What would Cardinal Heenan have done?

                       Cardinal Heenan - to him the Church meant "authority" - and so it should

Picture: A Reluctant Sinner

I mean what would Cardinal Heenan have done in the sense of action over the gay "marriage" fiasco, or the gay Masses in Soho, Catholic Adoption Agencies caving in to government legislation, Catholic schools being cesspits of ignorance regarding the Faith, the Pathway to oblivion touted by Liverpool, the general lethargy of the hierarchy when it comes to standing up for Christ, being a witness to the Church Militant.

Well, he would not have remained silent.

He was always on television fighting the good fight.

He made acute observations regarding the new Mass in the vernacular ("the men won't go you know") although I am unsure as to why he didn't think that the women also would not go.

He it was who did more than any person other than, possibly, Mother Theresa, to bring broadcaster and intellectual, Malcolm Muggeridge into the fold.

The late Cardinal Heenan was a scrapper but always in a kind way. He gave witness to the Faith straight from the shoulder; he would not have waited until the last minute to issue a letter regarding the Church's view on same-sex marriage.

And I doubt Mr Barber would be getting his knees under the desk at the Catholic Education Service if the good Cardinal was still Archbishop of Westminster.

The following conversation is between the Cardinal and Malcolm Muggeridge before he jumped into the Tiber.

It gives an excellent insight into both men, it is amusing and forthright.
 In answer to Muggeridge's question "Presumably  you want people to become Roman Catholic?" His Eminence answers: "Yes. I want everybody to" - a no nonsense response, full of Christian love both for his Faith and for others.

Extract from Muggeridge: Through the Microphone; BBC Radio and Television, Edited by Christopher Ralling.

Muggeridge: I always feel that almost the only reason that I’d like to become a Cardinal would be to be waited on by nuns.

Cardinal: I think you’d make a very good Cardinal as a matter of fact.

Muggeridge: I doubt it strongly. Not a Cardinal, perhaps a bishop.

Cardinal: Well, you’ve got to start somewhere.

Muggeridge: I always like lunching on Fridays because we don’t have meat.

Cardinal: You’re not getting any fish, by the way, you’re getting an omelette.

Muggeridge: No, no, it’s very nice. This would be part of the Catholic life that I would find least difficult. I suppose it dates from a time when eating meat was a tremendously important thing.

Cardinal: Well, you know what they say. They say that it was an example of the Jewish instinct of the twelve Apostles; they were all fishermen, and they decided that if they made a rule about fish on Fridays, it would be good business. But I don’t think that’s a theological doctrine.

Muggeridge: How powerful is a Cardinal today?

Cardinal: How powerful? It really depends on what you mean by power.

Muggeridge: But aren’t you the boss of the bishops?

Cardinal: The boss of the bishops? No, the Pope is.

Muggeridge: But he’s your boss?

Cardinal: The Pope is my boss, but he’s also the boss of all the bishops. The Pope deals directly with the bishops, not through me necessarily.

Muggeridge: He can go over your head as it were?

Cardinal: Well, yes. I wouldn’t think of it in that way.

Muggeridge: No. But the thing is that of course the Church does indulge in the sort of magnificence and outward show which one associates with worldly power.

Cardinal: When you’re taking part in ritual, as I do very often, it is burdensome rather than self-glorifying.

Muggeridge: You mean you personally don’t like it too much?

Cardinal: Well, no, and also you’ve got to wear the robes. The same as the poor Queen when she wears the crown and the royal robes. I’m sure she’s most uncomfortable but nevertheless she knows that by doing this she gives a certain satisfaction to her people.

Muggeridge: To me, at any rate, such emulation of the trappings of earthly authority would seem to have a certain danger.

Cardinal: This outward panoply and foolishness that you are thinking of, this has its uses, because even sticking a chain round a man’s neck and calling him mayor of Wigan – I don’t mean that with any disrespect to Wigan, of course – but putting a chain round a man’s neck marks him out as chief citizen. If he’s not a fool he doesn’t really think he’s the brightest and best and best and most intelligent man in that particular town. Nevertheless, that chain of office shows him to be what he is; it’s a sign – a badge of his office. Incidentally, I’ve got a chain on too, with a Cross, and I always envy a Mayor his chain, because at the end of the year he can just take it off and go off on his own, but this thing will be with me until I’m in the coffin in the Cathedral…

Muggeridge: How about your role as proselytizer?

