travels anyway" (yeah, you've noted that one, too! so much for the environment and Laudato si'). Anyway, we started to note, just far too many times for it to be coincidental, the same phrase being repeated in certain circles whenever the subject of Catholicism and the LGBT agenda cropped-up. It's an illogically formed and theologically redundant patter designed not only to shut you up but also expose your mean-spiritedness and distinct lack of charity (tick √) whenever you raise orthodox Church teaching:
"I/We believe in a merciful God...(repeat)...I/We believe in a merciful God...(repeat) I/We believe in a merciful God..."
And on and on it goes. It's straight out of the Kasperite bottom drawer.
It's impossible to engage them. Ever. For they are utterly entrenched in "the agenda". Still searching for, drumroll, "the fruits of Vatican II".
Hence we reached 2015 and this all-encompassing denial led to the arrangement of a vibrant NuChurch conference (as advertised liberally throughout the archdiocese on parish bulletins and notice-boards aplenty, which was designed to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the very event which apparently gave us the vibrant NuChurch) finally having to be cancelled just four days beforehand ... because the NuChurch really isn't vibrant at all. Everyone left. Except die-hard dissenters like Fr Radcliffe and his ever-dwindling band of "Easter People" groupies, who still lap-up every sickly word that he and his ilk spew.
It's the perfect collusion. Radcliffe uses sugary code words to hide his sinister agenda, and his hearers are the useful idiots who never wish to drill down anyway beneath the syrupy crust in order to explain the realities of what they really might mean...you know when it really comes down to it.
Thus the liberal elite in this archdiocese has gone round-and-round in wooly and ambiguous word circles for decades, like NuCatholic Daleks, generating nonsense barrier talk from their constantly turning tombola of specially vacuous post-conciliar phrases: "pathways", "merciful God", "Easter People", "the Kingdom", "empowerment", "inclusion", "the Sign We Give", "The Sign We Receive"... and on and on it painfully goes and has done since the mid-1970s.
SECTION SEVEN
So let's drill down into what Fr Radcliffe really means (because, let's be honest, that benefit-of-the-doubt exercise further up was unnecessary really).
Before we do so, you should be able to sense even moreso by now that our words have started to become gradually more physiologically graphic. They must be if we're to slice through the viscid veneer that has protected and prevented the real issue being discussed openly for decades now. Because, well, there's polite society to think of. This is England and it's not quite cricket.
However, we surely do have to address this issue head-on; in order to expose the vile reality of Fr Radcliffe's words: which are, again, about how far "gay sexuality" can be considered "Eucharistic" (it's utterly abhorrent to even have to type that ... really, just think for a second about what he's trying to say there! Disgusting!).
So, if you're one of those mental contortionists, or one of the "Easter People", or one of those who still thinks that Fr Radcliffe is a suitable speaker to invite to a Catholic conference presumably because, based on his track record, you believe he has something challenging to say, then we say that the information source that we will include further on in this piece is precisely for you. Many others will be sensible enough to swerve it.
If you're a proud Catholic-libber, then why not accept Fr Radcliffe's challenge with us? Let's see, together, shall we, how far "gay sexuality" can be "Eucharistic"?
We have reservations about what we intend to do further into this post. Of course we do. But we stop short of apologising, for we believe, to the very best of our discernment, that we are going to follow the most prudent method of exposing something quite serious that, sadly, needs to be laid bare in order to finally jolt certain people, especially liberal and rainbow-casual Catholics, from either their slumber or their denial. As already stated, we are going to post a deliberately de-activated link (which means that you'll have to do the technical work to activate it – that's if you will feel you need to). It links to a bluntly-written publication, freely available on the web, produced by the Terence Higgins Trust (THT) and it's one which completely unmasks the real, sinister, hypocritical and publicly dangerous agenda that menacingly lies beneath the outward facing flamboyancy of the whole LGBT culture that is deliberately pitched as benignly as possible to the gullible masses.
So, for some Catholics, like Fr Radcliffe and the rest of "Easter People" – and, as said, this rainbow-laced archdiocese is riddled with them and has been for decades – it's time to put Brideshead down and face-up to a reality. And if you're a Catholic bloke, especially, then it's time to man-up to the actuality of things that you may have been unthinkingly (the inoperative word, there) supportive of. In fact, why not start by reading Fr. Dariusz Oko's shatteringly-sobering read from 2012 concerning the trials faced by Pope Benedict XVI in (what we now know to be) the last period of his papacy: "With the Pope against the Homoheresy". Rorate Caeli asked its readers to circulate that article as widely as possible. We here do so willingly.
