The terrible news from Haiti of the earthquake there has shocked us all; and you may know that the Archbishop is amongst the dead.
Rorate Caeli has a photo of what I presume is the Cathedral in ruins, which gives some idea of the scale of the disaster.
On a more personal note, though, I also received an email a short time ago asking for prayers for the members of the Dominican Secular Institute in Haiti :
'There are five of them, and we will be very anxious until we have heard what has happened to them. They are all in key situations, working with children mostly. Much will be asked of them in these tragic circumstances; we just pray that they will find the strength once more to respond to others, and that the world will help them. They need our support badly.'
If you've never been in an earthquake, I can only say that it is truly a unique experience. I've been in several - none of them particularly serious - in California and Japan, and I've seen a tarmac road ripple before my eyes like the surface of water; in a severe one, such as that in Haiti, the earth can literally tear apart, change shape, and then close again - all in a few seconds. As you may imagine, such an experience can be tremendously psychologically damaging; not only because of the obvious physical effects of the earthquake, but also because you are suddenly faced with the unarguable fact that the most basic of all premises - the idea that we live on 'solid ground' - is baseless, and that the earth is not actually stable at all; an experience which must, certainly in traumatic circumstances, be something of a challenge to one's faith in the whole order of things.
Please pray for the people of Haiti : not only for the dead, that they may rest in peace, but also for the living, that God may help them at this terrible time, and that they may not lose their faith in His love and mercy through the experience which they have suffered.
Wednesday, 13 January 2010
MGR GRAHAM LEONARD RIP
I understand that Mgr Graham's Requiem is at the Oxford Oratory at 11:30 on Thursday 21 January 2010.
I imagine that it will be a very crowded service; so it will probably be advisable to arrive early.
I imagine that it will be a very crowded service; so it will probably be advisable to arrive early.
Tuesday, 12 January 2010
LOOKING FROM THE INSIDE OUT
In last year's tribute to Cardinal Hume,* there is a quote about monastic life (which I think may be from Dom Guéranger) which I like : 'The true monk is the man who, while living apart from the world, has his heart in the midst of the masses'.
There is a tendency, I think, particularly nowadays, for people to conclude that religious - particularly contemplative religious - are people 'running away' from the world, misanthropes turning their backs on 'real life'.
My own perception is very much the opposite : contemplatives are those who love God, and their fellow men, so much that they want to devote themselves totally to them - and their withdrawal from the mundane things which take up so much of our 'ordinary' lives allow them to do that.
If you live in the world, it is so easy for trivia to overtake you, and overwhelm your time; for the banal to obscure the glory and grandeur of God. For the contemplative religious, with all these distractions ruthlessly cut away, there remains only God, and God's world; which means that these things can receive the attention they really deserve.
A Retreat is an opportunity for us all to share this clarity of vision, if only for a few days. Directed Retreats are fine; and for many who have little opportunity for 'spirituality' in any serious sense, this can be their one chance in the year to get some clear guidance on this important aspect of life : but I do think that there is a great deal to be said for having a Retreat which is as silent as possible, and which allows us time to appreciate the reckless generosity of God.
Then, deep in God's love, we can see the world more clearly, and see and understand not only what it means to others, but also our own place in it, looking - as it were - from the inside out, with a new and sharper vision.
* Basil Hume Ten Years On, ed. William Charles (Continuum, 2009)
In last year's tribute to Cardinal Hume,* there is a quote about monastic life (which I think may be from Dom Guéranger) which I like : 'The true monk is the man who, while living apart from the world, has his heart in the midst of the masses'.
There is a tendency, I think, particularly nowadays, for people to conclude that religious - particularly contemplative religious - are people 'running away' from the world, misanthropes turning their backs on 'real life'.
My own perception is very much the opposite : contemplatives are those who love God, and their fellow men, so much that they want to devote themselves totally to them - and their withdrawal from the mundane things which take up so much of our 'ordinary' lives allow them to do that.
If you live in the world, it is so easy for trivia to overtake you, and overwhelm your time; for the banal to obscure the glory and grandeur of God. For the contemplative religious, with all these distractions ruthlessly cut away, there remains only God, and God's world; which means that these things can receive the attention they really deserve.
