Archdiocese of Toronto - Mass attendance falling off the cliff!

St. Michael's Cathedral, Toronto

Multiple reports indicate a worsening crisis for the Archdiocese of Toronto. Since 2016, Sunday mass attendance has fallen by over 30% to a typical attendance level of 9%. The decline began in 2016 but fell off the cliff with Thomas Cardinal Collins's "No Mass for You" policies and bedding down with corrupt authoritarian governments in 2020 and 2021. All of this was predicted, and they were warned, and still they did it.

There is no indication that any of the senior priests or episcopal leadership have a plan to reverse the trend. The "new springtime" is a bleak winter, and parish closings will be on the agenda. At the same time, bishops live in new, multi-million dollar real estate rather than rectories. They are not familiar with the smell of the sheep. They all have their own Casa Santas now. At least the real estate value will grow.

Yet, their rage is not at the reality of numbers or for their own failings but directed at those who expose it. The problem in the Catholic Church in Toronto began long ago. They were and are more concerned about the body politic than the Body of Christ. They have turned the Church here into a desolate city. There is no dialogue of trust, notwithstanding all the talk on listening.

They can't handle the truth. 

The truth? You can't handle, the truth!

A look back at The Desolate City of the Archdiocese of Toronto and a lost "Dialogue of Trust"

 

This post has been coming for quite a while. I have mulled over it, slowly editing, transcribing, and cleaning up what I have found for publication. The events blogged about earlier this week (the sexual assault lawsuit against Thomas Rosica) have caused me to consider it again. Therefore, I have made the decision to publish what follows. 

The purpose of this publication is to document an occurrence forty years ago and provide a historical record of certain activities at St. Augustine's Seminary in the Archdiocese of Toronto and the corruption of the times, the power and influence from the 1980's which are still being felt today. One of the priests featured below is retired, yet, as recently as a few months ago, remained on the Archdiocesan Priests Council. This is not an accusation of anything untoward on the part of the new Archbishop, now Cardinal Francis Leo, Indeed, this history may likely be news even to him and if this provides any service to him, to know the history and the rot and expose those who have worked against the faith, then that alone is worth its publication. The Catholic faithful of the Archdiocese of Toronto have a right to be aware of things that happened forty years ago that have long been forgotten or covered up and still affect the Church today. Many think that we have had no crisis of sexual perversion or abuse. This is not true. What we have is enough money to buy off the victims and force them into signing non-disclosure agreements.

Let me raise some points without names of scandals that happened here.

• A certain highly placed cleric, a Monsignor, in the chancery, fathered at least two children whilst in his high clerical office of Chancellor of Spiritual Affairs and Vicar General. What became of the mother?
• A priest professor at St. Augustine's Seminary raped and sodomized a young seminarian so badly that he was taken away by ambulance to repair the anal rupture. Years before, the Cardinal at the time, Aloysius Ambrozic, was told to get rid of him, to which he responded. "I have nobody else to teach liturgy." That injured seminarian was later ordained in the United States where he remains in a religious order. He was ordained by a Toronto Auxiliary Bishop in Washington. Odd, no? Police were not called. Charges were not laid. The crime was never reported. It was covered up. The perpetrator is now dead and judged.
• That same priest professor in a former post as a religious order prior was a pastor in a Mississauga (west of Toronto) parish and could very well be responsible for at least two other priests he may have "groomed." One of these is an openly homosexual man who left the priesthood, played the piano as a lounge singer, married a woman, divorced her and now lives in a same-sex relationship with another man. The other, whose theology and priestly formation skills were warped by the 1960's and the radical and false "spirit of Vatican II",  was, in 1976, Toronto's own James Martin of his day. He rose to rank as Rector of St. Augustine's and later Judicial Vicar. You will read about him below. Both of these men were formed as youth or young priests under that same Friar in Mississauga.
• A certain "hunk" of a Monsignor with the same Irish surname as a then Toronto Police Chief was frequently brought home to the Rosedale mansion of Cardinal Carter, "daddy," drunk and in drag from the gay district on Church Street.
• Another priest professor at the seminary was known to fondle young men and worse and was found coming out of the St. Charles Tavern on Toronto's Yonge Street and bragging about it in secular media.
• Several deaths of priests and professors from AIDS.

In the photo of a book page above, the late Anne Roche Muggeridge refers to a document called, "A Dialogue of Trust." It was written by the then Rector referred to above, who was fired for it, sent away to the Catholic University of America in Washington to study and then returned to the Archdiocese of Toronto and served at a senior level in the chancery structure as the Judicial Vicar. All true. He kept the keys to the vault on matters such as lawsuits, assaults and abuse. As referred to earlier, as of a few months ago, he still remained on the priests' council. As a point of personal reference, I actually attended his first Mass at St. Domenic's in Mississauga. My father was the family barber. 

These crimes and abuses happened in the age before the internet and search engines. The money of the Archdiocese silenced who it had to and forced non-disclosure agreements upon them. Stories abound about car accidents and bicycle accident deaths, one in particular of a prominent priest, but none can be proven. All of the information above has been given to me by priests of the Archdiocese of Toronto. They know. Some know more than others. All has been covered up and all the names are known. As for the letter referred to by Anne Roche Muggeridge, nobody had a copy of "A Dialogue of Trust."  It disappeared into history, it was never written, it didn't exist, nobody had it, and it was not published and could not be found. Until now.

The Body Politic was a "gay" newspaper published monthly and founded in 1971 until it ceased publication in 1987. It was located on Yonge Street not far from that same St. Charles Tavern where the academic priest abuser hung out. After intensive searching, "A Dialogue of Trust" was found. It had been published in The Body Politic as part of a larger article on the attempt by Gerald Emmett Cardinal Carter to "hide his gay purge" of St. Augustine's Seminary. It makes one ask, if not for the intrepid reporters at The Globe and Mail back then, certainly not on the side of the Church or Seminary, what would have happened? Would we have ever known? If all of those events above occurred under the administration of Cardinals Carter and Ambrozic how much worse would it have been without the reporting. It seems that after Cardinal Carter's "purge," only two seminarians left. What of the others? How many went on after 1983 to be ordained and were men who had or may have continued to act out their same-sex desires and attractions ordained and what has it meant for the Church in Toronto? How many of their mentors are still around to influence the Church in Toronto. Again, I repeat, part of the purpose of this post is as a public service to Archbishop Leo. 

What follows was transcribed from a microfiche copy by the writer. Bear in mind, that it was written for an audience sympathetic to the cause.

TORONTO'S ARCHBISHOP TRIES TO HIDE HIS  GAY PURGE, BUT THE STORY GETS OUT

Cardinal slams the closet door

Tensions over the apparent presence of gay students in a seminary in Metropolitan Toronto have escalated, with the help of Gerald Emmett Cardinal Carter, into an anti-homosexual witch-hunt which has led to the dismissal of three faculty members and the expulsion of two students. 