No, the nexus where Catholicism meets the subject of same-sex attraction can't forever remain ambiguously on the Sebastian Flyte-path, all teddy-bears, dreamy days, esoteric code and camp aesthetes. Et in Arcadia Ego, indeed. But that's exactly how this archdiocese, at least, has treated of the subject for decades – masking the pernicious reality – and it's exactly how we end up with the likes of Fr Radcliffe being seen as a perfect fit for an archdiocesan conference, despite his previous repulsive utterances. Dare to object to any of this and you're instantly branded a homophobe (√ tick). Whatever that is. That, though, is how the closed-Church-circle has operated, certainly in this archdiocese since the mid-1970s on the vital subject of same-sex attraction. An ambiguity, wrapped-up in denial, inside a feigned stigma.
It's also the method that the THT largely operates on, at least as far as its outward face goes, i.e. to the unsuspecting public, to the useful idiots, and to the "I believe in a merciful God" crew of Easter People Catholics. You may have heard of the THT. You may even have donated to it. You may actually well approve heartily of its campaign. If so, then why not peruse its well-financed communications output for a bit? Bear in mind that it's all legal and above board. If you're not from the UK and don't know much about this charity, then here's the Wikipedia link to show the approved good-standing that British society holds the THT in. So, to be clear, the "information source" that we referred to at the top of this post, that we will provide a deactivated web-link to, is that of an online publication produced by the THT. That organisation is a UK-approved charity i.e. one which enjoys state approval under the auspices of the Charity Commission and is supported by the usual big charity suspects that have come to dominate British life, culture and thinking over the last few decades, among them being The National Lottery, Comic Relief and Children in Need (it's hard to over-estimate the stranglehold that the last of those two organisations have on the charitable landscape of the UK). You can check all that out here.
Before we get to that stage, though, we first offer you two primers, which should certainly serve to inform you of the ever-narrowing focus of this post of ours, and also to some very critical realities connected to the whole matter of the LGBT agenda.
See this as a checkpoint before pressing on.
The first is a secular link (actually to a UK Government web-page; so it's nothing to be disturbed about, surely, if you're a progressive, rainbow-culture Catholic?). It demonstrates the perceived "health-based" (we use that phrase loosely also) partnership between the THT and Her Majesty's Government, all about the issue of the disease known as shigella flexneri. Never heard of that? Well, sadly, every day's a school day where the reality of LGBT matters are concerned. In fact, we're helping to spread awareness of this disease which is surely something that the UK Government and the THT would have to applaud. If you already find that you can't stomach (again, no pun intended) the contents of the above governmental bulletin, then we suggest that you certainly won't be able to deal with de-activated link that we'll provide much further below to the THT publication. Furthermore, if your sensus Catholicus is in good order and you don't need to be convinced about the incompatibility of disordered same-sex activities and rightly ordered Faith in the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, then you've no need to. If, however, you found your stomach churning a bit there, and you still believe that there is room within the ambit of Church teaching to approve of same-sex activities (genital relations; sodomy-plus), especially if you think there is scope to consider, like Fr Radclife does, how much such "gay sexuality" could be considered "Eucharistic", then you have some serious questions to answer of yourself when your head hits the pillow and it's just you, God and the darkness. For if you find that even a basic governmental health bulletin is just too much, then ask yourself why, and what it means about what you really believe about your liberal outlook. You know, deep down.
The second link is a Catholic one. To an article produced only last week by the excellent Crisis magazine. It is titled "Public Health Ignored as HIV Spreads". Everything we said in the previous paragraph concerning the reactions of the various camps who read the above governmental bulletin also applies here. Save to say, though, that if you're still in denial, even after reading everything we've offered so far, then know that the sightlines of this piece are tapering ever narrower to lead you to a point you must surely confront. If you are still somehow in denial, then you are exactly the type of person we had in mind when we structured this piece. You are indeed the type of Catholic who needs to re-activate the dormant link that we will provide a little further below. For if all the above, including Fr Oko's piece, still hasn't yet made you sit bolt upright, then surely the THT brochure will finally, finally do so.
If that fails then, truly, God help you.
SECTION EIGHT
We assure you that if you do activate the dormant link that we will provide it will not damage your computer in any way. Really, how could it? For it's a link to a page on an approved UK-charity website. Indeed, we stress that, from a secular viewpoint, this publication is to be considered quite casually, to be taken easily in your stride and quite matter-of-factly. No big thing. Just routine "health-based" information. And if you're one of those who sees no contradiction between the Natural Law and same-sex genital activities then you obviously won't have a problem with reading the publication.
