Perth Cathedral: “vaccine” – yes; Rosary – no.

Archbishop Timothy Costelloe of Perth has gone one step further than promoting the abortion-tainted gene serum: he has taken to supplying it through his Cathedral. So far, St Mary’s Cathedral has hosted two COVID-jab weekends; the last took place on January 8th and 9th.

Costelloe also said he has no objections to opening God’s house to the COVID cult any old time its high priests deem that necessary. The high priests – doctors from Royal Perth Hospital, the Western Australian Police Commissioner and the Vaccine Commander, Commissioner Christopher Dawson – encouraged His Grace to open his doors so that Perth’s Catholics can “stay safe” while they are fulfilling their Sunday obligation.

Staff from the Royal Perth hospital, getting ready to jab Catholics at the Cathedral. How do these people sleep at night?

“It’s an act of love”, the Freemason-friendly Archbishop Costelloe told media last year. “It’s for the common good.” Sure, if “common” means “everyone is doing it” and “good” means keeping the abortion industry in business.

“Abortion?” I hear you say. “But Archbishop Costelloe has assured us that these innoculations have nothing to do with abortion!” He has? Then His Grace is being somewhat untruthful.

There is some part of the community that is concerned that because the very early days of the development of the early discoveries which later led to the vaccines, there was some involvement of cells derived from aborted children. And of course, the Catholic Church’s position on abortion is very clear. …… [but it is licit] because of the remote nature of the origins of it and of the need to have it for the common good.

Archbishop Timothy Costelloe, PERTH CATHOLIC, Dec ’21.

Wow. Look at that attempt to distance the vex from abortion: “the early days of the development of the early discoveries which later led to the vaccines.” That certainly is something of a stretch.

Despite that obfuscation from His Grace, we know that Pfizer and Moderna used HEK cells at each stage of development. We also know that these Big Pharma companies lie – so they will only under-report the use of fetal cells, not over-report.

So, it hardly needs to be restated here that these experimental “vaccines” constitute proximate complicity with the grave evil of abortion, and not remote complicity, as the Archbishop would have us believe. The use of cells harvested from innocent children (sometimes while still alive) is not, as Costelloe suggests, confined to only one step in the drug’s development process way back in the dim, dark past.

As Children of God for Life remind us, “our obligation is to effectively oppose the use of aborted children in biomedical research” – not to go about jabbing initiates of the COVID cult.

The Cathedral’s Fr Fernandez getting his shot.
Does this……
… remind you of this?
….. or even of this??

Now, all of this is bad enough. But our Archbishop went above and beyond his usual pattern of ignoring Catholicism and embracing the world: he banned a group of faithful Catholics from praying outside the Cathedral while the jab clinic was open. (See the Facebook live video here – commentary begins around the 18 mins mark.)

According to the reporter, Cathedral security told the Rosary group, who had gathered to pray for the Church, that their prayers were considered a “protest.” The group were told that unless they stopped praying outside the building, the police would be called to move them on.

Imagine that: a Catholic Archdiocese would call police to move on Catholics who were praying. Unbelievable.

Strangely – and this really is odd: the Catholic group were given the alternative of praying inside the Cathedral grounds. So prayer inside the building is edifying while prayer outside the building is “protest”?

Apparently “conscience” is all well and good when it lines up with the right narrative. Should one’s conscience somehow not be invoked if it makes one oppose a prelate’s error? Then again, it wasn’t that long ago that Costelloe was throwing a Catholic school principal under the bus for refusing to get jabbed, so that tells us all we need to know about the post-conciliar canard of “conscience.”

Perhaps the only consolation in all of this is that the jabs weren’t given in the body of the church – so now the Cathedral parish centre can add “depopulation campaign” to the myriad occupations hosted there.

All smiles. But who foots the bill when a parishioner ends up with myocarditis? Or worse?

In an earlier article, I drew attention to the incongruence of many Catholics being only too willing to accept an invasive medical treatment at the behest of the Church, yet dismissing Church teaching on issues as important as birth control, because “celibate-men-have-no-right-to-tell-me-what-to-do” and, well, because babies are simply too much work. It’s that elastic “conscience” at work again.

Speaking of babies, we’ve all heard about “Safeguarding Children” and “Protecting The Most Vulnerable”. In fact, that’s about all we’ve heard from the Church for the past ten years – apart from the plethora of cultural Marxist talking points.

So now that the Western Australian government is pushing COVID-jabs on the 5-11-year-olds, will the clinic at St. Mary’s Cathedral soon be injecting children? If so, the Archbishop might want to get that Rosary group back to pray for him, pronto: when the children’s bodies start piling up, their parents are going to be far more vocal than those of the tiny little donor of HEK-293.

A Christmas Dog Whistle from Coleridge

 From the Merriam-Webster online dictionary: a ‘dog whistle’ is a coded message communicated through words or phrases commonly understood by a particular group of people, but not by others.