A Retreat is an opportunity for us all to share this clarity of vision, if only for a few days. Directed Retreats are fine; and for many who have little opportunity for 'spirituality' in any serious sense, this can be their one chance in the year to get some clear guidance on this important aspect of life : but I do think that there is a great deal to be said for having a Retreat which is as silent as possible, and which allows us time to appreciate the reckless generosity of God.
Then, deep in God's love, we can see the world more clearly, and see and understand not only what it means to others, but also our own place in it, looking - as it were - from the inside out, with a new and sharper vision.
* Basil Hume Ten Years On, ed. William Charles (Continuum, 2009)
UNCERTAIN STANDARDS
Following through a post from Mulier Fortis yesterday evening, I ended up on Fr Ray Blake's blog which I hadn't visited for several days, and found an interesting post about a firm in India which makes vestments.
Actually, the post itself was only mildly interesting, as I already knew the firm : what was interesting was the comments about it, with most commenters seeming to be more interested than anything else in whether the employees were properly paid, and working in 'safe' conditions, and the need to check this before buying.
Now I'm not suggesting that it's acceptable for anyone, least of all the Church, to benefit from sweated labour, child labour, or deliberate recklessness about the lives and welfare of workers. It's not, and it never was - Revd Percy Dearmer, in the first edition of 'The Parson's Handbook' (a manual for ritualistically-inclined Anglicans published in 1899) inveighed against the purchase of vestments and other furnishings for Churches made by sweated labour; and indeed the Warham Guild, which he helped found in 1912, had as its avowed purpose 'the making of all the "Ornaments of the Church and of the Ministers thereof" according to the standard of the Ornaments Rubric, and under fair conditions of labour'. (My emphasis)
What concerns me is that there seems to me two risks in the approach which some of the commentators seemed to be advocating.
The first is the simple one that, because it is difficult to verify anything about what goes on in the back rooms of a business several thousand miles away, people may simply decide that it's 'too difficult', and just place their orders elsewhere : so that those workers are deprived of employment, and thus wages - and whatever they may be, they are still more than nothing.
The second is that there is an increasing tendency in the 'First World' to assume that our own standards can - and should - be applied to the 'Third World', without any sort of critical reference to their - rather than our - realities; and apart from being unrealistic, this is a form of arrogance.
I have been fortunate enough to spend a great deal of time in India; and I am therefore very familiar with the real costs of living there - not the costs that tourists see, but the real costs of shopping, and housekeeping, and maintaining ordinary domestic life; and I hope I also have a realistic appreciation of what constitutes a decent standard of living there.
I am well aware that there are many people who have incomes broadly similar to what they might have in the UK; and whose lifestyle is apparently similar to what they would have here.
However, that is grossly unrealistic as a comparator.
If I go to the restaurant close to my usual hotel in Delhi with a friend, a meal for the two of us will probably cost about £30 - £35 : which is broadly what we'd pay for a similar meal at the Indian restaurant close to where I live in London.
However, I could also go to a small local eating house, close by, and have an equally good meal - albeit in slightly less splendid surroundings - for about £3 for the two of us; and that, of course, is where the vast majority of Indians would eat, if they ate out. Again, I know from experience that £10 spent on shopping to cook at home will buy more food than four adults can eat in a long weekend.
Similarly, whilst in the UK at present we're very concerned about heating costs for the elderly, that's hardly a problem in India. In fact there are many millions of families in India who live on about £20 a week; and if that's not lavish, it's by no means destitution. Those who can afford to live at 'western rates' are, in fact, very rich; they are the equivalent of those who can spend £1,000 on dinner in London, or £250,000 on a car.
The other thing that I am aware of is that finding out anything concrete about such things as pay rates in India is nearly impossible; one can prove anything in India, given a short time, and for a modest price - I have little doubt that, for say £250, and given perhaps a week, I could produce appropriate (and apparently authentic) documentary evidence of my having been validly elected President of India !
I realized all these problems quite quickly after I started going to India; and had to do quite a lot of thinking about how to deal with them. Did I, for instance, give tips the size I would in the UK - which by Indian standards would be enormous - when I ate in 'tourist' restaurants ? Or did I give 'local sized' tips . . . after all, I didn't know whether the staff kept them; I might just have been paying for the Boss's new Mercedes.
In the end I came up with what I thought was a pragmatic solution, which I commend to anyone facing this sort of dilemma.