Some details of the purge at St Augustine's Seminary in Scarborough, the preeminent school for the training of Roman Catholic priests in English-speaking Canada, were made public in two reports published by The Globe and Mail on September 7 and 8. The stories said that the Rev Brian Clough, St Augustine's rector, and the Rev Thomas Dailey, dean of studies, had been dismissed the first week of June and that the Rev John Tulk, a professor of church history, had been fired early in September. 

Globe reporters Stanley Oziewicz and Peter Moon uncovered the following facts: 

• Carter, the archbishop of Toronto, ordered the dismissals after an investigation of the seminary conducted at his request by the Most Rev Marcel Gervais, auxiliary bishop of London, Ontario; 

• Carter asked Gervais to investigate after coming into possession of a document about "tensions" between gay and straight seminarians that was distributed to St Augustine's sisters, students and faculty by Clough; 

• The tensions had arisen from allegations of homosexual behaviour at a party held in Tulk's rooms at the seminary. 

Beyond these few facts, little has been revealed about the origins of the dispute. Although he had reported the June dismissals when they occurred, Oziewicz first learned some of the details several weeks later from an anonymous letter. In their September stories, Oziewicz and Moon wrote: "Sources, including members of the faculty and student body at the seminary, members of religious orders and laymen, agreed to talk for this article provided they were not identified. Many feared for their future careers if their names were used...." TBP's own investigation has encountered similar fears. Most of those interviewed said they feared retaliation by Cardinal Carter. A priest told TBP: "The diocese is actively trying to find out who gave that information to The Globe and Mail." A member of a religious order commented: "He (Carter) doesn't show any sensitivity toward people, so they're afraid to speak out." When told TOP had been able to learn much of the story and would publish it, the member added, "It will do a lot of good because it shows how they really operate." 

In addition to those quoted, TBP's account of the tensions leading to the dismissals and expulsions has been gathered from a well-placed source who wishes to remain anonymous, and from documents which have come into our possession. Brian Clough could not be reached for comment. A copy of this article was sent to Margaret Long, Assistant to the Director of Communications of the Archdiocese of Toronto, for comment, but she did not return any of TBP's calls.

Cardinal Carter: a secret operation against creeping Protestantism and homosexuality

The presence of suspected gay students in the seminary apparently first became an issue during the 1982/83 seminary year when some first-year students complained about the campy behaviour of some other students. The issue was taken up by an informal group of about a dozen conservative seminarians who were united by their dissatisfaction with the faculty's generally liberal interpretation of Catholic theology. They came to be known as "the machos." Defenders of those accused were dubbed "the effeminates," the group to which the two students who were expelled belonged. Most students belonged to neither. (According to Oziewicz and Moon, Gervais found that between six and 12 of the approximately 50 students were "homosexually oriented." Our source suggests that even Gervais's upper figure may be much too low.) 

Gossip and paranoia flourished. Dennis Hayes, a seminarian who says he belonged to neither group, explained: "When you group a number of people you have a fishbowl type of effect; when people start talking, these things spread.. an innocent comment can turn into a vicious attack." 

In March 1983 several students were criticized in their written year-end evaluation by faculty for their "feminine mannerisms." 

A month later, the authors of an annual letter from students to faculty complained that the faculty was tolerating a "vigilante group" that was harassing suspected gay students. The letter also said that criticism of some students for their mannerisms had exacerbated the situation.

By September it appeared that the letter had had some effect: at the week-long retreat which starts the school year, most of the faculty who spoke of the matter called for tolerance of differences in the seminary. 

But the complaints continued. Charles Lewis, a former RCMP employee said to be in the "macho group" — an allegation which he did not deny — told TBP he himself had lodged a complaint about sexual activity in the seminary: "guys doing things they shouldn't be doing." But he admitted he hadn't witnessed such activity himself. On the other side, rumours flew that "the machos" were searching

Toronto's gay bars for seminarians.

TBP has found no evidence to support this allegation. 

Tensions between the two factions became so acute that, in the late fall, Clough held separate meetings with members of the two groups and with unaligned students in an attempt to cool the dispute.

But after a party held in Tulk's rooms following a joint religious service with Anglican seminarians on January 26 of this year, events started to spiral out of control. Although Gervais later was to find that nothing amiss had occurred at the party, rumours circulated of drunkenness and homosexual activity. 

In a speech delivered to St Augustine's seminarians at a special house meeting six days later, Clough criticized "the rumour mill" and appealed for an end to gossip about the party. On February 8 he met again with members of the factions and other students, this time in a joint meeting. 

Then, on March 19, a three-page letter, "A Dialogue in Trust," apparently written by someone who had been at the February meeting, was distributed on Clough's authority to the seminary's students, faculty and sisters. 

Compassion and the Cardinal 

The Archbishop of Toronto knows how to pick friends, and if you're not one of them. . . . 

"CARDINAL CARTER AIDS DAVIS: No Solidarnosc for T.T.C. Workers" — that was the heading on a leaflet twitting Gerald Emmett Cardinal Carter, archbishop of Toronto, for backing strikes in Poland while opposing a threatened transit strike at home that would have cut into attendance at, and profits from, the recent papal tour. 

Carter, a close friend of John Paul II, was a supporter of the Second Vatican Council, which reformed the Catholic Church. Yet, his critics say, Carter is more zealous for the letter of the reforms than for their spirit. Last year, when the Canadian Council of Catholic Bishops issued an economic report that blamed the profit motive for widespread poverty and unemployment, Carter disavowed the document, siding with the outraged bankers and industrialists. And early this year he authored a pastoral letter which condemned attempts to elaborate a Catholic theology that would allow birth control, abortion and the ordination of women.

Carter's record on gay issues is not completely black. He once wrote a report on police/minority relations which devoted a few lines of criticism to homophobic verbal abuse. But he has also barred the local chapter of Dignity, the gay Catholic organization, from the use of a church for their meetings and has told homophobic jokes to an audience of police officers. The fear and silence surrounding the purge at St Augustine's Seminary point not just to the man's power, but to the way he exercises it. "Insensitive" is the word which most often comes to the lips of his critics. But Carter may have inadvertently illuminated the issue when he dismissed Thomas Dailey. According to the press reports, he told the priest, "You are much too compassionate." Perhaps it is not others, who are too compassionate, but the Cardinal who is not compassionate enough. Although unsigned, the names of Clough and three students appeared at the bottom of the letter. A notable feature of this letter is its twice-stated concern that news of the tensions within the seminary might get beyond its walls. The fearful reference to "having 'outsiders' resolve those issues for us" appears to have been an allusion to Cardinal Carter.

