tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30490922.post5132138851931372240..comments2008-08-16T15:08:38.939+01:00Joseph Shawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06587987442560784792noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30490922.post-2593981810357527032008-08-16T15:08:00.000+01:002008-08-16T15:08:00.000+01:00I believe in supporting our fellow Catholics in their legitimate complaints against their bishop over his handling of this: as traditionalists we have had plenty of experience of injustice and high-handedness from bishops, only to find other Catholics indifferent. Let us not perpetuate this 'I'm all right Jack' attitude'.<BR/><BR/>And the stripping of Fr Lawler of parish responsibilities would be grossly unjust without some very good explanation. We have the explanation, from the VG: Fr Lawler says the NO in Latin ad orientem. So much for the 'Reform of the Reform'!Joseph Shawnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30490922.post-674431195371939492008-08-15T19:54:00.000+01:002008-08-15T19:54:00.000+01:00Sorry, but this is the wrong battle.<BR/><BR/>The parish closure is nothing to do with the Latin Mass - otherwise why would the other parishes be being closed when they have only the NO in English?<BR/><BR/>Bishop Roache specifically sent two priests to Merton because he wants the EF in every deanery. Hardly the actions of someone who hates the mass.<BR/><BR/>As for Fr. Lawler, we must remember that not every detail about his ministry is in the public forum, not should it be. That matter should be strickly between a priest and his bishop, and Fr. Lawler should have kept it so - especially as Roache is bound by confidentially in regard to his priests. <BR/><BR/>We cannot assume to have all the details here.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com