Writing about Archbishop Comensoli’s light-filled Christmas message brought back memories of Archbishop Coleridge’s very “enlightening” Christmas tidings of 2019. His 30 minute chat came in the form of a Facebook live event; I’m told some of the comments made at the time were quite confrontational – they no longer appear on the Facebook page, however.

A transcript of the most illuminative section is given below:

…The story of ancient Israel, very often, seemed hopeless, and time and time again, the Chosen People had to ‘rummage through the ruins’, as it were, in the search for a hope in the midst of what seemed to be a hopelessness.

And it’s really that ‘rummaging’ through a seemingly hopeless situation that generates the Bible that we have: a proclamation, not of a cheap hope, but a costly hope born always – and only – out of hopelessness.

And that’s why, in the beginning of the Bible, where we have the story of Creation, it begins in the darkness, the emptiness and the chaos. That’s always where the story of God-with-us begins. But this was the truth of ancient Israel’s history.

So that which is dark, empty and chaotic, that’s where we find – according to the Bible – real light, real fulness, and really, the order of God: the ‘great harmonics of love.’

Mark Coleridge, Archbishop of Brisbane, December 2019.

Now traditionally, the idea of ordo ab chao or “order out of chaos” is not a Catholic one, or even a Christian one: it is a Freemasonic idea.

Ordo ab chao is, in fact, the motto of the thirty-third degree.

There is more of this veiled Masonic language in the segment, too, like a reference to the “light at the heart of very darkness” when commenting on the push for euthanasia that was happening that the time.

Lux in tenebris is a Christian concept, of course; it is intrinsic to the message of Christ coming into the world for our redemption. But the phrase has been coopted by the Masons and other Gnostics and therefore serves well for the purposes of dog-whistling – especially when used by a bishop.

So, Masonic infiltrator or pious pastor? Well, that’s not for me to say.

But any bishop who mentions the “great harmonics of love” after suggesting that we have to “rummage around” to find God in our lives, is pretty suspect. Especially when, a couple of years down the track, he fires his priests for refusing to submit to that big old medical experiment we know only too well.

Brisbane Archdiocese’s Two Minutes Hate video

Remember the Two Minutes Hate from Orwell’s 1984? It was a regular, designated time allotted to giving the unfortunate inhabitants of Oceania an outlet for their pent-up frustrations so that their resentment was never aimed at the real abuser: their tyrannical leader, Big Brother.

Well, this offering from the Archdiocese of Brisbane might not count as hate, per se, but one has to admit that their “Blooper” video shows nothing but contempt and disrespect for the Sacred Liturgy and makes one wonder if comedy is being used to disguise the priests’ personal resentment toward their own, holy vocation.

Under the watchful eye of the papolatrous Mark Coleridge, who isn’t exactly known for his love of doctrine or tradition, the Archdiocese has sunk to a new low with the release of the two-minute video showing bloopers and gaffs made by priests during their online homilies. The cringeworthy video, which – even more embarrassingly has become an annual offering – features priests laughing, lisping and mocking the serious business of forming their flocks.

What some might consider a light-hearted wrap-up to a tumultuous year, in reality exemplifies the disdain harboured by much of the clergy towards tradition as well as the modern ecclesial obsession on celebrity, a phenomenon which disastrously runs contrary to the virtue of humility.

Above and right: here is how traditional priests show their love for God and man by taking their vocations seriously.

These modernists priests seem to think it’s “all about them.” THEIR style, THEIR humour, THEIR performance. There’s no doubt that people make mistakes, sometimes humorous ones, when speaking publicly and privately, but that’s no reason to make a joke out of a sacred liturgical action.

A harmless joke is when an 8-year-old draws a picture of Pontius Pilate flying a plane, but it is not harmless or a joke when a grown man dressed in priestly garb plays up to the camera and is then showcased by the diocesan media team.

The video can be viewed here: A couple of screengrabs are shown below, but I do recommend watching it with the sound up for the whole experience. The captions are from the video – not added by yours truly.

The baphomet hand gesture makes a nice touch.

It might be all “Lights! Camera! Action!” when it comes to entertaining the masses that are being “accompanied” to hell, but each of these men will have to account for his “darkness and inaction” at the hour of his death.

Meanwhile, all those actual priests – those men who take their vocations seriously – don’t have time for this kind of nonsense. They’re far too busy hearing confessions for hours each week, or dropping everything to administer the Last Rites to a dying parishioner, or answering unjust admonitions from their Ordinaries or carefully crafting a solid sermon based on the writings of the saints and the Fathers of the Church.

Religious freedom: mixed messages and cross-purposes

“It’s not fair.”

That was the plaintive cry from the Victorian hierarchy when the mean old state government announced that it will be making Catholic schools hire gay teachers.

“We stood up for you”, the Archbishop could be imagined to lament. “We shut our churches, we halted the First Blessing and the Last Rites; we stopped sanitising souls and started sanitising hands, just because you told us to. Heck, we even beat you to it!”

But instead of being grateful, bad Catholic Dan Andrews went full steam ahead with his pet project. Well, maybe that was always going to be the result when the Church set the bar so low by limiting Her mission to promoting “a fair and just society in which pluralism is valued and respected.” Sounds nice, but it’s just not Catholic.