Cardinal: I loathe that word.

Muggeridge: Presumably you want more people to become Roman Catholics?

Cardinal: Yes. I want everybody to.

Muggeridge: Therefore you are a sort of missionary.

Cardinal: I object to the word proselytizer because it sounds like something very underhand, some poison, some snaky movement by which you’re trying to drag people from the truth and indoctrinate them….No, you wouldn’t call Christ a proselytizer; a preacher perhaps. We call the Apostles –

Muggeridge: Evangelists.

Cardinal: Evangelists, men who have the message, which they believe to be truth, and want to spread it everywhere. Now there’s nothing strange about that, because even if you happened to have discovered a cough cure and it really works, and you take this thing, this drug or injection, all winter, and never have a cold, you know well that you cannot stop telling your friends about it. If you’re a good man and you possess a good thing, you want to share it. There’s an old philosophical saying, Bonum est diffusivum sui. You’ll know this, of course, but for the sake of my colleagues on the bench I will translate. It means that goodness diffuses itself, spreads itself, it can’t help it, just as heat can’t help expanding, warmth glows. In this kind of way a person who possesses the faith wants to spread it, want his warmth to go out to others. Now that’s no problem to me. Is it a problem to you?

Muggeridge: No, not a problem at all.

Cardinal: But this is what you’ve got to remember. Although we don’t use the word because it’s an offensive kind of word to use, this country’s full of pagans, this country’s full of people who know as little about God as the so-called heathens that you mentioned.

Muggeridge: Since you would hold that your Church in certain respects has the message uniquely, you would presumably wish good Anglicans also to join it.

Cardinal: Well naturally; after all this country was once a completely Catholic country, as you know. It would be lovely if once again it would be a completely Catholic country, from my point of view. Whereas, as you know, others would say, ‘Oh no, just a moment, it was once a Catholic country, but the corruption of Rome spread, and it has to be cured by a complete revival and renewal, and then the old Catholic faith was restored and Romanism dissipated.’ That’s another point of view – not, as it happens, mine.

Muggeridge: I didn’t think it was. Anyway, the point is that presumably, in so far as you would in the long run hope to bring back the Anglican church into the fold, into the Roman Catholic fold, that would mean that you were a missionary in relation to them also; that even the Archbishop of Canterbury, say, is a target.

Cardinal: Well, target is hardly the word.

Muggeridge: How do you get along with him, incidentally?

Cardinal: He’s a very great friend of mine; I’m very fond of him, and of his wife too.

Muggeridge: Do you argue with him when you’re there?

Cardinal: I don’t think we argue in the sense of having controversy. It’s clear that as the Chief Bishop of the Church, the Anglican Church in this country and throughout the world, it’s hardly likely that when I go to Lambeth I would go with a whole bundle of tracts in my pocket and say, ‘Look, I must explain to you about Papal Infallibility.’ Of course not. Our conversation is on a very different level, and I don’t think he ever seriously tries to persuade me of the errors of Rome or offer me a job as his assistant or auxiliary bishop in Canterbury. No, we don’t do that. But if you ask me, I don’t want to appear in any way insincere. I do agree that my greatest desire would be to have all Englishmen Catholics again.

Muggeridge: And those little churches and cathedrals that used to be Catholic – all their bells would be ringing.

Cardinal: You’ve got to be quite mature before you realize what being a priest involves, particularly in the question of celibacy, giving up the right to a family and so on, and it’s at that time, I think that the crisis comes with most people. These young men realize, they might be 20, 19, 21, anything, but they’ll be quite mature and they will then say, ‘Now, for the first time I realize that this really does mean a lonely life.’ You’re not feeling miserable because you’re alone, but you’re a man apart.

The relationship between a Catholic priest and his people is something you’ve got to experience to understand, they call me Father and that’s a term of tremendous affection. Now that Fatherhood I find enormously attractive and uplifting, but the shouting and the kissing, that means very little indeed.

Muggeridge: What do people want from their religion?

Cardinal: It’s the unchanging teaching of the Church which answers the deepest appeal, I think, in the heart of the people.

Muggeridge: What is that unchanging teaching, in a word?