"A Dialogue in Trust" proved to be the means of betrayal: within a few days, a copy had been conveyed to Carter. And by the second week of April, Gervais had begun his investigation into theological and sexual deviation at St Augustine's.

In the purge of St Augustine's, a harmonious constellation of authoritarianism, sectarianism and homophobia can be seen at work. Since the Second Vatican Council, part of the Catholic clergy and laity have been moving away from both the church's traditional insistence on authority as the source of truth and the concomitant paranoia about Protestant theologies. The council suggested that truth is not absolute, that a changing world can pose new questions and demand new answers.

St Augustine's Seminary has been influenced by this new current in Catholicism and has exposed its students to the interaction of social activism and feminism with traditional teachings. As one of the eight theological colleges that jointly make up the Toronto School of Theology, an ecumenical project, the seminary has encouraged an open-minded comparison of Protestant and Catholic beliefs.

But as the new Catholicism has developed, so has the conviction among some Catholics that the revolt against authority and the flirtation with Protestantism — often the same thing to their eyes — have gone too far. It is common knowledge in the Diocese of Toronto that Cardinal Carter and other conservatives are less than fond of St Augustine's, where the now thin trickle of future priests — the seminary's approximately 50 students rattle about in a building that could hold 200 — are thought to be in danger of contamination by rebellion and creeping Protestantism. Once Carter had indisputable evidence that the place of homosexuals in the priesthood was, however informally and tentatively, being explored at the seminary, he struck.

The purge was carried out in a secrecy induced by fear: everyone who knew, even the victims, was too intimidated to speak out. To this day, Carter refuses to say why the firings occurred. Gervais's report remains a secret.

According to the Globe, although Clough, Tulk and the tenured Dailey were instructors at the Toronto School of Theology, the Cardinal ordered them to resign without any explanation to the school. Carter told TST officials that any protest from them over his neglect of due process could result in the withdrawal of St Augustine's from the joint project.

Some of the homophobia was blatant. Gervais is reported to have asked students about homosexual activity, but not about heterosexual activity. And he told faculty they should not admit gay students to the seminary. When the teachers protested that there is nothing in the rules about the sexual orientation of priests, he backed off slightly but still insisted that a gay seminarian would have to have been chaste for five years before admission. Apparently, he made no such stipulation for heterosexual applicants.

But to speak of discrimination is merely to scratch the surface; the homophobia here is deeper and subtler than that.

A trust betrayed The confidential dialogue that didn’t stay confidential

What follows is the complete, unedited text of ' 'A Dialogue in Trust, ' ' the letter circulated by St . Augustine's Seminary Rector Brian Clough to students and faculty on March 19, of this year. (1983)

The following are reflections on discussions that occurred during the past year in regard to issues and tensions that were present in the house. These discussions were alluded to in Fr. Clough's address to the house in February. Initially, Fr. Clough met with three distinct groups composed of second, third, and fourth-year students. These groups represented different viewpoints on tensions that were growing within the first few months of the seminary year. The three distinct meetings allowed students to articulate their perceptions of what was occurring within and between emerging factions. These meetings were completed by the end of the first term. A collective meeting of the three groups took place a week after Fr. Clough's February address.

The purpose of the collective meeting was to provide a forum for dialogue and for the definition of issues that each group perceived. A second issue was to receive feedback on Fr. Cough's February intervention in regard to the house social with Trinity College. It was hoped that the meeting would be an initial step toward resolution of various problems. The meeting began with an attempt to identify what the problems were. The general consensus was that there was misunderstanding of viewpoints, attitudes, and behaviors. This was characteristic of all, not of a certain few. It was recognised that many of us did not know each other well enough and were unsure about positions held, which generated unease and, perhaps, a little suspicion. Within an institution there will be a broad range of personalities and attitudes. Such a situation can all too easily lead to conflict, which itself produces intolerance and insensitivity. It was felt that we were categorizing each other as to lifestyle and orientation. It should be noted that in Fr. Clough's February address there was mention made of a general nosiness of other's business and a consequent breakdown in trust. The problem, then, was one of misunderstanding and unfamiliarity that led to insensitivity and intolerance. Discussion ensued with each group expressing its feelings on the problem. It was felt that each group was given a free and equal opportunity to express their views. As the discussion progressed, it became evident that group boundaries were breaking down and that each was expressing his views as an individual, rather than as a representative of a group.

It became clear that the issue would be lost if the discussion were limited to the surface problem: that is, a tension between those perceived to be "macho" and those perceived to be "effeminate". It was agreed that such exclusive terms are damaging and denigrating. It is all too easy to categorize someone because he acts differently. The issue was then not how to limit those who act differently, but how to come to know the other with greater appreciation and understanding of his uniqueness.

 Five main points were made during the discussion:

 1: to equate homosexuality with effeminate behavior is false. A person's sexual orientation should not become a preoccupation for others. The issue is not one of homosexuality or heterosexuality within or outside the seminary, but one of sensitivity to others who may be different than ourselves.

 2: it is important to be sensitive to the effect that our behavior has on others and the possible effects or perceptions that can result from the cumulative effect of group behavior in a particular situation.

3: it should be recognized that feelings of being threatened by another's uniqueness have their source within ourselves and must be resolved within ourselves. The problem should not be 'how can I change the other', but 'how can I come to terms with myself so that I can appreciate the other more'.

4: out of an ignorance of another's pain can come a desire to avoid that individual because he is different. Thus the challenge must be recognized: to confront someone with a problem is harder than not dealing with him. 

5: the seminary community has a right to resolve its own issues without having them communicated outside the house or having "outsiders" resolve those issues for us. 

The immediate results of the meeting were generally positive. It was felt that dialogue which occurred within the context of the meeting could be transferred to a less formal setting. Much misunderstanding was identified and corrected. It may be correct to say that tolerance was learned and that out of that learning came a greater appreciation and comfort with others who were different than ourselves: that is, a tolerance that was embedded in charity and mutual respect. With the reduction of tension through the expression of difficulties came a more relaxed atmosphere in the house. An important result was that the "silent majority" spoke-up and took an active part in the discussions. It was agreed that the meeting was an initial step to the resolution of the issue. Though the issue was not totally resolved, the meeting provided an opportunity to dialogue in trust. 

