Complete madness

Over the years I've met many Catholics, especially families, who don't have a television. The reason why is that they don't want to expose their children (or themselves)to the drivel that is on the box these days - violence, sex and general trash. They refuse to pay their licence fee because they are so disgusted about the content and the anti-Catholic bias of most if not all mainstream broadcasters. They are worried about the messages broadcasters are trying to put forward, particularly to their kids. I've always been impressed with families that, if you like, boycott TV. But I've always been of the opinion that television is a most informative and entertaining medium at the right times and have always thought I wouldn't deprive any children I may or may not have in the future of controlled access to a TV. In light of concerning news over the last couple of days, I think my opinion may be changing.

With still a few minutes to go until the end of the marvellous feast day of the Annunciation when God became an embryo in the womb of Mary, the latest attack on the unborn had been announced. The proposals by the Broadcast Committee of Advertising Practice (BCAP) would allow abortion providers to advertise their services on TV. It's the latest obscene idea to supposedly help our deluded Government cut teenage pregnancy rates. Instead, this is nothing short of an attack on the innocence of childhood.

Since 1990, from both Tory and Labour governments, we've had a continuation of the same policy of more sex education and greater availability of contraception (including abortifacients) available free to kids as young as 11 at school without the need for parental consent. We've seen every effort to basically chuck condoms at youngsters like sweets in an effort to supposedly reduce unwanted pregnancies. And the results? Levels of teenage pregnancies have stayed about the same, if not increased, and sexually transmitted infections have rocketed.

The present Government's target to halve the number of under-18 conceptions is a miserable failure. And their answer? More provision for contraceptive and abortion services. It doesn't make sense. In reality it makes the Government look dumb - which is exactly what it is. They point blank refuse to even try to look into trialing abstinence education that has been so successful in parts of America. I expect the Government will be keen on BCAP's advice.

In this recent development, we have to remember that many "sexual healthcare services" like Marie Stopes and BPAS are businesses. They have a financial interest in killing unborn children. Will this change in policy apply to pro-life organisations that help women through crisis pregnancies? I suspect not. Through this advertising, abortion providers will exploit vulnerable children and put them in a comfort zone by making them think: "It's okay, if I get pregnant I'll just go to the clinic and get rid of it."

The dangerous suggestion of such adverts on TV comes on the same day that we hear of the terrible story of schoolgirl Alesha Thomas who died after having an abortion at Marie Stopes in Leeds. The clinic didn't give her the antibiotics prescribed to her. She died of a toxic shock syndrome five days after the procedure. Recording a narrative verdict at the inquest into her death Coroner Roger Whittaker hit out at Marie Stopes saying: "There was no system in place for the review after the visiting clinician had left and I believe there should have been."

I've already attacked horrible condom adverts promoting promiscuity more than anything on the TV and the radio. I suspect the allowing of abortion providers to advertise would lead many more Catholics to ditch their TVs.

Apparently there's a consultation on this plan that doesn't close until June. Once I find out how you put forward submissions I'll post the details. Lets bombard them with constructive, intelligent letters arguing that this move would be complete madness.

What are they playing at?

These are the faces of the MPs who want to legalise the right for people to help their relatives and friends kill themselves. Patricia Hewitt's amendment (signed by six other anti-life MPs above and supported by about 100 in total) to the Coroners and Justice Bill would make it lawful to suggest that a person travel to a country where assisted suicide is legal, and to assist them to travel there. It is not restricted to facilitating suicide for the dying. It seems to apply to anyone, old or young, disabled or suffering from depression or other mental illness. One question has to be asked of these politicians: What are they doing?

They are putting vulnerable people at risk of greedy relatives who want to get hold of their money. But there's something much more sinister about this proposal - they are effectively saying that some lives are not worth living. What gives cocky MPs the right to even suggest that our humanity can be done away with when we feel like it? This is relativism at its most destructive.