Cardinal: In a word, if you want a word – authority.

Muggeridge: Authority, whose authority?

Cardinal: The authority of the Church, made known through the Pope and through the Council.

Muggeridge: Contrasting with that, when you’re standing at the altar…?

Cardinal: Now that’s quite different. When I’m standing at the altar, I am there representing Christ. When I offer the Mass, I don’t say, ‘This is the Body of Christ,’ I say, ‘This is my Body,’ because I, John Heenan, don’t exist. That’s why the vestments are there to disguise my personality. I am standing there a mediator, as 

one representing Christ. That’s quite different; there I am the Church, so to speak.

Muggeridge: This is the difficult thing to understand.

Cardinal: Of course, of course.

Muggeridge: I mean, how do you feel, when you’re doing it?

Cardinal: Well, I’ve been a priest for thirty-five years, and I’ve offered Mass every day.

Muggeridge: For thirty-five years.

Cardinal: Yes, and sometimes more than once a day. Now there’s an old saying, an old Latin saw, – Ab ssuetis non fit passio – a thing you’re used to doesn’t affect you, and so, obviously, I don’t feel emotionally now as I did the day I put on vestments for the first time, and offered my first Mass as a young priest. I don’t feel the same but perhaps I treasure the Mass even more; the Mass means more to me now after thirty-five years of celebration daily, than it did then. But how to describe that and how to show that that should be so is very difficult.

Muggeridge: Does it add to your worries when you think that by and large people are falling away from the Christian religion?

Cardinal: Of course, of course. I don’t use the word worry, because I don’t worry about these things. It’s God’s business, you know. If they’re falling away from religion, they’re falling away from Him.

Muggeridge: But you wouldn’t feel that it’s because you’re being inadequate?

Cardinal: Yes, yes.

Muggeridge: Do you, when you wake up in the night, think that…

Cardinal: How do you know I wake up in the night?

Muggeridge: I’m sure you’re a fellow-insomniac. I can spot them. When you wake up, would it be a bad thing that would worry you to think to yourself, ‘Well, are we really making a great mistake’?

Cardinal: No, I don’t. On this, no. I have no doubts whatsoever.

Muggeridge: You would regard yourself as being a person who held, on the whole, for tradition?

Cardinal: Well yes, I would say that every Catholic really at heart values the tradition. You can’t be a Catholic without holding for tradition. We’re the one thing in a changing world that’s solid. We’re the thing that people can reach for.

Muggeridge: But you are going to go on being as solid as you have been?

Cardinal: I hope so. Of course we are. Rome is the centre of Christianity. This place is still the centre, and that’s not because of that material building. Because, you see, this city of Rome could be taken over by the communists tomorrow, or next year. But even if materially we abandoned Rome, the spiritual centre of the Church is the Pope, the Vicar of Christ, and, as you know, there have been Popes that have never seen Rome. At one time there were no less than three people claiming to be the Pope. There was vice in this Vatican. This was a centre of vice from time to time, the Borgia Popes and so on, and therefore we are sometimes inclined to think that this was the most wicked of all ages, but in fact, in many ways, it’s the best of all ages. And you asked some time ago where I stood, and was I against progress. The answer is no. But obviously when you get people emotionally charges and determined to broaden the view, there are going to be excesses, they’re going to exaggerate, they’re going to get it wrong, and some of us have got to stand quite firm and say, ‘Yes, I love this wide open view, but we mustn’t for a moment forget truth, we mustn’t pretend that truth doesn’t matter.

Soho Masses, a reminder from earlier this year

The Homosexual and other similar groups who attend the Warwick Street Masses in London may be concerned as to the future of the so called 'gay Masses' as supported by Archbishop Nichols in his statement earlier this year.

In the light of a reported investigation into these Masses by Archbishop Gerhard Mueller
(see Protect the Pope blog), it is interesting to view how The Catholic Herald reported on the Archbishop's statement in February this year,  just to refresh one's memory.

"Archbishop Vincent Nichols has reaffirmed the Diocese of Westminster’s pastoral provision for gay Catholics following accusations that it provides a platform for dissent from Church teaching.