The less immediate results were just as important. The meetings that occurred this year served as a first step to dialogue that can and will hopefully occur in years to come. It was recognized that there will always be problems in institutional living and that these problems should be addressed. Thus, the path was opened to future dialogue. It was suggested that the services of professionals, such as Sister Dickson, be employed in addressing issues such as sexuality, spirituality, tolerance, etc. It has been suggested that an opportunity be provided for year groups to reflect on the year with their representatives to the extended faculty meetings. It was also suggested that new students precede returning students at the start of the year by a day or two in order to better prepare them for seminary life and to ease the process of assimilation. In all, these discussions came out of an experience of grace; an experience that was felt by the whole seminary community. The meeting of the collective closed with the hope and the positive anticipation of greater interpersonal communication and friendship 

19 MARCH 1984 

M. CENERINI

FR. B. CLOUGH 

J. MURPHY

D. REILANDER 

This document has been distributed to the sisters, faculty, and students of St. Augustine's Seminary. Its purpose is specifically for the members of the house, i.e. the document is confidential to members of the house. This is why the document has not been posted on the bulletin board.

END 

Single-sex institutions in the world. 

Homosexual activity is inevitable; that a certain fraction of its members will be gay is inevitable. Yet it remains a great unspoken concern. Mary Malone, a St Augustine's faculty member, says: "The presence of gay students among seminarians is not new. Until recently, we pretended it wasn't there." 

The St Augustine's purge was directed not so much against gay seminarians as against those, gay or straight, students or faculty, who dared to break the silence — to push or pull open the closet doors just a crack. The purge would be a warning to those still in the closet to stay there. That's perhaps why only two students were asked to leave the seminary, although Gervais estimated that there were as many as 12 "homosexually inclined" students there. That could be the meaning of Carter's explanation to reporters of Clough's dismissal: "To talk about it is one thing, but to put it in print (in "A Dialogue of Trust") is a problem." 

Malone describes Clough and Tulk as "honest, compassionate men." "Their integrity," she says, "helped something come into the open that others would have preferred to keep secret." Clough, Dailey and Tulk are gone from St Augustine's, but those responsible failed in their goal. The secret is now out in the open.

The Rector referred to above, Father Brian Clough, after being fired for the scandal went on to become the Judicial Vicar for the Archdiocese of Toronto. This article is from the Globe and Mail on May 8, 1976. As of a few months ago, Clough was still on the Priest's Council.

To the priests of the Archdiocese of Toronto

To the priests of the Archdiocese of Toronto,

I know some of you, some better than others, and some of you are personal friends with my wife and me. We have written, spoken, and dined in restaurants or in our home. We share much and we share the sorrow for the state of the Church here in Toronto and universally.

To the rest of you, I have something to say.

How was it, even after the plagiarism scandal, that you invited Thomas J. Rosica to speak in your parish? How was it that you gave him a voice in rehabilitation? Don't talk to me about "mercy." Where was the mercy for those who were subjected to his errors? You knew of all of this and you stayed silent. You knew what he was doing and others of this ilk. 

Why are you so fearful? What does he have on you? What does the system have on you?

Where is your courage to out this filth? 

I have known about this current matter since 2015. I have known more in the last few months. Have you seen it posted here? Have you seen me betray the confidence? 

You know what to do.

voxcantoris@rogers.com

THOMAS J. ROSICA SUED IN ONTARIO COURT FOR SEXUAL ASSAULT ON TORONTO PRIEST!

On June 29, I wrote a short blog post that a certain Toronto priest which multiple sources confirmed had his faculties removed. I can report now, that priest was Thomas J. Rosica, CSB. I was unable to report what I also knew at the time, that a Toronto priest working under Rosica on World Youth Day, 2002 was sexually assaulted by the Basilian priest. The assaults began in the late 1990's. The suit filed in the Ontario court and which is now public information states that the relationship. “allowed Rosica an opportunity to be alone with the Plaintiff and to exert total control over him, prey upon him and sexually abuse him." further, it states that Rosica repeatedly "groped and fondled" the sexual organs of the young priest. This was known to the writer nearly a decade ago after the attempted frivolous and vexatious lawsuit against me. However, at the time, I was sworn to secrecy and unable to report it or reveal my source.  

The lawsuit also goes after the Congregation of St. Basil for not properly supervising Rosica. As someone who himself was physically abused and battered by Basilian priests at the age of 13 and took it to the Congregation directly 40 years later, and as someone unjustly sued by Rosica, I can assure you that the Basilian Congregation is as much at fault and derelict in their duty to God and to His faithful. The suit further states that “The Basilians knew or ought to have known that Rosica had engaged in deviant behaviour and failed to investigate such. In failing to investigate and identify any past failings of Rosica, they also failed to identify any victims who may have been in need of counseling, assistance and support because of the actions of Rosica." Yes, the Basilians knew, they all knew and they all covered it up! 

Rosica, of course, denies the allegations just as he denied he was a serial plagiarist which this writer first exposed in 2015. In response to the Court, Rosica claims that he “infrequent ministerial contact with the Plaintiff between 1996 and 2002, but denies sexually abusing or sexually assaulting or making unwanted physical contact or engaging in any improper conduct with the Plaintiff.”

Rosica asked the Court to dismiss the lawsuit claiming that the process is governed by Canon Law.  Rosica did not choose the path of the Church or Scripture in his desire to sue this writer but rather chose Ontario's court system. The hypocrisy is there for all to see. 

In June 2024, Tom Rosica was witnessed coming out of a Toronto gay bathhouse. 

Justice comes. One just needs to be patient. All things come to those that wait.

No Faculties?

Multiple sources, I repeat, multiple, indicate a certain priest in Toronto has had his faculties removed. 

HAS THOMAS J. ROSICA ABANDONED PROVIDENCE HOUSE BED PANS FOR A BATH HOUSE?

Thomas J. Rosica, Basilian priest, former Executive Producer of Pepper and Darkness TV, also known as Salt + Light and former Vatican communications officer appointed by Pope Francis himself has been found, according to Lifesite news by a “credible” and on-the-record source, allegedly coming out of a Toronto homosexual bathhouse.

At this time, Rosica denies his presence there. My sources at LifeSiteNews say they’re sticking with their story.

By the way, Shane, Vox Cantoris was the first to out the serial plagiarist. 

EXCLUSIVE: Eyewitness claims Fr. Thomas Rosica spent 2 hours in homosexual bathhouse - LifeSite (lifesitenews.com)

 

Will Toronto's "Vegan priest" push his ideology on the people at Guardian Angels in Brampton? Will he be welcomed with a pig roast?

The annual priest transfer is underway for the Archdiocese of Toronto. It is larger than it has been in several years, certainly since the No Mass For You period of Tom Collins.

In early 2021, the Catholic Register, owned by the Archdiocese of Toronto, featured the pastor of St. Ambrose in south Etobicoke who declared that our God is a vegan god Animal welfare and the Church (catholicregister.org):

“I remember in the beginning I was a little bit more urgent (with preaching about transitioning to plant-based living) because I was kind of going through it,” he said. “I understand it kind of takes (small) steps with certain people and obviously people have been open to it as well. If you’re always talking about it, I think there are people that don’t want to hear it all the time unfortunately. It’s a delicate matter at times because you are dealing with people’s palette.”