Hewitt argues her amendment will only "reinforcing the current prosecution policy", referring to the claim that no-one has been prosecuted for doing this from the UK as yet. But it will mean allowing aiding and abetting a suicide - or to cut to the chase - a form of murder, in my opinion. Hewitt fully admits this is part of a much wider agenda. It's her first step to try to legalise assisted suicide in the UK. She wants to introduce a private members' bill to that effect when given the chance. These are dangerous times.

It is outrageous and chilling that a former Health Secretary thinks a type of healthcare should be helping people to kill themselves. If this is really what she considers key motivation for doctors and nurses should be, we might as well forget about the NHS altogether.

This amendment was only tabled on Thursday - and may be debated and voted on by Monday or Tuesday. It just shows how evil pieces of legislation can get through in less than a week in our political system. By Wednesday, Parliament could have put the last nail in the coffin for the sanctity of life. Please don't allow this to happen. Contact your MP today to urge them not to support this.

Ms Hewitt's amendment has been signed by Conservative MPs Crispin Blunt and Richard Ottaway, Labour's Kevin Barron, James Plaskitt and Chris McCafferty and (the king of secularism) Lib Dem Evan Harris.

St Patrick's Day

As a student, St Patrick's Day was great fun. After Mass around lunchtime it would be time to go down to the rammed Dog and Partridge for a few pints of Guinness. The afternoon would roll into the evening and celebrations would continue with fantastic live music inside a massive tent erected right in the middle of Sheffield. It was great fun, especially mingling with the local Irish community. Then usually on the following night there would be a party at the chaplaincy.

I realise now, however, that despite this being a great feast day for people not just in Ireland but in Great Britain as well, many just use it as an excuse to get drunk and prance about.

On Tuesday I had a day off to go and see Arsenal v Hull City at the Emirates Stadium in London (I'm still livid about us losing 1-2 in very controversial circumstances). I went to Westminster Cathedral for confession and Mass. You could tell there were plenty of Irish people there because everyone around me was about three lines ahead when reciting the responses and prayers! Then I went over the road to Ha Ha's and enjoyed a fantastic Irish stew for lunch.

Then I headed closer to the ground for a pint or two. On seeing hundreds of people stood outside pubs with pints of whatever, I was reminded how tacky St Patrick's Day has got. Men and women of all ages wearing either Ireland rugby, football or Gaelic football shirts were swaying and singing out of tune to a classic Pogues number on the music player. Tacky badges and those stupid Paddy hats you get if you buy a certain number of Gunniess' were being worn in abundance. Individuals, some of who (including myself) hardly have an Irish bone in their body, clearly out of it by 4pm in the afternoon.

I'm not trying to deny people a drink on St Patrick's Day. After all, I've been guilty on plenty of March 17's for having far too many. But what does annoy me is the realisation that most celebrating probably couldn't give a monkeys about the great saint himself. It's a cultural thing, it's cool to be Irish for a day etc.

The most important thing about Tuesday was celebrating the ministry of St Patrick, a bishop who converted thousands back to Christianity, built churches and performed many miracles. It was also about asking for St Patrick's intercession to help us to become closer to Christ. And, of course, a day for praying for a peaceful Ireland, especially given recent goings on in the north. Unfortunately our secular country is more bothered about gulping down another pint then at least popping into church for five minutes.

It's so important to keep feast days as feast days - having a special meal, a glass of wine as well as prayer and Mass (if we can get there). Today is one of my feast days, St Joseph, my confirmation name. There are other great saints we need to honour and celebrate. But sadly, as Catholics, we don't seem to treasure our saints as much as we should at times. It seems only to be St Patrick's Day that gets the attention, but sadly for the wrong reasons.

Lenten 40 Martyr Reflections: Saint Alexander Briant

In many of these reflections, I must have said the line “St n. was probably endured one of the most gruesome deaths/or was treated the worst of the 40” quite a few times. Yet every saint I research seems to fit this bill in some way. However, I think it will be hard to beat Saint Alexander Briant for the severity of his torture, treatment in prison and execution. He was deprived of food and drink for six days, was racked at least twice to the point that he couldn’t move any part of his body and during his martyrdom, the executioner adjusted the noose to make his death even more painful. We have examples where persecutors of some martyrs at least enjoyed a drink together or allowed people to visit them in prison. But Briant seemed to be an exceptional case.