I spend the money, and hope that the workers are being properly treated. Also, I recognize that anything they get is better than nothing; and that many of the things I buy in the UK may well have been made by the same people, but without me knowing about it, anyway.*
At the same time, I pass on a percentage of what I have saved by buying at Indian prices to a suitable charity in India, which can ensure that the money goes to someone who really needs it. There are, for example, many religious Orders in India who do wonderful work, and can really make good use of anything I give them - which makes sure that, one way or another, spending my money there does do some concrete good . . . and not just to my wallet.
* This also leads to another question, which I shall deal with in a future Post - that of buying things which are made in countries with oppressive regimes, where your money is probably helping to support the regime more than the worker.
Following through a post from Mulier Fortis yesterday evening, I ended up on Fr Ray Blake's blog which I hadn't visited for several days, and found an interesting post about a firm in India which makes vestments.
Actually, the post itself was only mildly interesting, as I already knew the firm : what was interesting was the comments about it, with most commenters seeming to be more interested than anything else in whether the employees were properly paid, and working in 'safe' conditions, and the need to check this before buying.
Now I'm not suggesting that it's acceptable for anyone, least of all the Church, to benefit from sweated labour, child labour, or deliberate recklessness about the lives and welfare of workers. It's not, and it never was - Revd Percy Dearmer, in the first edition of 'The Parson's Handbook' (a manual for ritualistically-inclined Anglicans published in 1899) inveighed against the purchase of vestments and other furnishings for Churches made by sweated labour; and indeed the Warham Guild, which he helped found in 1912, had as its avowed purpose 'the making of all the "Ornaments of the Church and of the Ministers thereof" according to the standard of the Ornaments Rubric, and under fair conditions of labour'. (My emphasis)
What concerns me is that there seems to me two risks in the approach which some of the commentators seemed to be advocating.
The first is the simple one that, because it is difficult to verify anything about what goes on in the back rooms of a business several thousand miles away, people may simply decide that it's 'too difficult', and just place their orders elsewhere : so that those workers are deprived of employment, and thus wages - and whatever they may be, they are still more than nothing.
The second is that there is an increasing tendency in the 'First World' to assume that our own standards can - and should - be applied to the 'Third World', without any sort of critical reference to their - rather than our - realities; and apart from being unrealistic, this is a form of arrogance.
I have been fortunate enough to spend a great deal of time in India; and I am therefore very familiar with the real costs of living there - not the costs that tourists see, but the real costs of shopping, and housekeeping, and maintaining ordinary domestic life; and I hope I also have a realistic appreciation of what constitutes a decent standard of living there.
I am well aware that there are many people who have incomes broadly similar to what they might have in the UK; and whose lifestyle is apparently similar to what they would have here.
However, that is grossly unrealistic as a comparator.
If I go to the restaurant close to my usual hotel in Delhi with a friend, a meal for the two of us will probably cost about £30 - £35 : which is broadly what we'd pay for a similar meal at the Indian restaurant close to where I live in London.
However, I could also go to a small local eating house, close by, and have an equally good meal - albeit in slightly less splendid surroundings - for about £3 for the two of us; and that, of course, is where the vast majority of Indians would eat, if they ate out. Again, I know from experience that £10 spent on shopping to cook at home will buy more food than four adults can eat in a long weekend.
Similarly, whilst in the UK at present we're very concerned about heating costs for the elderly, that's hardly a problem in India. In fact there are many millions of families in India who live on about £20 a week; and if that's not lavish, it's by no means destitution. Those who can afford to live at 'western rates' are, in fact, very rich; they are the equivalent of those who can spend £1,000 on dinner in London, or £250,000 on a car.
The other thing that I am aware of is that finding out anything concrete about such things as pay rates in India is nearly impossible; one can prove anything in India, given a short time, and for a modest price - I have little doubt that, for say £250, and given perhaps a week, I could produce appropriate (and apparently authentic) documentary evidence of my having been validly elected President of India !
I realized all these problems quite quickly after I started going to India; and had to do quite a lot of thinking about how to deal with them. Did I, for instance, give tips the size I would in the UK - which by Indian standards would be enormous - when I ate in 'tourist' restaurants ? Or did I give 'local sized' tips . . . after all, I didn't know whether the staff kept them; I might just have been paying for the Boss's new Mercedes.
In the end I came up with what I thought was a pragmatic solution, which I commend to anyone facing this sort of dilemma.