How much did this priest preach of Jesus Christ?

Good luck to him as he takes up his new role at Guardian Angels in Brampton, a parish where Filipinos and Africans dominate. I am sure they will welcome him with a parking lot pig roast.

Vox Cantoris: Food for thought! Toronto pastor preaches "veganism" from pulpit - says we have a: "Vegan-god!"

Toronto priest, Neil Pereira, 33, arrested and charged for sexual crimes against a minor!

A Toronto priest on loan to the Diocese of Peterborough, Neil Pereira, 33, has been arrested and charged with sexual crimes against a minor. Prior to leaving for campus ministry at Trent University and Sir Sandford Fleming College. Ordained in June 2020 by Thomas No Mass For You Collins, Pereira was Associate Pastor at St. Isaac Jogues in Pickering.

Peterborough priest, Father Neil Pereira, was arrested for alleged sexual assault of a minor (thepeterboroughexaminer.com)

The man must be presumed innocent. Sources familiar don't believe he did anything inappropriate. Who really knows anymore?

See how long Neil keeps this up.

Not long! Good work, Neil. 

Another Archdiocese of Toronto priest forced to grovel before CityPanic24 and the Alphabet fascist brigades.

Two years ago with the attack on the Church in Canada due to the reports of alleged graves of children in residential schools, a much-respected pastor at Merciful Redeemer parish in  Mississauga spoke out and made the statement that not all things in the residential schools were bad, some good came from them. CITY 24, always an amateur and bombastically Marxist media outlet in Toronto, and others crucified the good monsignor. CITY and CBC are continuing their anti-Catholic hate. For the record, the Indigenous residential schools in Canada were Canadian government policy that, like the lockdown of Mass, the Church mistakenly went along with in exchange for mammon. The pastor was forced to leave the parish, he and it had been threatened with violence, and Thomas "No Mass For You" Collins and his sidekick, Neil MacCarthy threw the Monsignor under the media bus whilst pinching incense to Ba'al rather than defend him and the truth. Some good, maybe much good came out of the residential schools in spite of the policy of the Government of Canada.

Throwing Toronto priests under the media bus is not new for Neil and the gang of apparatchiks in the chancery. It happened a few years earlier when a Toronto archdiocesan priest at St. Leo the Great in Brooklin, Ontario, northeast of Oshawa, had the nerve to mention certain sins to school children using the fairly typical "examination of conscience" pamphlet with which most of us are familiar not dissimilar to that found at this link. The actions of the communications bureaucrats at the chancery office were deplorable, literally condemning the priest to the media because some TwitYourInstaFace Karens ran to the CBC that Father was talking about sin to children.

These same officials told priests a few years earlier not to discuss the issue of gay-straight alliances in Catholic schools; that they were "handling it." I was told by more than one priest that they were ordered by Neil MacCarthy not to preach on it from the pulpit. Imagine that, a communication director-- a layman ordering priests. Oh, Tom and Neil handled it all right. Badly. They trusted a government headed by a lesbian Premier who threw her cuck husband into the basement so she could bring her new babe into the family home. Good move. 

Now to the latest.

At St. Gertrude's parish in Oshawa, east of Toronto, the pastor allowed the distribution of a flyer condemning the attack on families and children by the Marxist alphabet mob. The mob has taken over the movement so far beyond the rights of same-sex attracted people to not be harassed or discriminated against that even many of them are questioning it. 

Is it any wonder the chancery spokesman, Neil MacCarthy, is the butt of jokes and held in such disdain by the diocesan priests and so few of them trust the bishops?

“While the insert in question was not created by the parish, the pastor had allowed for it to be distributed. We have reached out to the pastor and he highly regrets permitting this to be circulated and is preparing to apologize unequivocally to the congregation at all Masses on Sunday. Please know that the Archdiocese was not made aware of this material in advance, had not given permission for it to be created, printed or distributed as it is clearly unacceptable and offensive and has no place in the church bulletin or elsewhere for that matter.”

The Archdiocesan officials and presumably Archbishop Francis Leo, as in the case above, threw the pastor under the bus loaded with anti-Catholic bigots and forced the Pastor to grovel as the chaceryrats held his feet to the fire. 

“I recognize that much of the content was inappropriate and offensive and caused hurt and distress starting in our own parish family and reverberating out into the wider community. I should not have allowed it to have been circulated. I sincerely apologize for my actions.”

It's reasonable to question the prudence of the pastor in allowing an outside flyer to be distributed at the church. I've seen the flyer and it will not be posted here. It reveals private contact information. While one can sympathize with the writer, they did Father no favour. This is not how you fight back, illogical rants are not the way. One lowers themselves to the level of the cultural Marxists and becomes the antagonist themselves. The literal online hatred and bile being spewed at the Church should have been foreseen. No priest needs this, no parish. That being said, it is disgraceful that he was hung out to dry, publicly by the Chancery proving that pastors are nothing more than branch managers. A few weeks ago, St. Michael's Cathedral in Toronto and others promoted a talk by Thomas Rosica using the alphabet moniker? How prudent was that? Lowering people to an alphabet label is not Catholic!

Rather than wade into the public debate on the legitimate fears of most Catholics and particularly, parents about their children and the attack on their faith and morals, a teaching moment was wasted as the new Archbishop is seen as just another weak and ineffective shepherd refusing to be a defender of faith and culture. 

The question we all have is this; Does the new Archbishop, Francis Leo, sanction this public flogging of his priests or is this just another case of the chanceryrats pushing back on him and letting him know who the real boss is.

Well Archbishop Leo, what say you?

Did you approve of this?

Was this Neil acting on his own once again?

Do you wonder, Your Grace, why you can finish the sentences at the Tuesday priest visits? 

Archdiocese of Toronto web page promoted "LGBTQ" labelling in 2022 under Thomas Collins; not this year, change has come under Archbishop Leo.

Every once in a while, I blow it. I have been corrected and offer apologies to anyone who read this article or came to it before I corrected it.

This screen shot from the archdiocesan web page was sent to me late last night. The sender did not notice and nor did I that this was form last year, 2022. The Chancery staff responsible for Communications removed this year's advertisement by Manresa and this old one.

I thank Neil MacCarthy for bringing clarity to this and the error to my attention and I apologize for the error.

It is too bad that Thomas Collins saw no issue with this but that is history.

The Archdiocese of Toronto has a Courage Apostolate which is below.