Like so many of the martyrs, however, he was remarkably resilient. After his body was twisted and torn by the so-called “master of the rack”, Briant taunted his persecutors saying (like an elder brother when his younger brother is trying to hurt him in a pretend fight): “Is that all you can do?” A Protestant minister who was trying to get his to conform said: “It’s a miracle.”

Alexander Briant was born in Somerset in 1556. Little is known of his early life until he studied at Hertford Hall at Oxford. He became a pupil of Robert Persons, who with Saint Edmund Campion later joined the Society of Jesus. Persons, like Briant, was from Somerset and both became Roman Catholics while still at University. Briant later moved from Hart Hall and joined Persons at Balliol College, founded in 1263.

In 1576, Alexander travelled to the English College at Douai and continued his studies there and at Rheims. He was ordained to the priesthood in Cambrai on March 29 1578 and embarked on the English mission on August 3 1579.

For a time he ministered in his own part of the country, where he reconciled the father of his Oxford friend, Fr. Persons, S.J., to the Catholic Church. Later Briant moved to London and lived in the house of Fr. Persons near Saint Bride's Church in the Strand.

During these years Fr. Persons was probably the recusant priest most "wanted" by the Government. His energy and enthusiasm had set him at the heart the English Mission. The authorities were out to get him.

When early in March 1581 the Government's pursuivants raided the house, Fr. Briant was caught but Persons and others had fled. Fr Alex’s chamber was ransacked, three pounds and a silver chalice was taken from him. He was thrown into The Counter Prison, Wood Street. Among the other Catholic martyrs to be held there was Blessed George Napper. This jail usually housed people unable to pay debts and those arrested for being drunk a disorderly in public. But the charges Briant was imprisoned for were much more serious.

He was jailed in strict isolation and was starved of food and water for days. In the end, he managed to get hold of a penny’s worth of stale cheese, some bread and a pint of strong beer. Because many of the inmates were drunks, beer was probably the easiest item to get. But this sustenance caused his thirst to become even more desperate and in the end he resorted to catching the drips of rainwater that leaked into the cell in his hat.

As if the agony of starvation and gasping for water wasn’t enough, Fr Briant was in for much more brutal treatment that would leave him paralysed. Because of his links to Fr Persons, the authorities considered Fr Alex as a vital man to get information from as to the priest’s whereabouts and activities.

The day after Ascension, he was moved to the Tower of London. Predicting he may well be starved there, he hid some of the cheese he had picked up from the Counter but it was taken from him during a search.

On March 27 he was brought before Lieutenant Dr Hammond and a pursuivant called Norton for interrogation. Fr Alex refused to say anything about where he had said Mass or anything to do with Fr Person’s whereabouts. They began to torture him, ordering needles to be driven under his nails. But the priest took the pain and prayed for the forgiveness of his tormenters. On April 6 he was consigned to "The Pit", a deep dungeon, where he was in complete darkness for eight days.

The importance of Briant to the Government is emphasised by a letter from the Council to the Lieutenant in May 1581, more than a month after he was first tortured. It said Fr Briant was caught with “books and writings carrying matters of high treason”. Part of the letter read: “…If he shall refuse by persuasion to confess such things as you shall find him able to reveal unto you, then shall you offer unto him the torture of the Tower, and in case upon the sight thereof he shall obstinately refuse to confess the truth, then shall you put him unto the torture and by the pain and terror of the same, wring from him the knowledge of things as shall appertain.”

Fr Briant was stretched on the rack on two successive days. The scavenger's daughter was an A-frame shaped metal rack. The head was strapped to the top point of the A, the hands at the mid-point and the legs at the lower spread ends. This meant the head swinged down, forcing the knees up in a sitting position so the body compressed to force blood from the nose and ears. They also used the thumbscrew on Briant. The victim's thumbs, fingers or toes were placed in the vice and slowly crushed.