From the Syllabus of Errors:

#15. Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion, which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true.

Allocution “Maxima Quidem”, June 9, 1862; “Damnatio Multiplices Inter”, June 10, 1851.

Now, of course, for the bishops it is totally fine if they choose to allow gay teachers in their schools. (Likewise cohabiting or atheist or communist teachers.) But it’s a different matter entirely when the State compels a Catholic Education Department to stop exercising its autonomy, right?

It might seem virtuous to complain, but where exactly were you for the last few decades when parents despaired because their children were not adequately being taught the Faith?

And, as the pages of this website document, there wasn’t a peep from the Archdiocese when Dan Andrews tried to go full Nazi last month with his Pandemic powers. So this hullabaloo over restrictions on schools is not entirely consistent.

The schizophrenic state of affairs continues with an email from the chancellor to the Archdiocesan clergy, meant to apprise priests of the new laws and bills around religious freedom. The email includes links to several articles which are meant to provide reference material for the clergy.

One article is the Archbishop’s glowing appraisal of the Federal government’s religious freedom bill. That bill certainly does seem to offer some protections for Catholic schools, and may prove useful as it could override the state government’s proposals, which are clearly discriminatory (in the bad way.)

Another article is by ex-Labor MP and now Executive Director of the National Catholic Education Commission, Jacinta Collins, who thinks the proposed Federal bill will provide some necessary protections. So far, so good: with her strong pro-life record, at least she is somewhat Catholic.

For further suggested reading, the chancery includes an article from John Haldane, Professor of Philosophy of Education at the ACU Melbourne on the Victorian government’s new law. Professor Haldane rightly condemns the law, observing “the extent to which … it would curtail the operations of many religious institutions, including schools, to a point where they would struggle to continue,” and its “unwarranted restriction on the idea of the ethical.” Great. There should be more of this.

But then who else does the Archdiocese haul out to opine on the Federal bill? None other than Frank Brennan, the Jesuit arch-heretic who was so public in his support of gay marriage. And the best ammunition he can muster to support his position on the bill is the UN declaration on Human Rights!

Well, come to think of it, the choice of Brennan as apologist might be rather apt: he is the perfect role model for all those parents who like their schools “Catholic, but not too Catholic.”

(And remember that little ol’ Plenary Council? Brennan is a peritus. Just one more reason why it’s difficult to take the Plenary seriously.)

But back to the Archbishop’s lauding and lamentations – here’s a little free advice:

Anyone who is really serious about a “free and open society”, giving people a “fair go”, and avoiding “un-Australian” behaviour, would not be banning priests from attending Freedom rallies or implementing segregation in their parishes.

They would not be sacking priests for educating their parishioners about harmful and immoral “vaccines”.

They would be financially supporting Catholics who are out of work because of vaccine mandates. (Although that won’t happen here, as the Melbourne Archdiocese is broke.)

But in an Archdiocese where Catholic students can attend a formal with their gay partner, where a public sinner like Premier Daniel Andrews can receive Holy Communion at a celebrity funeral, where a Catholic college persecutes students who don’t follow their LGBTI agenda, and where the process of amalgamating parishes is being deceptively promoted as non-amalgamation, consistency is obviously not its strongpoint.

Maybe that’s why it’s so hard for the hierarchy to understand that for a Catholic school to merit the right to employ the staff of its choice, that school would have to actually be Catholic, in ethos and practise.

Psst. Wanna buy a used Tabernacle?

Sounds a bit sleazy, doesn’t it? Well, not if you’re in the business of selling off valuable sacred objects as happened recently in country Victoria.

Ballarat’s Bishop Paul Bird decided to sell off one of the Diocese’s prized possessions – well, it obviously wasn’t that highly prized – the lovely old St Joseph’s church at Learmonth.

Apparently the Tabernacle went for the bargain price of only $900. Imagine that.

One’s blood is still boiling. That invaluable structure which held Our Lord’s Sacred Body for almost 150 years is now most likely a drinks cabinet in some entrepreneur’s man cave or worse, is being used for some nefarious purpose by satanists.

Have these bishops no shame at all?

That reminds me of a little joke, actually.

It’s a bit grim.

Do you get it?

Now maybe I’m being too cynical.

Perhaps a reader will let me know that a rigid young priest bought the tabernacle as he’s trying to tradify his basketball court of a sanctuary before the next Motu Proprio is released.

We live in hope.

The lovely old building was flogged off on December 7th, just one day before the end of the Year of St Joseph. At least some of its artefacts, including a statue of St Joseph, have ended up in a Melbourne church, which is something, I suppose, as the church is a Catholic one. Did the parish priest have to pay for those, I wonder?

Which is more sad? An empty Church …..
…. an empty sacristy…..
…. or a Tabernacle that’s about to be sold off to the highest bidder? (Or maybe it’s that Cranmer pool-table in the foreground.)