Thank you for your understanding. I had not yet had my covefe.

https://couragerc.org/chapter/toronto-ontario/

 

St. Michael's Cathedral bulletin in Toronto promotes Thomas J. Rosica's "LGBT" lecture

UPDATE:

As noted below, I was sent the notice of this as it appeared then at archtoronto.org. After contacting Neil MacCarthy, Director of Communications, seeing the problem, had it removed and I confirmed it. He did the right thing. Alas, it appears it was not stopped from going to parishes and being printed in bulletins. Well, Neil? What do you have to say for yourself and the deception? Was I duped? Were you? Was ++Francis Leo? Or, all you all culpable and at least we know where we stand?

Not a good start!

Reports from readers that it has appeared in numerous church bulletins including that of the former Chaplain for the Extraordinary Form Mass. 

Readers in Toronto, send links of the parishes where it has been published.

St. Clare of Assisi Woodbridge

St. Aidan, Scarborough

Happy Sunday!

Bulletin - St. Michael's Cathedral Basilica (stmichaelscathedral.com)

The bulletin for this Sunday in Toronto's St. Michael's Cathedral features a post promoting the Rosica lecture to take place at the Jesuit Manresa retreat centre. In itself, there is nothing wrong with a session for parents of those suffering from same-sex attraction or gender dysphoria. The point is, the labelling by using the alphabet moniker. The Church does not label people by their sin. People have dignity as men and women, there are no others. This is the point of the post below.

Vox Cantoris: The rehabilitation of Thomas J. Rosica continues - Jesuit retreat to "Parents of LGBTQ Young Adults!"

FULL DISCLOSURE:

Last week, a Toronto priest sent me a notice of this, it was on his diocesan update and a web page at archtoronto.org. Seeing it, I wrote to Archdiocesan Director of Public Relations Neil MacCarthy and questioned whether this was the new breeze of Archbishop Francis Leo or a "chancery rat." Neil confirmed it was a "rat" and that Archbishop Leo was not aware and the post was removed. Now, we find that in Archbishop Leo's own Cathedral's bulletin, the alphabet mafia has won.

As I wrote to Neil, is it not bad enough for Catholics on a daily basis to be assaulted by this demonic symbol, be it the alphabet labels ever expanding or the abominable abuse of God's rainbow? Can we not even find peace away from it in the Temple of God?

Is this in the bulletin because a secretary chose to do it?

Was it the Rector's decision?

If not, does the Rector know, does he proof read the bulletin?

Does Archbishop Leo know? Did he sanction it? 

The Vigil Novus Ordo Mass for Ascension Thursday transferred to Sunday on Saturday night is in just over an hour. Will they pull the bulletin?

As for Tom Rosica, if the litigious bully and serial plagiarist wishes to leave the bedpans of Presentation House he can be assured this blogger will be writing. 

If Archbishop Francis Leo was not aware of this and did not approve, then he knows even more now where he must act quickly to assert his authority. If he did approve or does not act, then we know a little bit more of our new Shepherd and what it means. 

On the eve of the installation of His Grace Francis Leo - A Monograph on the State of the Archdiocese of Toronto

Tomorrow morning at Toronto's St. Michael's Cathedral, His Grace, Francis Leo will be
installed as Metropolitan Archbishop of Toronto. Archbishop Leo will be 52 in June and is the youngest bishop since Michael Power. The task ahead for Archbishop Leo is enormous. The Archdiocese of Toronto since Philip Pocock through Gerald Emmet Carter, Aloysius Ambrozic, and Thomas Collins has been a veritable "deep church." There have been cover-ups and pay-offs. A recently-deceased former Vicar-General and Monsignor fathered children whilst, in his position unbeknownst to the faithful, a scandal covered. Seminary professors and "liturgists" at St. Augustine's Seminary engaged in rampant sodomy covered up, much of it criminal and covered up through pay-offs and non-disclosures and explained away by rectors many of whom knew it was happening. Liturgy is in a state of anarchy in many places or simply, banality, catechesis is non-existent, schools are in apostasy, our hospitals engaging in narcotic "harm reduction" and the distribution of condoms and worse. For these last two, we have taken from Caesar and now dance to his tune. We saw the cancellation of Mass at the demands of "virtuous" public health officials and government in exchange for what amounted to wampum. We have seen under Cardinal Archbishop Collins a list of isolated and demoralized priests who have no support and no spiritual father, who have been insulted and ostracized over medical choice, and many of whom have been in one way or another, canceled. Young people want nothing to do with their parishes and have abandoned the faith. Parishes are generally in decline except for still intact new immigrant communities and even then, the new generations are not well staying. Faith is evaporating before our eyes and when we look around us we see an indictment on every Metropolitan Ordinary in Toronto since the Pocock. Collins has been no better and has presided over the near collapse. This is the reality. The Emporer has no clothes. Thomas Collins betrayed one and all when he shut down our churches and refused to stand up to the diktats of government. The last two weeks of posts are a reminder of the failure of this man against those toadies who praise and exalt him. 

I am honoured to have been provided, from an Anonymous source, this monograph on the current state of affairs and the task ahead. 

Truth suffers but it does not die

(St. Teresa of Avila) 

March 25, 2023 will mark the beginning of a new chapter in the history of the Archdiocese of Toronto. The new Archbishop, Francis (Frank) Leo will be installed and will undertake the spiritual guidance and care of the clergy and faithful of this portion of the Lord’s vineyard.

Undoubtedly, by now, His Grace will have been briefed by the representatives of the various Offices of the archdiocesan curia, and by the outgoing Archbishop, Thomas Cardinal Collins. If the Cardinal’s recent and surreal interview with the The Pillar is any indication of what Archbishop Leo has been told about the state of affairs as they pertain to the pastoral obligations and work of the archdiocese, the new Ordinary is in for a very rude awakening. In fairness, His Grace is coming from the Montreal; hardly a bastion of orthodoxy and fervour; and Toronto has yet to experience the church closures and the clustering of parishes that have occurred in Quebec. Nevertheless, in all fairness, so that he might undertake his task honestly and realistically he deserves to receive a truthful assessment of the state of things and not a narrative fashioned by the ideology and delusions of those who together with Cardinal Collins have shaped the life of this archdiocese for decades.

The new Archbishop takes possession of a metropolitan see that may be aptly described as a desolate city. This sad state of things is not particular to Toronto. It is undeniable that the Church is in decline throughout the world; and over these many years of crisis and collapse not a few have undertaken to chronicle the litany of betrayal of the faith and of the faithful, institutions of learning most especially, and of health care facilities. Our once distinctively Catholic institutions, largely staffed by dedicated religious men and women and dedicated laity are mere shells, no longer animated by a Catholic ethos. The Church in Toronto has experienced all of this and more. What makes this decline particularly tragic in the archdiocese of Toronto is its effect not only on its suffragan dioceses but also the propagation of ineffective and destructive pastoral theology throughout the country and beyond through the city’s once Catholic university colleges and the archdiocesan seminary. As the largest English speaking see in the country, Toronto is not without influence, good or bad; and the desertification that has occurred in Toronto reflects a general trend everywhere, especially in the years of the current pontificate.