The rackmaster boasted he would make Fr. Briant a foot longer than God had made him, unless he would give the required information about Fr. Persons. It was during this ordeal that Fr. Briant started to laugh, saying: “Is this all that you can do? You’ll have to do much better if you want to get anything out of me. If the rack is no more than this, let me have a hundred more for this cause.”

Fr Alex went back to his cell for the night. He had a temperature, unimaginable pain and his wounds were scabbing over. He was barely conscious. But they tortured him again the next day. Fr Alex was conscience he could be racked to death this time and prepared himself for the end. During the torture, Briant did faint but they sprinkled water on his face so he endured all the pain. But the humble priest united all his sufferings with Christ on the cross.

Seeing he would not crack, Norton asked him if he agreed the pope, and not the queen, was the supreme head of the Church in England. Briant said yes I reply. He was also asked a version the so-called “bloody question”. This was asked of many of the martyrs, particularly those of the 1580s, and was along the lines of: “If the Pope sent over an army turn England back to its Catholic roots and asked everyone to support him, whose side would you be on then – the Pope’s or the Queen’s?” Whatever the answer in favour of the Pope the replier was doomed. Briant treated the question as hypothetical and said: “Whether the pope have authority to withdraw [subjects] from obedience to her majesty, [I] know not.”

Upon his response to these questions, the lieutenant shouted abuse at the priest and slapped him in the face. Briant was thrown back in prison and was unable to move anything. He laid without bedding for 15 days in the cell, wearing itchy, bloodstained clothes. The fact he survived these conditions say a lot about his prayer life, trust in God and the strength he got from the Holy Spirit. Requesting admission to the Jesuits, he wrote a letter in which he revealed some of his thoughts.

The soon-to-be martyr said prayers after his first round of torture replenished him and he was filled with “a kind of supernatural sweetness of spirit”. He said his adversaries “fulfilled their wicked lust in practising their cruel tyranny upon my body”. When he found out that he was to endure more racking, Briant notes he trusted that, with the help of God, “I should be able to bear and suffer it patiently”.

There are conflicting accounts as to whether he was accepted formally as a Jesuit before the execution. But the Society does recognise him as one of theirs.

At his trial on November 16 1581, Alex made a wooden cross that he publicly carried to Westminster Hall, the highest court at that time in the land. But the cross was aggressively taken from the priest prompting him to say: “You can take it out of my hands, but not out of my heart.” It apparently made its way eventually to the English College in Rome.

There is little information about his trial, only that he was found guilty of treason and instantly shackled. The irons were not removed until his hanging, drawing and quartering.

On December 1 1581 he was in good company, martyred with two of his Oxford friends Edmund Campion and Ralph Sherwin. He was dragged through the muddy London streets to Tyburn. Having to watch his two friends being brutally killed, with the realisation that his body would be ripped to shreds in the same way, must have been terrifying. In fact, the records suggest he had a more painful death than the others. He was cut down while still alive so that he could be disembowelled and his body cut into quarters. His heart, bowels and entrails were burnt in front of a crowd that seemed to enjoy the spectacle.

Briant was just 25 when his earthly life came to an end. That’s just two years older than I am now. It’s amazing to think what he went through during that quarter of a century. When you think about it, December 1 is a momentous day for English Catholicism. Arguably three of the most scholarly and intelligent priests in English Catholic history gave their lives for Christ, enduring the most intense suffering. Little is known about Saint Alexander Briant’s ministry but it’s clear he was an intellectual young man and had the ability to convert people with the help of the Holy Spirit.

It is difficult to accept that Briant survived his torment without strength and determination from the Holy Spirit. The trust he had in God to get him through the excruciating torture, and even to laugh at his torturers, is an example to us all. During Lent, many of us struggle even to abstain even from having that chocolate bar we would usually have at lunchtime or whatever. Saint Alexander Briant can help us with fasting so it becomes a fruitful action in bringing us closer to Christ.
Saint Alexander Briant, Pray for Us.

