Page 2, 20th May 1966

20th May 1966
Page 2
Page 2, 20th May 1966 — citts., porU s i 7 s

Report an error

Noticed an error on this page?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it.



Related articles

The End Of A Great Movement

Page 1 from 18th September 1959

What It Really Means To Be A Lay Apostle

Page 5 from 6th May 1966

Are The New School Plans Dangerous?

Page 5 from 6th August 1965

Murphy's Law Spells Congress Disorder

Page 4 from 9th May 1980

Fortunes Made Out Of Our Foibles

Page 4 from 23rd April 1993

citts., porU s i 7 s

Sir, — I hope Archbishop Murphy will forgive me for taking issue with him on the paragraph about the workerpriests in his article on the lay apostolate (May 6).

It is suggested there that the experiment of the workerpriests was a "tragedy" and that those heroic priests lacked in faith and piety. This is not quite the truth as I learned it from the many close friends I have among them.

While it is true that some left the Church in understandable impatience it is also true that the curial intervention which led, against the advice of the French hierarchy, to a harsh diminution ( not suppression) of this experiment was largely brought about by the efforts of a wealthy industrialist who was later sought by the police for fabricating plastic bombs on a large scale in order to assist the extreme right-wing in the Algerian question which led to unprecedented horrors committed by Catholic officers and soldiers who went to Mass on Sundays and shot Moslem patients in hospitals on weekdays.

Surely, the very fact that the Council reversed the decision should have made it clear to all of us that neither the experiment nor the priests who continued loyally under the guidance of their bishops though under a cloud of popular suspicion deserve to be dismissed so uncharitably and unfairly?

Theo Westow Salisbury, Wilts.

blog comments powered by Disqus