5th Question: Co-responsibility in the Mission

 I did not attend any of the meetings organised by my parish.   I knew that if I spoke up on this particular topic I would gain no support from anyone.   O yes, some would agree, but they would, as they see it, be uncharitable to cause division and would continue to 'leave it to God'.

I saw a wonderful sight in Church a couple of weeks ago.   A lady had gone to the altar to receive Communion, kneeling and on the tongue.    She had two small children on either side and both of them knelt with her.   She was teaching the children how to love  Jesus.    But why was she kneeling on the floor?   Why was there no kneeler for her and the children?    Many are now kneeling on the floor, but why is there no kneeler presented to them?   It all goes back to the 70's and 80's when our parish was turned upside down by anti-catholics who had discovered they had the Holy Spirit and were now in a position to take over the and build a New Church,   With the support of the then bishop and many priests, that the Sacred Species was indeed the Flesh of Jesus as the Early Church had claimed was dismissed.   Adoration had begun in the middle ages, despite the Orthodox Church which left the Roman Church in the 7th century being totally Eucharist then as it is today.   I have already written about how at one point neither the catholic school nor the Preparation for Holy Communion contained any mention of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament.   Then there was the heretical movement of the Presence of Jesus on the Altar to a side room or hidden, as it is in a nearby parish, in some scene about the Burning Bush, the sacred hosts were put at the metal base of the so called bush.   What was disturbing was the fantasy produced to permit this - that the people were the Body of Christ and we did not need the physical presence of Jesus to complicate things.  It was arrant nonsense, but I remember how a priest with no conscience said to the people "legislation in the Church is against having the tabernacle on the altar".   No such legislation exists, but the people did not know that, and were cruelly deceived by the priests they trusted.    I have heard that a priest in a neighbouring parish put the tabernacle back on the altar but after about four days it was put back in the burning bush, which I cannot definitely confirm, however if he did do it, I would not be surprised by the outcome, which is the point to which I will turn.

Despite having alienated children in schools to the extent that in a short period of time over 95 per cent no longer cared for religion, and indeed the diocese was losing over one thousand parishioners every year, something  I wrote to the then Bishop about, in the parishes themselves the empty seats were growing, the reformers never cared very much for the saying "By their fruits you will know them", and they carried on with their reforms.  Fewer practicing young people meant fewer priests and vocations so a scheme was set up where parishes were divided into pastoral areas which at a lecture I was told would mean that two priests could manage five or six parishes.   And of course we did not want foreign priests.   The whole diocese ended up in a mess, but one thing they did well was to ensure that their reforms would continue by the simple method of ensuring there were no more parish elections and people dedicated to the cause would continue to run things.  New priests were guided as to what they could and could not do.   Amazingly no Catholics gave them any trouble, well there is always one, and they could continue to ensure that teaching the Catholic Faith and following the teachings of Christ on adultery, divorce, and abortion, would be ignored while they were in charge.   Their New Church would continue.   Even Our Lady was smashed at one meeting, and many follow Mary Magdalen instead. 

So I did not go to the 'Synod' meetings.   For if there is to be 'honesty with one another' it must start with an elected Parish Council,