It wouldn’t be a surprise, if he did have to pay. The Diocese of Ballarat, which formerly owned St Joseph’s, has had money problems for some time. That’s what tends to happen when dioceses cover up the sexual abuse of children for decades then follow it up by convincing Catholics that Mass isn’t important anymore. The encore to such a performance is usually episcopal pearl-rattling when the finance department realises that without all those pious posteriors on seats, a diocese soon becomes insolvent.

Admittedly, St Joseph’s five parishioners were sad to see their church closed and sold off. One of them valiantly exercised the virtue of hope by suggesting that the building should become an art gallery.

And yes, that is, in fact, allowed under Canon Law, which states that a Church may be sold to someone who will not use it for any sordid reason.

Then again, that would depend on what kind of art is being displayed there, wouldn’t it?

After she was buried the priest came in—I was there alone. I don’t think he saw me—and took out the altar stone and put it in his bag; then he burned the wads of wool with the holy oil and threw the ash outside; he emptied the holy water stoop and blew out the lamp in the sanctuary, and left the tabernacle open, as though from now on it was always to be Good Friday. I suppose none of this makes any sense to you, Charles, poor agnostic. I stayed there till he was gone, and then, suddenly, there wasn’t any chapel there any more, just an oddly decorated room.

Evelyn Waugh, Brideshead Revisited

Why did the bishop buy the Lodge?

It sounds like a joke, does it not? But this is deadly serious. A Catholic Archbishop, in need of new premises for his admin offices, concluded that a Freemason’s Lodge would be the best location from which to preach, teach and sanctify his unwary flock.

This story might be a few years old now, but it’s still worth taking a closer look.

Timothy Costelloe was installed as Archbishop of Perth in 2012, and in August 2015 purchased a $7 million property in Perth’s CBD from which to run the Archdiocese. The property, 249 Adelaide Terrace was owned by the Grand Lodge WA and had been used as their headquarters. Who knows what kind of deal was struck, but the bishop got quite a bargain as he paid half a million less than the amount paid by the Masons when they bought the property six years earlier.

Before and after shots of 249 Adelaide Terrace, Perth. Pictures with Archdiocesan signage are pretty thin on the ground, so if any reader can supply, I’d be most grateful.

Now it is somewhat strange for a Catholic institution to take over a Masonic temple – especially in these days when our bishops seem only too willing to “dialogue and accompany” the Masons. In fact, there could be one of only three reasons why a bishop would make this decision:

1. Extreme piety: despite exorcists claiming that it is sometimes impossible to cleanse a geographical site from demonic influence, the bishop is confident that he can enlist all the powers of the Church (exorcism, prayers of liberation, sacramentals, Masses) to free the site and use it to further the mission of the Church.

2. Ignorance: the bishop’s formation was so dumbed-down that he sees Masonry as no threat to Catholicism; he thinks it’s nothing more than a social club for men intent on growing their virtues.

3. He is a Mason and wants to access the power that comes from the dual processes of mocking God (by moving Church offices into a former temple) and of tapping into the rituals that have been performed there.

Hopefully it’s number 2, although that doesn’t minimise the risk to the Archdiocese. (Number One is out of the question – this is Australia, remember?) So what is known about Archbishop Costelloe? Does he have any form as a Mason or Masonic sympathiser?

Well, he says he is against child abuse (don’t they all?) but followed his predecessors’ footsteps by covering it up (ditto) – even though he has “seen the anguish” first hand. He says enforced celibacy causes priests to abuse children but then sacked a priest for breaking his vow of celibacy. (Obviously, the action taken by His Grace was appropriate, however, it does seem a tad inconsistent with his stance on celibacy….) The Archbishop is also involved with a few legal battles with his priests, not to mention whispers of his utter contempt for the more orthodox ones.

But at least he honours the ancestors, right?

He has even opted not to stick up for a Catholic school principal who is against the state government’s vaccine mandates. Instead of lauding that man, Archbishop Costelloe distanced himself from the principal, saying that he was “deeply disappointed.”

Yes, your Grace, it is always disappointing when a layman shows up the clergy’s lack of conviction by demonstrating his own.

So now, having looked briefly at some poignant items from the bishop’s CV, let us return to the title of this piece: why DID the bishop buy the Lodge?

All things considered, could the answer possibly be: to get to the Other Side?

Another Stasi Bishop in Queensland

Another Queensland bishop has come out in favour of the state government’s COVID tyranny, promising to help Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk to stem another “wave” of the “pandemic” in any way possible. 

The bishop of Townsville, Timothy Harris, publicly shared the pastoral letter he had written in support of the globalist medical experiment. Apparently unaware of either the Australian Constitution’s prohibition on forced medical treatments or of the Nuremberg Declaration’s ban on human experimentation, the bishop has urged Catholics to submit to being inoculated with gene serum “out of love.”

The letter contains more than a few white lies, such as that the “disinformation about vaccines is decreasing vaccination rates and increasing deaths.” Wonder if he has any evidence to back up that one?

“We are running out of time before the wave of infection hits Queensland”, says he. Hmmm, it’s almost as if he received preternatural knowledge of the frightfully unscary new variant, Omicron.