Christianity in Public Life

Andrew Selous MP secured an interesting debate in Westminster Hall on Wendesday on Christianity in Public Life. Mr Selous is the chair of the Christians in Parliament All-Party Parliamentary Group.

From the title, I thought there would be some juicy debates about the role of Christian politicians and their conflict with secularism. I was slightly disappointed. A lot of it was quite fluffy, "O what a fantastic job faith-based organisations in the community do" etc and the like. But there were some interesting points raised. Here's just a higgildy piggildy round-up of the debate. Please note I'm not necessarily keen on all MPs quoted. I'm just providing a summary of the proceedings as such.

In his opening speech, Mr Selous said:

There are some who would like faith, including the Christian faith, to be an entirely private matter that is practised at home and that is left at the front door when one goes out to work, especially if one has anything to do with public life. I dispute that position and want to state a contrary view, but will do so very much in the spirit of considering the contribution that people of faith make to the life of our country.

Most, if not all speakers were keen to point out the UK is still not a secular society but Christian. There was also a bit of talk about Christian charities being discriminated against. Hinting at (though not mentioning) the furore over the Sexual Orientation Regulations, Communities and Local Government minister Iain Wright gave the Government line:

We are not saying that organisations in receipt of public funding cannot be open about their religious motivation, display religious symbols or tell beneficiaries about their faith. We understand that the principle of mission is central to religions, including Christianity and Islam. However, we are saying that the provision of services cannot be conditional on participation in religious activity, nor can services be provided in a way that does not conform to equality legislation and nor can public money pay for worship or activities specifically designed to do that.

An interesting intervention came from the recently elected John Mason, who won the Glasgow East by election for the SNP. He gave an eye opener into how influential Christianity was to his victory:

Faith became quite a major issue during my by-election last July, and it was encouraging to find that a number of people realised that it was still possible to be open about one’s Christian faith and, first, to be selected by a mainstream party, a category in which I include my party, and, secondly, to be elected by the public.

I decided on the spur of the moment to have a prayer at the opening of my constituency office in January. My pastor turned up unexpectedly, and I suddenly thought that I would ask him to pray. The reaction was interesting. One unbelieving friend walked out and argued that it was totally inappropriate, while the guy from the local newspaper thought that it was appropriate. So there we are.

And there was some good old "bashing" of secularism. Labour MP Sharon Hodgson said:

Like it or not, secularists often sing from the same hymn sheet as those whom they seek to silence. Their insistence on the privatisation of religion is as dogmatic as any other creed.

But the mood was dampened when parliament's king of secularism Evan Harris entered the ring.

...We should not give money to organisations that discriminate against gay people or people of religion when delivering public service. They should not discriminate against service users on religious grounds. They should not have the right to do that, and should not be allowed to proselytise on the state, as it were, using public funding, or while delivering a public service.

There were stories about the defiance of Christians and the increasing push by secularists to forward their agenda. Liberal Democrat Sarah Teather was:

"...reminded of what Madeleine Bunting said in her article in The Times about the disjunction between the adverts on the atheist bus and the often poor immigrants sitting on the top deck of the bus returning from a night shift with their prayer books open on their laps."

Wycombe MP Paul Goodman said:

At the Conservative party conference last year, the National Secular Society had a stall for the first time, and I think that represents how secularists are beginning to come into the public sphere to make their argument. The society states on its website that some delegates said, “Thank God you are here”, which is a peculiar way of expressing gratitude for its presence, but perhaps that is a sign of the times.

Despite the lack of talk on Christian politicians' using reason and theories of morality (i.e Natural Law) to stop and vote against some of the greatest evils of our time (e.g abortion and embryo research - which many involved in the debate probably support anyway), it was good to see the role of Christians in public life being debated among MPs. It shows religion has not completely gone out of the decision making minds of our law makers.

Obama's attack on the unborn

This week we have seen the expected attack on tiny human life by US president Barack Obama.

Sitting at a table surrounded by wide-smiling advisers, Obama proudly signed the executive order that effectively condemns countless human embryonic lives to the waste bin. The President overturned President Bush's ban on state-funded embryo stem cell research.