I spend the money, and hope that the workers are being properly treated. Also, I recognize that anything they get is better than nothing; and that many of the things I buy in the UK may well have been made by the same people, but without me knowing about it, anyway.*
At the same time, I pass on a percentage of what I have saved by buying at Indian prices to a suitable charity in India, which can ensure that the money goes to someone who really needs it. There are, for example, many religious Orders in India who do wonderful work, and can really make good use of anything I give them - which makes sure that, one way or another, spending my money there does do some concrete good . . . and not just to my wallet.
* This also leads to another question, which I shall deal with in a future Post - that of buying things which are made in countries with oppressive regimes, where your money is probably helping to support the regime more than the worker.
Monday, 11 January 2010
FUMBLING FOR MEANING
I’m no exegete; and my Greek is long behind me, so I cannot make any useful comment on the original text – which probably means that the rest of this Post will serve only to advertise my ignorance, and excite the derision of scholars ! - but my attention was caught today by an injunction in the Second Reading in the Office of Readings – a passage from the First Epistle of Pope S. Clement to the Corinthians (1 Clem 59,4, to be exact).
It appears in the midst of a list of requests to God, all the rest of which make more-or-less good sense : ‘qui in tribulatione sunt, libera, humilium miserere, lapsos eleva, inopibus occurre, infirmos sana, errantes populi tui converte’.
Or (in the words of the Divine Office) ‘Deliver the afflicted, pity the lowly, raise the fallen . . . heal the sick, and bring home thy wandering people’.
All those are fine; it was ‘inopibus occurre’ which baffled me, as I took it to mean ‘occur to (possibly ‘meet’) those in need’; which really didn’t seem to make much sense.
The Divine Office gave me ‘Reveal thyself to the needy’; and subsequent enquiry (Deo Gratias for the internet !) in various translations of the Epistle found ‘Show thyself unto the needy’ (Lightfoot), ‘Appear to those who are in need’ (Hoole), and ‘Upon those in need, arise’ (Keith) – none of which left me very much the wiser.
All the rest of the requests made, as I say, good sense; but the suggestion that God might improve the lot of ‘those in need’ by appearing to them seemed to me to be rather less on a practical footing than (say) the suggestion that He ‘heal the sick’.
However, as I pondered it, I think I began to see a little more light.
The rest of the list only seems to be straightforward; possibly because of the reference to the sick, which appears obvious (coupled, perhaps, with the fact that this list is followed by another which begins ‘Feed thou the hungry . . .’).
In fact I think the rather curious phrase which caught my eye was the clue to the fact that these requests are the things which we ought to be asking God to do for us spiritually : not, in other words, to concern Himself (or rather, we ought not to concern ourselves) with temporal matters, but rather with spiritual ones.
Looked at in that light, the whole list not only makes sense as a list of individual petitions, but as a consideration of almost all the spiritual ills to which we are subject : affliction, lowliness, fallenness, neediness, sickness, and errancy.
Fallenness – the condition of being human, and afflicted by Original Sin – is the abiding lot of all of us; and whilst (with the assistance of the Grace of God) it is open to us to strive against that state, as it is inherent in us, it is also not something which we naturally perceive as a problem – hence the desire that God appear to us, to show us His glory, and thus inspire us to make use of the grace which He offers, and seek Him actively.
Indeed, as I thought, it occurred to me that ‘appearing to us’ is perhaps the greatest gift He can give us, as by doing so He not only offers us His grace, He also motivates us to accept and make use of it, and provides us with a target – His ineffable love – to aim for.
Perhaps that’s why the Lesson is today, the first day of Ordinary Time after the Epiphany Season when we have considered the three epiphanic events of Jesus’ life !
I’m no exegete; and my Greek is long behind me, so I cannot make any useful comment on the original text – which probably means that the rest of this Post will serve only to advertise my ignorance, and excite the derision of scholars ! - but my attention was caught today by an injunction in the Second Reading in the Office of Readings – a passage from the First Epistle of Pope S. Clement to the Corinthians (1 Clem 59,4, to be exact).
It appears in the midst of a list of requests to God, all the rest of which make more-or-less good sense : ‘qui in tribulatione sunt, libera, humilium miserere, lapsos eleva, inopibus occurre, infirmos sana, errantes populi tui converte’.
Or (in the words of the Divine Office) ‘Deliver the afflicted, pity the lowly, raise the fallen . . . heal the sick, and bring home thy wandering people’.