Whilst it may not harm your computer, it may – we stress may – harm your soul. Then again, it might actually help. Let's put this under the microscope. We take our grave responsibilities very seriously here. We are aware of the need to consider the matter of certain species that can be powerfully lodged into the imagination (e.g. data either really witnessed or mentally conceived). We are aware of the need to tread carefully around the subject of the Three Powers of the Soul – memory, intellect and will – and specifically the first of those. Without travelling too far from the realms of routine philosophy and metaphysics and into the territory of theology, it is suggested, in this precise case, that any information retained in the memory as a result of reading the THT material could be both detrimental and beneficial. It's a fine line, to be sure. On the one hand, if your sensus Catholicus is correctly ordered, then we suggest that your memory doesn't require the information from within the publication that we will advert to and it would very likely be detri-mental were you to avail yourself of it (although we do make one pointed and possible exception further below). However, on the other hand, if your sensus Catholicus is so utterly disordered and corrupted that you really need to be appraised once-and-for-all about the physical realities behind the LGBT agenda, then you certainly do need this information lodged firmly into your memory; further, you need it to be acting as a power of the soul, for good, literally, to remind and jolt you, every single time you feel yourself being seduced again by the saccharine outface of the LGBT agenda.
Only you can decide which camp you fall into.
But here's a hugely important point to bear in mind. The "health-based" publication we speak of, again as produced by one of the nation's leading charities, is clearly aimed at young, adolescent men who may be experiencing same-sex attraction. Indeed, one of its early page headlines proclaims: "Here's What They Never Told You At School". Not only is it meant to be educational and healthy, it's also designed to be helpful. Further, it has been produced to "help" in the fight to prevent the spread of AIDS, HIV and other sexually-transmitted diseases – all aims which form the mission core of the THT. Apparently.
Just like Fr Radcliffe uses code phrases and seemingly innocuous veneer-speak to mask what he's really talking about, and knows full well that the straining-to-be-fashionable useful idiots who nod along with him really don't want to go too deeply into things but will happily push his agenda forward with him, well so does the THT use that same double-tactic. The THT, too, presents a seemingly wholesome charitable facade, built on care and compassion, but also knows that the just-aching-to-be-lib-lot will keep funding it either directly or indirectly via channels like Comic Relief or Children in Need.
So, you will have the chance, if you feel you need it, to see what really lies behind the apparently acceptable front of the THT, and therefore the whole LGBT culture. What lurks behind the rainbow flag. And it is exactly the same as what lurks behind the sentiment and false-mercy speak of Fr Radcliffe.
The THT publication we refer to is called: "The Bottom Line".
Ironically, we find ourselves in agreement with the THT on one aspect.
The publication title couldn't be more repulsively apt.
SECTION NINE
So, if you see no problem in a Churchman like Fr Radcliffe spouting his open support for same-sex activity, then you'll obviously be able to brush aside the contents of the THT publication we refer to equally as casually. We've delayed our direct reference to it deliberately, and admittedly cumbersomely (but this is deadly serious stuff), to get you thinking. If you need to that is.
If, though, you still consider yourself to be progressive enough to think it's appropriate for someone like Fr Radcliffe to be invited to address an archdiocesan conference to celebrate all things Vatican II – and therefore implicitly send a signal that you are supportive of his dissent – then this is a publication for your express attention.
It's time that you finally awoke and came to your senses; if necessary by this online version of a very cold glass of very necessary water in the face that awaits you in but a few more paragraphs.
You're progressive? You're liberal? You're casual and broad-minded? Test yourself, then, to see how much you really are. Discover how broad are your Radcliffian stripes. Indeed, use this method to see how "Eucharistic" the healthy and good activities, that the THT educates young men with same-sex attraction about, really are.
The publication that we refer to first came to our attention two years ago after it was courageously linked on a UK priest's famous blog. That good priest later came under some understandable pressure to remove it; the com-box debate boiled down to the matter that it really wasn't suitable material for a priestly blog. We had some sympathy with that. At this same time, we had great respect for the courage of the priest in question who stuck to his guns and retained the link. Good on him. Well this is a lay-run blog, so no such clerical sensitivities apply. Therefore, we'll follow the good priestly blogger and include it also - but in slightly modified fashion. As we've said, this is a publication that is freely available on the Internet. We're just bringing it all-but-two-steps directly closer to you. We really don't wish to do this. But it's become necessary because we've reached a maddening point where so many, including our archbishop, are so blithely supporting and approving something that they, we'll give another benefit of the doubt here, must simply be completely ignorant about.