Obama said he was ending what he believed was "a false choice between sound science and moral values," adding that the research shows great potential and that "with proper guidelines and strict oversight, the perils can be avoided". He said:

"As a person of faith, I believe we are called to care for each other and work to ease human suffering ... But in recent years, when it comes to stem cell research, rather than furthering discovery, our government called to care for each other and work to ease human suffering. I believe we have been given the capacity and will to pursue this research – and the humanity and conscience to do so responsibly."

It's concerning that, with a smirk on his face, Obama uses faith as an excuse to allow destructive research on human embryos. The man has been deluded into thinking that this research will come up with cures. In Britain alone, this type of research has been allowed for nearly 20 years and not one treatment or cure has emerged from it. This is despite dozens of cures and treatments coming from ethical adult stem cell research. Human embryonic stem cell research is therefore bad science, I would say.

Watching this item on BBC News last night, I was reminded how biased the Beeb is towards Obama's politics and ethics. I watched with shock (but not surprised) as Justin Webb smiled his way through reporting this major step in the new presidency. The only argument from the other side of the argument was a five second clip of an interview with a spokesman from a pro-life organisation. Reading his blog on the BBC website, my suspicions are confirmed. You get an idea of how one-sided journalists such as he seem to be. Mr Webb writes:

"The repudiation is of a policy but also of a way of life, that puts faith above science."

I should add a personal note: my son, of whom I have written recently, has type one diabetes and could one day be cured by stem cell treatment... I note with real anticipation that America, with all its energy and zest for improvement and technical knowhow and openness to ideas and talent, is now able to devote much more of those qualities to this field. I have faith!

It seems Mr Webb is also deluded. I'm not denying him the right to express his view on a story he has been doing - I do it every day, there's no such thing as perfectly objective reporting. But there must surely be an effort by reporters from the public service broadcaster to be as balanced as possible when reporting on these significant issues? It seemed quite clear from his TV news report that Mr Webb was delighted the president had allowed this, what we would translate it to, destruction of human life.

Then from Pat Buckley, SPUC's lobbyist, we hear that Obama's new administration has joined forces with extreme pro-abortion campaigners to push a far-reaching anti-life agenda at the United Nations. Obama's colleagues are calling for the promotion of sexual and reproductive health and rights, likely to be interpreted to include abortion on demand.

The expectations about the introduction of Obama's dangerous anti-life policies have become reality.

Lenten 40 Martyr Reflections: St Cuthbert Mayne

St Cuthbert Mayne was the first secular missionary priest to be martyred and was also the protomartyr of Douai college in France. A fellow at St John’s College, Oxford, Cuthbert was one of the first to begin a long tradition of graduates or students who were drawn to the Catholic priesthood from that institution. His conversion was a gradual one - he took instruction from Edmund Campion. But after being ordained and joining the English mission, Cuthbert was caught very early on in his ministry and became a scapegoat for the vehemently anti-Catholic priest authorities in the late 16th century.

Unlike many of the martyrs, what was referred to as the “old faith” was not Cuthbert’s old faith. He was born at Youlston in Devon in 1544, the son of John. Mayne was brought up a Protestant by his uncle, a minister in the “new” religion. He was educated at Barnstaple Grammar and, at the age of 19, was made a Church of England deacon. It almost seems as though the young man was pushed into this by his uncle. He wasn’t really in tune with the Reformation and didn’t realise there were different religions.

When studying for his Bachelor of Arts at Oxford, Mayne came in contact with Campion, Gregory Martin and Henry Shaw among others. He held the position of St John’s College chaplain for several years but one wonders if he was adequately spiritually formed to carry this out. The college was becoming a real stronghold of Catholicity and Cuthbert was pitied by Papist students who chipped away at his conscience and advising him of his sin. Realising Cuthbert’s “Romeward tendencies”, Campion and Martin continued to write to the fellow urging them to join them at Douai.