All those are fine; it was ‘inopibus occurre’ which baffled me, as I took it to mean ‘occur to (possibly ‘meet’) those in need’; which really didn’t seem to make much sense.
The Divine Office gave me ‘Reveal thyself to the needy’; and subsequent enquiry (Deo Gratias for the internet !) in various translations of the Epistle found ‘Show thyself unto the needy’ (Lightfoot), ‘Appear to those who are in need’ (Hoole), and ‘Upon those in need, arise’ (Keith) – none of which left me very much the wiser.
All the rest of the requests made, as I say, good sense; but the suggestion that God might improve the lot of ‘those in need’ by appearing to them seemed to me to be rather less on a practical footing than (say) the suggestion that He ‘heal the sick’.
However, as I pondered it, I think I began to see a little more light.
The rest of the list only seems to be straightforward; possibly because of the reference to the sick, which appears obvious (coupled, perhaps, with the fact that this list is followed by another which begins ‘Feed thou the hungry . . .’).
In fact I think the rather curious phrase which caught my eye was the clue to the fact that these requests are the things which we ought to be asking God to do for us spiritually : not, in other words, to concern Himself (or rather, we ought not to concern ourselves) with temporal matters, but rather with spiritual ones.
Looked at in that light, the whole list not only makes sense as a list of individual petitions, but as a consideration of almost all the spiritual ills to which we are subject : affliction, lowliness, fallenness, neediness, sickness, and errancy.
Fallenness – the condition of being human, and afflicted by Original Sin – is the abiding lot of all of us; and whilst (with the assistance of the Grace of God) it is open to us to strive against that state, as it is inherent in us, it is also not something which we naturally perceive as a problem – hence the desire that God appear to us, to show us His glory, and thus inspire us to make use of the grace which He offers, and seek Him actively.
Indeed, as I thought, it occurred to me that ‘appearing to us’ is perhaps the greatest gift He can give us, as by doing so He not only offers us His grace, He also motivates us to accept and make use of it, and provides us with a target – His ineffable love – to aim for.
Perhaps that’s why the Lesson is today, the first day of Ordinary Time after the Epiphany Season when we have considered the three epiphanic events of Jesus’ life !
THE POWER OF PRAYER
A very brief post : very late last evening I had an email from an old friend requesting prayers for a seven-year-old girl named Lottie Pink, who was diagnosed few days ago with a very serious Brain Tumour, and is having surgery today at Great Ormond Street.
Obviously we all pray that, if it is God's will, she is restored to full health; but what, for me, was the most notable thing was the responses from the person who emailed me, and from Lottie's parents, to the feedback from my 'Prayer Mafia' - the various friends and acquaintances to whom I forward such requests.
My friend is Catholic; so the only thing which really surprised her was the speed of the response, and the breadth of my acquaintance (and, I have to say, she was perhaps a little amused that the first two responses I received were from two very distinguished religious - one Jesuit, one Dominican !).
Lottie's parents, however, are not Catholic : and they received an eye-opening introduction to the willingness of the Faithful to accept other people's burdens, and to support them in prayer, which I hope will be a great source of strength to them in this troubling time.
A very brief post : very late last evening I had an email from an old friend requesting prayers for a seven-year-old girl named Lottie Pink, who was diagnosed few days ago with a very serious Brain Tumour, and is having surgery today at Great Ormond Street.
Obviously we all pray that, if it is God's will, she is restored to full health; but what, for me, was the most notable thing was the responses from the person who emailed me, and from Lottie's parents, to the feedback from my 'Prayer Mafia' - the various friends and acquaintances to whom I forward such requests.
My friend is Catholic; so the only thing which really surprised her was the speed of the response, and the breadth of my acquaintance (and, I have to say, she was perhaps a little amused that the first two responses I received were from two very distinguished religious - one Jesuit, one Dominican !).
Lottie's parents, however, are not Catholic : and they received an eye-opening introduction to the willingness of the Faithful to accept other people's burdens, and to support them in prayer, which I hope will be a great source of strength to them in this troubling time.
Saturday, 9 January 2010
TIMOTHY 1
Two separate - and very different - posts which I read yesterday eventually fused in my mind.