With unfettered irony, Bishop Harris posted his letter to social media, noting that “social media is not a reliable source of information about vaccines.”

Well, he got that right.

A look at the bishop’s Twitter feed reveals a few of his interest …. Laudato Si …. Jesuitical arch-heretic Frank Brennan …. and many tweets critical of euthanasia legislation.

Now this says nothing in the bishop’s favour: it is something fairly common for most prelates these days. Their pre-occupation with euthanasia can be contrasted with their almost total silence on abortion. Maybe our ageing clerics believe assisted suicide constitutes a personal threat to their own wellbeing whereas abortion does not.

It’s difficult to stem the cynicism when anti-euthanasia comments are interspersed with pro-vaccine ones: pushing adherence to the tyrannical gene-serum regime is in effect pushing a form of assisted suicide. One wonders how the bishop feels about the need for VAD patients to be jabbed before their last goodbye?

At least it appears that he approves of rigidity.

As an aside, Bishop Harris happened to share an image which I hadn’t previously come across: it appears to show Pope Francis in front of an art installation in St Peter’s Square. I suspect that the artwork was created to represent the reforms achieved by the Pope over the last eight years.

No doubt the green tarp to the Pope’s rear represents the “inscrutable dream of the God of Surprises” or perhaps the “poetic mystery of the Synodal process”.

Back to Bishop Harris. The image below was taken from the Bishop’s Facebook page (where his entire Pastoral Letter can also be viewed.) The photograph was taken at the Queensland Law Year prayer service, where according to the bishop, “Key judges and magistrates and other members of the legal fraternity gather each year.”

The bishop’s hand gesture is quite intriguing. It looks remarkably like a common occult gesture related to Thelema Magick and which is used by world leaders such as Angela Merkel – but of course, that must be a coincidence.

Definitely a coincidence.

Speaking of coincidences, a victim of historical sexual abuse at the hands of a priest received an apology from this very bishop in June of this year – only THREE years after she first sought his help. That must be some kind of record.

Admittedly, the Townsville Diocese had covered up the priest’s abuse for a mere twenty years, a fact which Bishop Harris lied about to the complainant by saying that immediate action had been taken when the complaints started rolling in.

So although Bishop Harris was not responsible for the coverup (leaving the priest at his post to abuse 22 victims over two decades) he lied about when the Church first knew about the abuse. As icing on the cake, the archivist from the Diocese has stated that somewhere along the way, evidence of the case was destroyed.

However, we may be able to take some comfort from that apology. Judging by the Bishop’s track record, vaccine-injured Catholics (if, indeed, they are still alive by then) may expect an apology in around twenty years’ time. Just expect some lies and deception along the way.

Persecuted Christians and Digital Passports.

Last night was Red Wednesday, and an annual liturgy honouring persecuted Christians was unironically held at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in Melbourne. By all accounts, the evening went off without a hitch.

Non-vaccinated Catholics knew their place and waited outside until it was clear that the government-mandated quota for “undeclared status” had not been reached and they were allowed to enter the building.

(Under current Victorian health-paranoia policies, only fifty people can be present inside a church building if even one refuses to give their vaccination status to the authorities – this applies regardless of the size of the building.)

As light rain began to fall, the unclean swapped stories about which shops they had been thrown out of that day and of the buses in which they had been made to sit in the back. Apparently they felt quite privileged to have been allowed to answer their calls of nature without the need to show proof of vaccination. (Archbishop Comensoli might want to install a QR code reader in the bathrooms to see that it doesn’t happen again.)

A conscientious security guard initially prohibited entry to the unmasked as well. When they promptly knelt on the steps to pray, the somewhat shocked guard relented and advised them that they could enter sans masks. It was a real blessing that Catholics who put their faith in God were, in the end, allowed to worship with those who put their faith in gene therapy, mandates, QR codes, digital passports and the like.

Priests and laity representing various Eastern Rite Catholic groups and migrant groups were in attendance; for some reason there was no priest representing non-vaccinated Catholics. (Word on the street is that not quite all of Archbishop Comensoli’s faithful priests have handed in their resignations as yet. He really needs to try a bit harder, as despite his best efforts, some have managed to persevere by uniting their sufferings with those of the Crucified One.)

Reliable reports indicate that the evening was very prayerful and that an Iraqi priest’s homily about his experiences of persecution made a deep impression on all present. His suffering was tangible but thankfully, his faith was intact. God bless him.

Some present wondered if the persecution of Christians in his country began with closure of the churches, segregation of the populace or forced detention of Indigenous citizens. But that really is a stretch of the imagination.

Afterwards, outside the Cathedral, the conversation turned to tares and wheat, and one mean, old Trad suggested that it might be time for the Church to introduce Her very own app to be used to indicate worthiness for reception of Communion.

I’ve developed the idea here. Call it a Digital Ecclesial Passport, (DEP) if you will. Parish priests could outline their DEP policies in their weekly bulletins in this way:

Please note that it is a condition of entry to our Communion Queue (CQ) that parishioners show their Digital Ecclesial Passport (DEP) with positive proof that they are in a state of grace. Your DEP must be linked with your medical records indicating that you are not currently using artificial birth control and have not previously undergone a vasectomy, tubal ligation or in vitro fertilisation. [Exemptions apply for those who are truly repentant and have made adequate reparation for their grave sin/s.]