For a valid, final comparison, think about the pro-life v pro-abortion debate for a moment. How many pro-abortionists, and Catholics at that, do you know who claim to have a fixed and informed position about their opinion – but crucially refuse to watch the hundreds and hundreds of examples of online footage which demonstrate the true barbarity of abortion and the very real human lives that are being destroyed in their millions? Why? Because they don't want to face the graphic truth and the reality that they might have to change their minds, or that they might have to decide once and for all that there are only two positions you can have on abortion: that it is acceptable (for whatever secondary reason) to butcher human lives in the womb; or that it isn't.
Well, this is the same scenario of sin. How many Catholics do you know who profess to be fashionably "right on" about the aberrosexual agenda but simply refuse to consider the "biological realities" that are right at the heart of the matter?
If you're a rainbow-Catholic-liberal, then ask yourself one last time, before we half-link to the THT publication "The Bottom Line", if you're still certain that same-sex genital activity is compatible with the Natural Law and Catholicism and that the whole LGBT agenda should be welcomed into the Church under the pastoral banner of "mercy".
If you've answered in the positive to the above questions then you really should have no bother in reading the "health-based" information provided by the THT only one section below. Very cautiously, we would also venture that a certain type of Catholic man might (emphasis) be able to withstand its contents without detriment to his soul. But hey, just to head off any accusations of misogyny (√ tick), if you're the type of Catholic woman who likes her beer by the pint, then go ahead also. You might well need one. Basically, though, if you're the type of bloke who considers himself to have "been to sea", as it were, and can handle, shall we say, "certain things", then the following information may (we stress may) be unwanted but all-the-same vital armoury for you whenever you find yourself on the battle-field. So we'll leave it up to you. Only you can know yourself best. However, even if you are a robust chap in that regard, then we would only offer you the following advice: the material that the THT offers-up will temporarily send you mentally to a very dark place. If you're vulnerable at the moment then it's best avoided. For your well-ordered sensus Catholicus will rein-in the unremitting bleakness in a blanket of black cloud. Prayer will restore your equilibrium of course, as it always does. But the temporary gloom will hover over you like one of those long Good Friday afternoons spent looking at Him on the Cross of Salvation and thinking about the appalling ocean of sins that we (all of us) flood the world with and from which He came to save us.
SECTION TEN
Here we go, then. Just below is the de-activated link which, as you can plainly see from its URL (i.e. the first bit which starts www.tht.org.uk) is indeed part of the online communications output of the very publicly reputable and very well-financed and very well-trusted Terence Higgins Trust. Okay, here's the dormant link:
http://www.tht.org.uk/~/media/132C90B69AAF43C7AFE01E0F71E96D51.ashx
Do with that what you think best.
SECTION ELEVEN
So?
You know when sodomy, as a word, doesn't quite cover it? Well, no, nor did we until we first read that in 2013.
If you have read the material that we all but linked-to above, then just how "Eucharistic", in the vile and evil suggestions of Fr Radcliffe, do you think that "gay sexuality", in his maddening words, could ever be?
If you're a liberal, just how far did you get? Bailed on Page 1? Or was it Page 3 and out?
For those who did stick it out, then maybe you made it to Pages 31 onwards and read the harrowing litany of seemingly endless sexually-transmitted diseases listed there, the clinical names of which seem to have been formed at random from an endless churning factory of screeching vowels straight out of Hades.
And that's a publication that's designed to prevent AIDS, HIV and disease? We'd hate to see something that was hell-bent, literally, on directly promoting abberosexual sin.
So, how progressive do you feel now?
Have you changed your mind about a few things, not least your views about how NHS budgets are allocated? Have you reconsidered how the abberosexual agenda is simply incompatible with Church teaching? Good. At last! Welcome home.
You may understand now that those amongst us in the pews who carry the Cross of same-sex attraction need so much better than that. They also need far better than Fr Radcliffe's scandalous nod of ambiguous approval. And they certainly need better than Pope Francis' hideously ill-judged "who am I to judge?" treacle.
If you haven't changed your mind, though, and you still think you're staying true to Christ and the Catholic Church, then that sand you're forcing yourself to chew really isn't good for tooth enamel.
At the very least, even if you're a committed secularist, you should have altered your thinking about the so-called "Antibiotic Armageddon" that is surely heading humanity's way, and was making world headlines only days ago.
Truly, global disaster lies that way and it's pushing ISIS hard on the rails.
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.