The first was by the inimitable Fr Mildew, who was discussing - inter alia - a recent article (in a periodical I will not deign to particularize) by fr Timothy Radcliffe OP; the second - in Godzdogz (actually dated January 6th, and headed 'Epipphany Snowfall') was what must surely be a very rare photo of fr Timothy engaged in the somewhat bizarre activity of being amused by a bear in the snow - at Blackfriars, Oxford !
fr Timothy's writings were a significant factor in bringing me home to the Catholic Church, and the article to which Fr Mildew refers is yet another example of his facility for hitting just the right nail exactly on the head at the crucial moment.
When I read Father's post, I went to the website of the periodical in question and read the article to which he had directed my attention; but then found that the first part, in the previous issue, was accessible to Subscribers only . . .
However, today - and in the somewhat unlikely surroundings of the Bishop of London's residence - I noticed a copy of the relevant issue of the loathsome rag on the side table; and having a few moments (and my gloves with me), was able to read the first part of fr Timothy's article, which gave me much further food for thought.
With considerable presumption, I commend the article mightily - although this should not be taken as any endorsement of its regrettable location !
TIMOTHY 2
However, fr Radcliffe is not the only famous 'Fr Tim' who has been conspicuous on the blogs in the last day or so, because Fr Tim Finigan (of 'The Hermeneutic of Continuity'), who is in Rome at the Clergy Conference, was selected to be the SubDeacon at the Pontifical High Mass celebrated yesterday in S. John Lateran by Cardinal Canizares Lovera - photos of which seem to be appearing all over the place ! (There is a splendid set on New Liturgical Movement, for instance.)
Obviously, being selected to be a Sacred Minister for a Pontifical Mass sung by the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship (in the Extraordinary Form, as well !) in the 'Mother and Mistress of All the Churches of the World' is an enormous privilege for Fr Tim : but I think it must also be seen as something of an accolade for Our Lady of the Rosary, Blackfen, his splendid Parish.
I rejoice with and for them all; and pray that Fr Tim's ministry - in all its many aspects - will continue to be richly blessed.
(At the same time, I'm grateful he was in Rome today, so that there was no risk of him seeing me with a copy of that periodical in my hands !)
Two separate - and very different - posts which I read yesterday eventually fused in my mind.
The first was by the inimitable Fr Mildew, who was discussing - inter alia - a recent article (in a periodical I will not deign to particularize) by fr Timothy Radcliffe OP; the second - in Godzdogz (actually dated January 6th, and headed 'Epipphany Snowfall') was what must surely be a very rare photo of fr Timothy engaged in the somewhat bizarre activity of being amused by a bear in the snow - at Blackfriars, Oxford !
fr Timothy's writings were a significant factor in bringing me home to the Catholic Church, and the article to which Fr Mildew refers is yet another example of his facility for hitting just the right nail exactly on the head at the crucial moment.
When I read Father's post, I went to the website of the periodical in question and read the article to which he had directed my attention; but then found that the first part, in the previous issue, was accessible to Subscribers only . . .
However, today - and in the somewhat unlikely surroundings of the Bishop of London's residence - I noticed a copy of the relevant issue of the loathsome rag on the side table; and having a few moments (and my gloves with me), was able to read the first part of fr Timothy's article, which gave me much further food for thought.
With considerable presumption, I commend the article mightily - although this should not be taken as any endorsement of its regrettable location !
TIMOTHY 2
However, fr Radcliffe is not the only famous 'Fr Tim' who has been conspicuous on the blogs in the last day or so, because Fr Tim Finigan (of 'The Hermeneutic of Continuity'), who is in Rome at the Clergy Conference, was selected to be the SubDeacon at the Pontifical High Mass celebrated yesterday in S. John Lateran by Cardinal Canizares Lovera - photos of which seem to be appearing all over the place ! (There is a splendid set on New Liturgical Movement, for instance.)
Obviously, being selected to be a Sacred Minister for a Pontifical Mass sung by the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship (in the Extraordinary Form, as well !) in the 'Mother and Mistress of All the Churches of the World' is an enormous privilege for Fr Tim : but I think it must also be seen as something of an accolade for Our Lady of the Rosary, Blackfen, his splendid Parish.
I rejoice with and for them all; and pray that Fr Tim's ministry - in all its many aspects - will continue to be richly blessed.
(At the same time, I'm grateful he was in Rome today, so that there was no risk of him seeing me with a copy of that periodical in my hands !)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)