Please ensure that your DEP is also linked to the Diocesan Records Department, showing either a “Single” or “Regular Marriage” status, as those cohabiting or in irregular marriages will not be allowed into the CQ.

Politicians and other prominent civic personalities will require additional proof of their “Ability to Receive Holy Communion” status. Those in this category will need to link their DEP to the “How They Voted” portal, and anyone with a score of less than 99.99% on matters of morality (including but not limited to, abortion and assisted dying legislation) will be declined entry to the CQ. Note that exemptions claimed under the “I’m a Catholic, but ….” clause are invalid.

The parish priest reserves the right to exclude from the CQ those whose passports do not show:

* sufficient preparation for reception of Holy Communion

* attendance at the Sacrament of Confession after participation in mortal sin

* belief in the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Sacred Species

NOTE: Please consult the Dress Code tab on your app for information on appropriate clothing required for entry into my church.

Parents of school-age children must be able to prove that they have made tangible attempts to raise their children in the Catholic Faith before admission into the CQ. Those who allow their children to attend diocesan-based Catholic schools must be able to show proof that their chosen educational provider is not detrimental to their children’s faith and wellbeing. (Good luck with that one lol)

your PP.

It definitely shows promise.

DEPs for clerics would need some extra tweaks. Maybe a “Proof of non-involvement in Vatican Bank investments” certificate and evidence that a Grindr app had not been activated within 48 hours of celebration of the Sacraments?

The app would be free, of course, although some savvy IOR official could come up with a paid version that tracks indulgences and converts them to Bitcoin for a small fee. What could possibly go wrong?

Hmmm. On second thoughts, maybe it wouldn’t take off. Catholics simply wouldn’t allow that kind of persecution and segregation to take place in their churches.

Parents would have to start taking responsibility for their children’s formation and we all know that’s the obligation of the non-Catholic teachers with their heretical catechesis programs. And as for the dress code? Most Catholics don’t like being told what to wear – unless they’re asked to wear a mask. Masks do cover a multitude of sins, you know. (They don’t cover cleavage very well, but are known to prevent small sins of transmission.)

Better to keep things as they are, with all and sundry allowed to partake of the Holy Eucharist whenever they attend Mass. Even those pesky non-vaccinated Catholics should be able to attend, providing, of course, that the government allows it.

Divine Wreckovation in Melbourne

The following letter is being circulated among the clergy of the Melbourne Archdiocese and reveals the brewing discontent regarding Archbishop Comensoli’s plan to restructure his territory. While priests and parishioners are being assured that this is not an amalgamation process, there really is no other way to describe it.


Dear Brother Priest Do you share my concern at the Archbishop’s newly announced plan to divide up the parishes?

The propaganda. The first thing that smells is the massive propaganda effort underway to sell it. It’s led by “Ron Huntly Leadership Coaching” (Sounds like something from California.) People are being trained up to spread the good news by reading prescribed hand-outs. The ones I’ve heard sound like scripts from The People’s republic of North Korea. Clearly, it’s the best thing to hit us since the Ascension. Even the name of the programme is a propaganda steal – ‘The Way of the Gospel’ (The WOG). I’m glad I’ve finally found the way of the Gospel. My days are running out so its just in time.

The Proposals.

The first part of the plan is to make the parishes more missionary in focus and not rely on maintenance. Nothing wrong with that. Although where parishes have strong congregations, mainly in the outer suburbs, some maintenance is in order. If we don’t help these people keep the faith, Catholicism in Australia is finished.

The second part of the plan is to divide the diocese into zones comprising three of four parishes joined together in one big parish called a ‘mission’. One priest will be in charge of each big parish, he will be called a ‘moderator’. He has all the authority and power over the ‘mission’ district. The other priests, known as Priests in Solidum (PIS), are from the other three parishes in the zone. What happens to them? What is their status?

What’s the problem? We are running out of priests and people. Something has to be done.

The Diocese of Melbourne is somewhat schizo. In the older parts, closer to the city, the Faith is dying. The upper middle class areas, The Camberwells, the Kews, and along the beachfront from Mentone to Gardenvale, once thriving parishes are now largely empty. Likewise, the inner city or yuppie areas. On the other hand, in the outer suburbs, in mainly immigrant areas, the parishes are thriving with viable congregations. The solution for the inner suburbs has been to put one priest in charge of half a dozen parishes. The Archbishop says these experiments are going well. (Not what I’ve heard.) But now, the Archbishop has decided to extend this experiment to the whole of the diocese, willy-nilly. That’s the problem. The parishes have been divided up, into threes or fours, and a priest, a Moderator, put in charge of each conglomerate. Parish priests will become helicopter priests, boundary riders, or fly-in-fly-out priests – whatever metaphor you use, it’s clearly a betrayal of the diocesan priesthood and the deep bond such priests develop with the people of the parish where they live. The laity in these parishes, great Mass-goers still, are seething because they see the spectre of priest-less parishes. They’re not wrong.