SECTION TWELVE
To the nub of our question, then.
Why did His Grace, given Fr Radcliffe's clearly publicised track record, and his abhorrent belief that the type of activities laid out above could, to some extent, be "Eucharistic", deem his fellow Dominican fit enough to be a keynote speaker for a conference in this archdiocese (although the irony is not lost on us that he is possibly one of the the best-worst living adverts for how dysfunctional the post-conciliar Church is; maybe that's worth celebrating)?
Let's put it as bluntly as it needs to be. It was an absolute disgrace and a scandal – in the true Catholic understanding of that word – that His Grace invited Fr Radcliffe to the archdiocese.
That needed saying.
Then again, it's also an outrage, a bigger one, that Pope Francis has appointed him as consultor to the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. A case of shepherd simply following chief shepherd, then?
It's just not enough to accept that it might simply have been a case of fellow Dominican inviting fellow Dominican. For Fr Aidan Nichols OP is also a Brother of His Grace's, and a man that many would say is possessed of the finest intellect currently to be found amongst the Order of Preachers. In fact, if you want to cleanse your mind after the filth you've either just read, or imagined, then do so with the very best of English Dominican thought and soak yourself in this magnificent lecture by Fr Nichols from 2012. Perhaps with a strong recovery scotch while you're at it.
No, there can be only two explanations as to why His Grace invited Fr Radcliffe to speak in our archdiocese. Either he was completely unaware of his track record and his revolting dissent and invited him simply because he's a noted academic - and, of course, that he's a fellow Dominican. Or he knows full well about the Radcliffian Rebellion and has sent a very clear signal that he implicitly agrees with him by inviting him to co-headline a landmark archdiocesan conference.
You choose the most preferable explanation.
Sadly, given that His Grace is a clear devotee of the Los Angeles Religious Education Conference (as linked to above), and is also a known supporter of ACTA, is a thinly-veiled supporter of the Kasperite Proposal and wanted Eucharistic doctrine to be "developed" at the recent Synod, and surely gave his approval for the internationally broadcast blasphemous festival of rainbow-hued Catholicism that passed for the funeral, in these parts in late summer, for the soul of a globally-renowned celebrity (Cilla-gate, as we've heard it perfectly described: see our links here, here and here), we have to conclude that His Grace knew exactly what he was doing when he invited Fr Radcliffe. He surely knows Fr Radcliffe's history. And he surely knew precisely what signal he was sending when he invited his fellow Dominican. And once again, we have to conclude that we'd have to be idiots not to receive and process the correct message.
It was His Grace's publicised support for ACTA in autumn 2014 that gave a slew of parishes in this archdiocese the confidence to publicise that dissenting organisation's aims in their newsletters. Similarly, it was His Grace's invitation to Fr Radcliffe which gave scores of parish newsletters in this archdiocese (including the very same one from the "parish cluster" that the Priestly Fraternity of St Peter has just moved into) the confidence to proclaim the implied good-standing of this Disreputable Dominican.
We have God's grace to thank for the utter failure of last weekend's intended dissent fest in this archdiocese. That and fact that hardly anyone in these parts (save for a dwindling band of Wimmin and Bob-On Fey-Rays, all joined at the un-hip, and still clutching gamely to their Liberation Theology manuals, for whom the 1970s will truly never die) gives two hoots about what the Novus Ordo Church purportedly has to offer their souls beyond the box-ticking and tribal attendance at St Left Harbour each week.
Sure, it may have raised a fleeting mirthful smirk to note that the archdiocesan celebration of Vatican II had to be cancelled because there's nobody left to celebrate it, but that was all. For it was no cause for sustained merriment. Because the lasting feelings were ones of intense sorrow and exasperation and deep scandal.
Sorrow for the mess that the Church-in-denial is in.
Exasperation that an archdiocesan conference like that was arranged and pre-intended to be so deliberately skewed to fit one agenda and one prevailing interpretation only.
And scandal that a thoroughly discredited dissenter like Fr Radcliffe, except in Pope Francis' and His Grace's eyes, was given prime billing.
The invitation of the two key-speakers chosen by His Grace has sent us a clear signal. However, whilst Prof. Massimo Faggioli is simply a sophist, Fr Radcliffe is frankly a filth-peddler.
It was an abomination that the latter was invited by His Grace to address such a key milestone conference in our archdiocese. It was also a clear indication of his wider thinking about the post-conciliar Church, both globally and locally.
"Yes, but he's been good enough to invite the Fraternity of St Peter to Warrington. Really, does nothing please you?"
Sigh.