One of Campion’s letters got into the hands of the Bishop of London. He immediately sent guards straight to Oxford to arrest Mayne and others. But Cuthbert had gone home to Devon. Hearing from friend Thomas Ford that the authorities were out to get him, Mayne jumped on a ship for Europe and reached Douai College in 1573.

The College had only been opened for five years. It was not too far from England and was a constituent college of the newly formed University of Douai. The institution was already filled with students, most of them from Oxford. Mayne therefore fitted in nicely. He took his Bachelor of Theology degree in early 1576 and in April returned to Cornwall as a newly ordained priest.

He was sent with John Paine and Henry Shaw by Dr William Allen, first President of the College. On arrival, Cuthbert went to live with Francis Tregian in St Probus’s parish, near Truro, Cornwall. Francis was the maternal uncle of Thomas Sherwood who was martyred on February 7 1578. Mr Tregian is also thought to have quit Queen Elizabeth’s Court.

Though Mayne passed as Tregian’s steward, rumours as to his real character spread. In June 1577, the Bishop of Exeter was visiting the area and the county’s sheriff asked for his assistance in searching Francis’ house. Tregian initially resisted the raid, telling the guards they should have a commission from the Queen to search his home. But when the Sheriff held a dagger to Francis’ chest, the householder relented. The officers “bounced and beat” Mayne’s door. In yet another remarkable (and somewhat amusing) act by of one of the 40 Martyrs, Cuthbert heard the noise and popped up from where he was in the garden to open the door for them!

Seizing Cuthbert, the Sheriff found an Agnus Dei case around his neck. These are small disks made from wax from the Easter candle and pressed with an image of the paschal Lamb and blessed by the Pope. They had been outlawed by parliament in 1571. They also found a papal bull that had also been outlawed and carrying one was now considered treason. Shouting abuse at him, the Sheriff arrested Cuthbert. The martyrdom of another faithful and brave priest was to be secured.

He was taken to the Bishop of Exeter with his belongings. He was then incarcerated at various people's houses before ending up in Launceston jail, an underground castle prison. Here, Mayne was cruelly imprisoned. He was chained to his bedposts and his legs were shackled. No-one had permission to talk to him.

The authorities sought a death sentence but had difficulty in framing a treason indictment to that end. At the opening of the trial on September 23 1587, there were five counts against him.

First, that he had obtained a "faculty" (or bulla) from the Roman See, containing absolution of the Queen's subjects; second, he had published the same at Golden; third, he had taught the authority of the Pope and denied the queen's ecclesiastical supremacy while in prison; fourth, he had brought an Agnus Dei into England and delivered it to Francis Tregian; fifth, for celebrating Mass. The judge was Sir Roger Manwood/Manhood/Marwood (three different sources have different spellings), the Chief Baron of the Exchequer, who was assisted by Mr Justice Jeffrey.

Mayne answered all counts. On the first and second, the supposed "faculty" was a copy printed at Douai of a Jubilee announcement in 1575. Its application had expired at the end of the jubilee and he had not published it either at Golden or elsewhere. On the third, Cuthbert denied saying anything definite on the Pope to three illiterate witnesses. With the Agnus Dei charge, the fact he was found with it on arrest did not confirm he had brought it to the country or delivered it to Tregian. Lastly, the presence of a Missal, a chalice, and vestments in his room did not prove he had said Mass.

Despite the excellent defence arguments, Manwood directed the jury to return a guilty verdict. The Privy Council was very concerned about reports that more than 30 graduates from Douai had been seen entering the country by spies. The judge said: "Where plain proofs were wanting, strong presumptions ought to take place." Imagine how a modern day judge would react to one of their colleagues saying that in open court these days.

After being harangued and threatened by Sheriff Grenville, the jury found the priest guilty. Mayne raised his eyes and said: "Deo gratias."

Cuthbert's execution is thought to have been delayed because Judge Jeffery had considered the proceedings unfair and informed the Privy Council, who met to discuss the case. But although some judges saying they were concerned, the Council said Mayne should be executed as a warning to other Catholics. They also instructed the killing to be done in the market place in full view as "a terror to the papists".