The new Archbishop must understand that there are figures in the archdiocese who hold positions of pastoral authority and influence and who have done so since the arrival of Gerald Emmet Carter as Archbishop in 1978. For over forty-five years, these clerics have occupied influential posts entrusted to them during the tenure of Archbishop Philip Pocock. During these many years they have been able to establish a deep church that through their younger acolytes and accomplices establishes policies and determines governance of institutions and institutes both under the direct control of the archdiocese, such as the seminary, and other institutions, particularly the sizable school boards and other institutes of learning. The claim that the governance of school boards is a matter of publicly elected trustees is a glaring dereliction of duty. Why are anti-Catholic trustees not censured? Who teaches the religion courses to young teachers for certification? Usually, former clerics who are ideologically in league with the deep church. In the confusion experienced everywhere by the post-conciliar reforms hastily and often indiscriminately imposed, the faithful of the archdiocese have been subjected to the tyranny of novelty and rebellion. For the average Catholic, this tyranny was felt most acutely in the breakdown of authentic catechesis and in the liturgical anarchy that scandalized the faithful and destroyed sacred art and architecture. Suffice it to say that the toleration of liturgical abuses which famously began in Toronto at the Newman Centre has never ended. Archbishop Pocock’s refusal to exercise episcopal oversight at the university chaplaincy and to correct liturgical abuses there and his tacit approval of dissent and disregard for canon law and liturgical rubrics everywhere else opened the floodgates and the rest as they say, is history. As a result, still today, anything is tolerated except liturgical sobriety and orthodox teaching. Tout le monde fait ça.

The many years since the devolution of Catholicism began in earnest in the 1970’s enable us now to see that these efforts were directed at the destruction and eradication of so-called Tridentine Catholicism. In the years spanning the post-conciliar years and the tenure of Gerald Emmet Cardinal Carter (1978-1990), at least as it concerns parish life, everything depended on whether the clergy of the parish were guided by what we now refer to as the hermeneutic of rupture or the hermeneutic of continuity. Some parishes were noted for their liturgical anarchy and the seminary, whose student body was decimated in a matter of a few years, became a hotbed of immorality, heterodoxy and liturgical anarchy. These problems have not been effectively resolved. Few were the priests who understood that this rupture with Tradition was and is a recipe for destruction and eventual loss of faith. One cannot fail to mention with admiration and reverence the faithful and courageous witness of Msgr. Vincent Foy, a canceled priest before the term was ever coined, who at one time was even forbidden to live within the boundaries of Archdiocese by one of its Ordinaries. Providentially, he outlived his detractors and persecutors.

Intolerance for anything remotely traditional and anyone intellectually convinced of the value and necessity of Tradition resulted in the banishment of so-called traditional priests to the peripheries of the archdiocese. Again, this is not particular to Toronto, and it reflects a widespread phenomenon that has caused anguish for priests and laity alike. It would seem that almost everywhere episcopal intolerance for orthodox priests has now developed the force of custom in the Church. For a time, during the pontificate of Pope Benedict when it seemed that traditional practices were again in vogue, the careerists among the clergy sported lace and put out a few extra candlesticks but all this has disappeared with the new pontificate. These are the clerical stars who boast of their travels and hobbies on their Facebook pages. The rest of the clergy are on the whole badly educated and fearful of the heavy handed hierarchy, and the entitled though ignorant laity. Moral guidance is seldom if ever given from the pulpit, for fear of being delated to the regional bishop or the ordinary.

All manner of abuses are tolerated by appeals and affirmations of ‘being pastoral’, but few of the clergy truly understand that a pastoral approach to anything implies the good of souls. Precious little of what passes for work in the archdiocese has anything to do with the salvation of souls which is the supreme law of the Church. “Social ministries”, an undefined category, occupies the apparatchiks in the offices of the pastoral centre and make work projects with no discernible results distract the parish clergy and volunteers. An excellent example of such sterile incompetence is the youth office, usually headed by an immature, young cleric whose sartorial penchant for running shoes and jeans assures appointment to this post. A whole industry has developed around this “ministry”. The end result of this interminable war against the Traditional Faith are empty parishes, an empty seminary, the disappearance of religious communities, and schools that are scandalously at odds with Catholic moral teaching. Much more could be said about the sad state of affairs but the evidence of decay and inertia is in plain view for everyone to see and to experience. Yet, the deep church still has a stranglehold on what is left of the Church in Toronto.

By any metric, nothing is better in the archdiocese of Toronto than it was in 2007 when Cardinal Collins took over the reins of command. A renovated Cathedral means nothing and its use as a venue to eulogize politicians responsible for the holocaust of abortion in our nation is a scandal. At the root of the collapse of the Church in Toronto and elsewhere is the pernicious heresy of modernism whose denial of objective truth has resulted in the dictatorship of relativism and the failure in governance and oversight on the part of a modernist hierarchy. Perhaps the most glaring example of decay is the scandalous silence of the hierarchy in the face of a school curriculum that corrupts the minds and souls of our children, the most morally vulnerable among us. To expect teachers who face loss of employment to defend Catholic moral truth is a dereliction of duty on the part of the shepherds. Failure to support brave teachers, parents and priests who challenge the immoral policies of the school boards and administrators is also scandalous. The corruption of innocence cries out to heaven. The deliverance of our children from the evils of transgender ideology and sexual perversions boldly promoted in separate schools is the most pressing of the many tasks that the Archbishop must undertake.

The reluctance and refusal to enunciate and to defend Church teaching as it pertains to faith and life and most especially the moral law has resulted in the present desultory state of affairs: a predominantly ignorant laity now mostly indifferent to the Faith, educators who boldly flaunt their heretical and immoral beliefs, a balkanized presbyterate dominated by a liberally minded group of representative clergy, and a hierarchy more faithful to government directives than to Catholic truth. The so-called pandemic with its parish closures, its assault on the sacred liturgy and surrender to the arbitrary dictates of health authorities has only expedited the decline of the Church. What is left, where it has not been made to scatter and disappear is a remnant Church, marginalized and dispossessed but fervent in faith and in charity.

The new Archbishop faces a very challenging task. His relative youth as he undertakes his tenure is a blessing and a rare opportunity to carry out and firmly establish meaningful reforms. If he has the courage and foresight to break with the disastrous policies of his predecessors and the laissez faire attitude of his immediate predecessor, he will dismantle the deep church and govern and guide his flock to holiness of life and eternal salvation. If he doesn’t, then he will preside over the dismantling of the façade that hides decay and rubble and the Church in Toronto will definitely be catacombal. The wealth of the archdiocese of Toronto has enabled its functionaries to avoid the public scandals that have in some cases resulted in financial insolvency in other dioceses; but worldly wealth no matter how abundant is never greater than truth, the daughter of time.