The consequences of the Comensoli plan

Short term What happens to the other parish priests in the mission zone? They are to be called Priests in Solidum (PIS priests) and as such they will be subordinate to the Moderator (If this is not the case, the Comensoli plan is no different to the old, deanery boundaries. And it is clearly meant to be more than that.) For centuries the basic structure has been the parish priest and his bishop. Now, under the new plan, it will be parish priest, Moderator, and bishop. Three our of every four parish priests have been demoted, made second class parish priests and indeed, redundant – solemn guarantees about us being parish priest(s) “in law with the same rights, responsibilities, and stability” notwithstanding.

Long term In time, when the PIS parish priests retire, die, or move on they will not be replaced. The Moderator priest will become the only parish priest in the missionary zone as was intended from the beginning.

Longer term The question will arise as to who looks after the parish with the PIS parish priest gone. Who will administer the place, and give day to day pastoral care? Obviously, lay people will be appointed. Mr and Mrs, or perhaps just Mrs “parish priest” in the presbytery. A Melbourne-produced video on Youtube (since taken down) admonishes Catholics to pay them a decent salary so they “can feed their family”. Fair enough; it’s basic social justice. There’s just one question – is the Comensoli plan Catholic?

Why was this decision taken?

Property. Perhaps we have to sell lots of property. This plan is just a long way of freeing up property for sale. There should be a discussion about it. Catholic schools no longer serve to hand on the Faith to our children. Sell them, not the parishes.

Shortage of priests. The probable reason. This plan will only make it worse. The helicopter priest will inspire no one. We used to bring in priests from overseas and were doing so until recently. A great success. They are wonderful priests, loved by our people. We have depended on overseas priests for most of our time in Australia. At the very beginning it was the English Benedictines. Then for the next 150 years it was the Irish. Now it’s the Indians. Glory be to God.

Extremist theology. Some extremist theological views have long advocated priest-less parishes.

What can we do?

We must do all we can to fight back. Make sure our people hear the other side to the issue, not just the propaganda version. Archbishop Comensoli says he has the Canon Law aspect all tied up and so is impervious to pleas and petitions. I saw on the internet a video about the diocese of Detroit (if not that, a major diocese in the US). There they introduced the same plan, calling the new divisions not zones but ‘families of parishes’. The priests fought back fiercely for their rights, appealed to Rome. They won. I am old enough to have known the great priests of the past here in Melbourne. What marvellous men. What holy men. They would have fought this new plan of Dr Comensoli with every fibre of their pastoral souls. Let’s follow suit. These men fought the introduction of modern catechetics into our schools in the 60s and 70s. They lost that battle. We know the result – generations of young Catholics totally ignorant of the Catholic Faith, the practice of which they continue to abandon in droves. Don’t let us lose this current battle. Pray, Protest, Publicise. It’s a fight to save the Church.

A Melbourne priest.

The laity have also begun to push back against Comensoli’s plans, organising a group involving dozens of parishioners from various parishes. That group recently held a meeting which came to the conclusion – one which is obviously not lost on the clergy – that the Archbishop has provided a flawed solution without examining the fundamental question.

That question is: precisely WHY are parishes dying??

(HINT: the Bishops have not been doing their job. For quite some time.)

However, all that can be whitewashed by throwing around a few catch-all words like Discernment and Mission. As almost everyone outside of the Archdiocese machine knows well, ‘discernment’ is only valid if the pathway discerned is in the line with an Archbishop’s own proposal!

As an aside, a quick search of Ron Huntley Leadership Coaching unearthed a few interesting tidbits. Ron Huntley hails from Canada – not a bad guess on the part of our anonymous priest above. He has been involved in the Divine Renovation movement, promoting Alpha, which is either good or bad, depending where you sit on the tradition scale. (If you’re a charismatic Modernist, then that would be a ten. If you’re a TLM attendee, that would be a score of -1.)

Huntley’s first job was as a sales rep for PFizer (!!!!) but I suppose we shouldn’t hold that against him. You can check out his LinkedIn profile here. It seems that Ron Huntley is currently holding Zoom conferences with selected members of the Archdiocesan clergy, training them for their role in Comensoli’s Brave New Archdiocese.

According to the CAM website, the Archbishop began consultation with his clergy about the ‘Way of the Gospel’ in March and April 2021. But here is part of a talk given by Ron Huntley in Melbourne in 2018, the topic of which was “Developing a healthy parish culture”. Perhaps Archbishop Comensoli’s plans have actually been in the pipeline far longer than he is letting on?

(And by the way, Your Grace, “consultation” usually involves ASKING people for their opinions, not TELLING them what you have decided to do to their beloved parishes.)

Just one more thing about Ron Huntley: he says he can detect the toxicity-level of a parish culture very quickly and presumably, he can do the same with dioceses. Maybe it’s time he paid another visit to the Archdiocese of Melbourne; it wouldn’t take him long to see that the toxicity-levels are off the charts.