In a statement issued today, the Archbishop of Westminster “reaffirmed the intention and purpose” of the pastoral provision for Catholics at the Church of Our Lady of the Assumption, Warwick Street.
The pastoral provision, known colloquially as the “Soho Masses”, has attracted criticism since it was established in February 2007 by the archbishop’s predecessor, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor. Earlier this month a short video of the bidding prayers at one of the Masses was posted on YouTube. Critics claimed that the prayers challenged Catholic teaching on homosexuality – a claim denied by the organisers.
Archbishop Nichols said: “As we approach the fifth anniversary of the establishment of a pastoral provision for Catholics of a same-sex orientation at the Church of Our Lady of the Assumption, I would like reaffirm the intention and purpose of this outreach.
“That intention and purpose were clearly set out in the statement issued by the Diocese of Westminster in 2007 when the provision was started under the guidance of Cardinal Cormac Murphy O’Connor.
“Furthermore it is important to recall and study again the direction and guidance set out by Cardinal Hume in 1997.
“In order to appreciate the intention and purpose of this provision a close reading of these two documents is required.
“These documents outline three essential foundations: the dignity of all persons created by God, the moral principles concerning chastity and the Church’s teaching on sexual activity, and the pastoral care of Catholics who are of same-sex orientation. All who participate in the Mass are called to live the church’s teaching through an ongoing conversion of life.
“At the present time consideration is being given to the circumstances in which these Masses are celebrated to ensure that their purpose is respected and that they are not occasions for confusion or opposition concerning the positive teaching of the Church on the meaning of human sexuality or the moral imperatives that flow from that teaching, which we uphold and towards which we all strive.”
The archbishop’s statement ended with a note which said: “The language used by the Catechism of the Catholic Church and other Church documents is the term ‘homosexual’. I am also conscious that the abbreviation LGBT is preferred by many as a collective identification. Whatever language is used, it is worth bearing in mind that the Church ‘refuses to consider the person as a “heterosexual” or a “homosexual” and insists that every person has a fundamental identity: the creature of God and, by grace, his child and heir to eternal life’ (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons, par 16).”
In response the Soho Masses Pastoral Council, the group that organises the provision, said that “increasing numbers” of gay Catholics had returned to the Church through the Masses.
The group said: “The Masses offer us a warm, joyful and inclusive occasion to share in communion with each other, with our families and friends, and with the whole Church, secure in the knowledge that we, too, have our place at the Lord’s table.
“Increasing numbers of LGBT Catholics who had been estranged from the Church have been restored to communion through the Diocese’s courageous witness to the dignity of all people.
“We also express our gratitude to the many clergy and lay people of the Diocese, and others, who support and sustain this ministry.”

There may be more than a little bit of back pedalling going on in the Victoria district at present.

Quite why we have Masses for specific congregations is beyond me. We don't have Masses for adulterers, fraudsters or serial killers - each Mass is for the Catholic community as a whole, regardless of sexual orientation or any deviation from the path of holiness.

The sooner Archbishop Mueller pronounces on the matter the better.

Yoga - the decision should be formal

Recently, a priest from the Portsmouth Diocese was vilified in the press for cancelling a contract with a Yoga instructor, for her to use the church hall for Yoga classes.

Fr John Chandler of St Edmund's Church stated that such activities were incompatible with Church teaching and, as such, could not be permitted on church premises.

It would appear as if there are two aspects to Yoga and that both aspects may be taught separately; that of exercise and that of spiritual meditation combined with exercise. It was the latter that was at stake in Fr Chandler's parish and he, quite rightly, called a halt.

But it appears as if the overall Church view on such issues is to leave it to the discretion of the parish priest. A spokesman for Portsmouth Diocese is reported to have said as much.

That is not good enough; it leaves priests vulnerable to charges of inconsistency, if nothing else.

It would seem to be a very black and white issue.

Any activity that might be construed as against the teaching of HMC should be proscribed.

That includes Yoga, Complementary Therapies (not all are bad but some such as Reiki are and it would be hard to be specific), Counselling and, of course, pro abort meetings. There may be others; it is necessary to be as specific as possible but it does need to come from the Archbishop of Westminster (for England and Wales Dioceses).

Leaving it to the individual PP is just a cop out and gives the media the chance of a field day.

Already they are claiming that there are many 'Catholic Yoga' classes taking place in church halls around the country.

The Church needs to take a position on this topic, but not a meditative one.