May the prayers and protection of Our Lady to whom Archbishop Leo appears to have a devotion assist him. May the prayers and witness of St. Thomas Becket, St. Charles Borromeo and our own Bishop Michael Power strengthen him. Ad multos annos!

Francis Leo, new Archbishop of Toronto

Pope Francis has today appointed a new Archbishop of Toronto, Bishop Frank Leo [Catholic-Hierarchy]. Archbishop Designate Leo will replace Thomas Cardinal Collins whose resignation was accepted. Archbishop Leo, 51, was only consecrated Auxiliary Bishop of Montreal in September 2022. Yes, Montreal! Given the history of the Maple Leafs and Habs, there is much one could say about this.

Bishop Frank Leo was on someone's radar but was not one for the obvious ones. Rumours have been MacGratten from Calgary, Smith from Edmonton, or Bolen from Regina and he is one of the youngest Archbishops appointed to Toronto since Michael Power. Rejoice, my fellow that it was not one of these nor our former or current Auxiliaries!

Archbishop Leo has an enormous task ahead of him. Many Toronto priests are demoralized, and many have been "canceled" by the Collins regime. Others have been "thrown under the bus" of political correctness and media mobs.  The decision by Thomas "No Mass for You" Collins to throw our lot in with the government and the "virtuous public health officials" has devasted Mass attendance and parish sustainability. The hollowing out of the faith in many old neighbourhoods of Toronto will leave Bishop Leo with the dirty work of closing dozens of churches. Bishop Leo comes into a cesspool within the Chancery. He will need every grace from the Holy Spirit and the intercession of the Blessed Mother to deal with it.  

The Marian logo on his miter and his crozier is a good sign rather than the wooden stick carried by Collins. His letter below is beautiful and may it indicate for us a renaissance for the Church in Toronto. 

Greetings Message to the People of God in the Archdiocese of Toronto from Archbishop-designate Most Rev. Francis Leo

11 February 2023, Memorial of Our Lady of Lourdes 

Dear Brothers and Sisters, 

Praised be Jesus Christ. 

I am reaching out to you all to convey my heartfelt greetings on the occasion of my appointment by the Holy Father to serve this beloved archdiocese as its archbishop and servant leader. I am deeply humbled by Pope Francis’ confidence and am profoundly grateful to him. I am very eager to get to know you all personally. Relying on the Lord’s unwavering assistance to fulfill the mission with which I am being entrusted, I place my hope in our Heavenly Father’s bountiful mercies as He journeys with all of us along the path of the Kingdom. I am also following in the footsteps of Thomas Cardinal Collins and in continuity with the committed, strong and selfless episcopal ministry he has provided for many years and for which we owe a huge debt of gratitude. 

Strikingly, it was the Annunciation scene that came to my mind and heart when the Apostolic Nuncio notified me of the appointment. I thought of the Blessed Mother, her amazement and questioning, her trust and her availability to join forces with the Holy Spirit in bringing about the Incarnation; in accepting to play her unique role in the Lord’s loving and saving plan; to be a humble instrument in the hands of our loving and saving God. Upon learning of the Holy Father’s decision to appoint me, I too was asked to utter my own personal and ecclesial Fiat – and I have done so with all my heart. 

My ministry among you as a Shepherd in Christ will no doubt provide copious occasions to share our faith, to walk together in holiness, to foster ecclesial communion, and to bring Christ to others in new ways. Together with Mary, each is invited to bring the presence of Jesus to life within our manifold communities. Our profound attachment to the Lord, remaining firmly rooted in His teachings and those of His Bride the Church, will enable us to sow seeds of enduring hope and be builders of bridges for that unity the Lord desires of us. 

I will open my heart and mind to listen to you, to hear from you, and I will do my best to be for you an example of Christ the Good Shepherd. I trust that the Lord Jesus will open up new horizons before us, will accompany us with his grace, and allow us to experience abundant life. To my brother bishops, to the priests and deacons, seminarians, women and men in consecrated life and lay faithful engaged in ministry in the archdiocese, I look forward to engaging in close collaboration with you as we build up the Body of Christ, working out of our diverse vocations and charisms. As we abide in His love and walk with hope and authenticity, let us be reminded that it is Christ who is our Chief Shepherd and guides us all to the fullness of truth and life. 

In embracing this new “calling within the calling” and so taking up the senior leadership role in the Archdiocese of Toronto, I truly believe that I stand to learn much from you: the very People I will strive to love and to serve, to empower and to inspire, to guide and to lead. As you know, I hail from the great city of Montreal and am the son of immigrant parents. My varied experiences in parish ministry and school chaplaincy, as a seminary formator and university lecturer, my years in the Holy See’s diplomatic service, my service at the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops and most recently as auxiliary bishop, vicar general and moderator of Montreal’s curia – these have been for me incredible graces beyond all telling and helped prepare me, through Divine Providence, for this new office of leadership and service in the midst of the ecclesial community. I will bring to this ministry all that I am and all that I have. 

To those who are near and actively engaged in the life of our Church, as well as to those who are more distant or struggle to choose her as their “spiritual home” - know that you are in my prayers daily and I will endeavour to be a loving pastor, a devoted father, a dedicated brother and an encouraging witness for you. In the immense and beautiful diversity of this archdiocesan family made up of parish communities and religious houses, educational institutions, health care and social services, ecclesial movements and associations, women, men and children, the elderly and the young, persons living on the margins, those with means and the needy, families of all walks of life, cultures, languages and traditions, and those persons in search for meaning, hope, healing and love, whatever your situation may be – know this: the door of my heart and that of our archdiocese are open to you. 

As a committed community of faith in the Risen Lord Jesus, we know, nonetheless, that we will inevitably face difficulties and trials. The key, however, is to remember that we are never alone. If we accept to come together in order to encourage and support, challenge and lift each other up, not only will we know the joy of belonging to the Lord and be pleasing to Him, we will likewise be blessed with new dynamism, heartfelt fellowship, and a sense of family in the Eucharistic faith community. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is our most treasured gift; the Kingdom we seek is one of justice and peace; the path is that of holiness and fidelity. I delight in the Spirit with you, as with one heart and one soul we will endeavour to share this gift, to seek this Kingdom and its righteousness, and to walk humbly along this path. 

Please remember me in your prayers so that I may faithfully serve the Lord in and through serving you. We are God’s beloved children and with Him all things are indeed possible. 

May Saint Michael the Archangel, our patron saint, defend us always and protect us everywhere. 

Yours sincerely in Jesus with Mary, 

+Francis Leo 

Archbishop-designate of Toronto