Who needs the Stasi when we have the bishops?

Another Australian bishop has been throwing his pandemic-acquired weight around, this time in sunny Queensland. Mark Coleridge, Archbishop of Brisbane, has decided to collaborate with the tyrannical state government by forcing his priests to get vaxxed or risk losing their faculties.

The Catholic Premier of Queensland, Annastacia Palaszczuk, affectionately known as “Stasi,” has found a willing ally in the Archbishop of Brisbane. Like Daniel Andrews and his “good Catholic grandfather”, Palaszczuk has fond memories of her Polish grandparents with their “eight photos of Pope John Paul II in the living room.” Also like Daniel Andrews, Palaszczuk is left-wing, pro-abortion, pro-euthanasia and has been autocratically bullying her subjects into following a raft of COVID mandates, including barely-voluntary vaccination.

While the two State Premiers have much in common, it is remarkable to likewise observe some similarities between Archbishops Coleridge and Comensoli: the latter fancies himself to be the Australian incarnation of John Paul II, while the former was, at one stage, the Polish Pontiff’s speech writer. But unlike JPII, neither Archbishop seems to have the strength nor the will to stand up against their secular leaders’ repressive regimes.

Despite demanding that his priests are double-vaxxed with toxic gene serum by December 15th (“Clergy not doubly vaccinated are failing in their duty to care for the faithful”), the good Archbishop states that he respects his priests’ consciences.

“I too have a conscience”, says he. At least, that’s what he tries to convince them of in his four-page letter, reproduced below.

For the time-poor, the short version is: “You have to listen to me since I am the CEO of the Archdiocesan Corporation.”

The CEO, whose hobbies include holding Zoom meetings with his staff of one.
The Stasi, seen here throwing a totally innocent Illuminati-inspired hand signal.

Yes, that’s right. The Archdiocese of Brisbane is a Corporation, so as well as owing obedience to their Ordinaries, priests must also now submit themselves to medical trials at the behest of their CEOs. From the letter:

I recognise that having a vaccination, including the COVID-19 vaccination, is a matter of personal choice. However, I am the sole member and officer of the Archdiocesan Corporation which in civil law is the employer of Archdiocesan staff, including those working in parishes. I am therefore bound to take seriously compliance with health directions. Further, I have a legal obligation to ensure that the Archdiocesan Corporation meets its workplace health and safety obligations….

Oooohhh. Civil AND legal obligations. But no moral ones?

The Archbishop goes on to make some sophistic claims about his duty to protect his priests, his priests’ duty to protect their parishioners and everyone’s duty to protect unborn babies from medical experimentation – oops, sorry! – he didn’t actually write that last bit because Australian bishops no longer believe in minor obligations like upholding Catholic teaching.

Coleridge did include some extracts from Canon Law which is always guaranteed to make a prelate look more credible. The fact that those Canons are twisted and misapplied is neither here nor there. (He is a CEO with Obligations, remember!)

Just take a look at the penalties Coleridge has prepared for the non-compliant priests, who are, no doubt, some of his most holy and orthodox men: the cessation of their public ministry or worse – suspension of their faculties.

In circumstances where a priest or deacon has not complied with paragraph 1 above by 15 December 2021, I will be asking that he voluntarily stand aside from pastoral duties in his parish and from all pastoral ministry until he has been fully vaccinated. Should a priest or deacon in such circumstances decline to stand aside voluntarily, I will need to consider the temporary suspension of faculties until he fully complies..

Does the Archbishop not realise that unvaccinated Catholics (and probably many vaccinated ones) have no problem at all with being ministered to by an unvaccinated priest? The letter continues with a tirade about medical exemptions, and makes no provision for conscientious objection – or for objecting to His Grace’s conscientiousness!

Now, it really comes as no surprise that Archbishop Coleridge has agreed to do the government’s bidding. As President of the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference – that same Bishops Conference which in 2017 approved Catholics to be Freemasons – he is more than familiar with handshake deals and fraternal cooperation. Coleridge is not even averse to using Brisbane’s churches for sexually-explicit entertainment or from pushing an heretical agenda at his pet project, the Plenary Council.

However, there may be just a little hope for Brisbane’s faithful, unvaccinated priests. It seems Archbishop Coleridge can sometimes be quite lenient when it comes to his pastors breaking the law – at least, it depends on what kind of law is being broken. If it is something on the scale of child sex abuse, he seems to be able to turn a blind eye. He can even enlist help from his pal Cardinal Cupich when the need arises. But something tells me that his unvaxxed priests will not be so fortunate.

In case there’s any doubt left as to what kind of prelate we are dealing with, here’s Archbishop Coleridge’s take on “synodality.” Given that it was St Charles Borromeo who risked contracting the plague to ensure that all Catholics had access to the Sacraments, Archbishop Coleridge unironically uses the patron saint of facing-down pandemics to promote heresy, all the while shirking his own responsibility to safeguard the souls of his flock.

The hermeneutic is strong in this one.