Mayne was told of his execution three days in advance. He devoted every remaining night of his life to prayer and contemplation. On November 27, his cell was filled with a bright light between midnight and 1am, an indication that this was a saintly man. This prompted other prisoners to call out - the light was so bright and they knew Cuthbert didn't even have a candle.

Like quite a few of the priestly martyrs, Cuthbert was challenged in debate on the day of his execution (November 29) by judges and ministers. Reports say Cuthbert outwitted them on every point.

Mayne was then offered life in return for a renunciation of his religion and an acknowledgment of the supremacy of the queen as head of the church. Declining both offers, he kissed the Bible and said: "The queen neither ever was, nor is, nor ever shall be, the head of the Church of England." He went on to say England would soon be converted back to Catholicism by the 'secret instructors' from Douai. Well and truly sealing his fate, Cuthbert made a political comment. "Any Catholic prince... invade any realm to reform the same to the authority to the See of Rome, that then the Catholics in that realm... should be ready to assist and help them." The group was infuriated and left the priest to prepare for his horrible death.

Mayne was drawn a quarter of a mile to the market place in Launceston, where an unusually high gibbet had been put up. Some wanted his head to be positioned so it scraped all the way along the floor. But the sheriff refused the requests.

On arrival, the 29-year-old was refused the right to address the crowd and instead knelt to say his prayers. Asked about the role of Mr Tregian and Sir John Arundel, Mayne said they knew nothing of the things he was condemned for. He was then pushed off the ladder and prayed: "In manus tuas." Some reports say the hangman let Cuthbert die before the disembowelment and quartering. One source says he was cut down alive, but in falling struck his head against the butcher's scaffold.

The executioner seems to have had much pleasure in ripping his body to pieces, holding up his heart to the crowd. His quarters were distributed to four different places and his head was put on a pole near a busy street. The hangman went mad a month after the martyrdom and died soon after.

The first Douai seminary priest to be martyred, St Cuthbert Mayne had a beautiful journey to Catholicism. Unlike many of the martyrs, he was born and brought up a Protestant and genuinely didn’t understand the split in Christianity until he got to university. It was his friends at university who saw his potential, gently chipping away and encouraging him to join them at Douai. The story of his conversion is an inspiration to all those young Catholics in the spiritually hostile environment of university in modern day Britain who want to express their faith gently but fully to their peers. Just as Edmund Campion felt the need to present and answer questions on his faith to someone who knocked at the door of Catholicism, so young Catholics should pray for the strength and courage to do this if they feel friends have “Romeward tendencies”. For people going through their conversion and maybe struggling with certain aspects of it, St Cuthbert can offer help in abundance.

The saint showed remarkable resilience, even if he was a tad clumsy strolling into the hands of his capturers when he heard a commotion and being in possession of a papal bull. He was clearly a cleaver academic and an effective debater. The outrageous trial he endured makes him a saint for those being wrongfully convicted to pray to.

A rough portrait of the priest still exists and portions of his skull are in various places, the largest being in the Carmelite Convent in Lanherne, Cornwall.

Saint Cuthbert Mayne, Ora Pro Nobis.

Edinburgh pro-life talk

John Howard up at Edinburgh University's pro-life group has asked me to plug a talk they're having on Thursday March 12. Life Society Edinburgh has recently been formed and are hosting the speech: End of Life Choices: Is there a place for Euthanasia? by Parliamentary Officer of the Catholic Church in Scotland John Deighan.

Mr Deighan is well up on the current political debates about moves to legalise euthanasia. As seems to tradition with university pro-life societies, a trip to a pub follows after the talk.

The event is in Lecture theatre 5, Appleton Tower, George Square from 6.30pm - 8.00pm. Entry is free and open to non-students as well as students. The lecture theatre holds 300 so there should be no problem accommodating people.

As former president of the University of Sheffield Pro-Life Society, I know how difficult it is to maintain a pro-life presence in a sometimes hostile environment. Please support the students by attending if you are available. Here's the Facebook link.