John Bruce doesn’t allow comments on his blog, so I’ll say a word or two here.
I think if he really knew my private thought, he would blow a gasket, so I will refrain. My comments on his previous articles and some private correspondence about the TAC story are not a conscience-salving exercise. I sleep well at night, and I have absolutely no desire of ever being a Roman Catholic again – and I will risk my salvation to quote the usual expression.
Like many others, I did get “carried away” at the time and allowed myself to be “programmed” by the “cult”. I got into a lot of trouble for it on the blogosphere, and the addresses of the trolls are still on my moderation list. New addresses are moderated unless I let them through a first time. I am that much more cynical for my experience. I have moved on, but am concerned for the recording of history.
Well, Mr Bruce, I am used to the insults and I am immune. History will be written and not always in the way the RC convert-apologists would prefer. I owe nothing to the American bishops, but I think they do have mitigating circumstances for not becoming Roman Catholics. Whether or not they are good Anglican bishops is not for me to judge.
In fact, he translated any necessary flummery into French, just in case any Francophones couldn’t see the wink behind the whole thing.
Produce the documents. I translated nothing into French because the anticipated French-speaking people from Africa did not turn up to the meeting. All I did was to attend services, listen to speeches and take photos. Fine, Mr Bruce accuses me of bad faith. So be it. I just don’t care, because I do not recognise him to be my judge.
* * *
One final note to this. I never do well in this kind of blog war, so I have resolved not to answer anything further coming from this man – who doubtlessly has his own demons to contend with. I have been in private correspondence with a couple of people who are concerned that the history of the TAC from October 2007 to the resignation of Archbishop Hepworth should be faithfully recorded. We need to strict with ourselves in making this a strictly academic exercise and not one of ruminating old bitterness and resentment.
I am willing to correspond by private e-mail on this subject, but it is now closed on my blog.
The Blue Flower 
Excellent example of Bruce’s utter refusal to hear what anyone else is sayings and his perverse desire to warp every bit of information to support his venom. You would be well advised to ignore such a one entirely.
I’m sure Charlie Hebdo would draw something really good if they heard about him – the filthy old man with flies buzzing round his head desperately trying to heckle down his hecklers at Hyde Park Corner. Great way of winning converts and justifying the mess he got himself into!
I’ve never heard of him…
You do better not to.
As I might have mentioned some threads ago, I was baptised at St. Mary of the Angels in 1953 as a teenager and served there as a lector and lay subdeacon many times under the late Fr. James Jordan. No one in the parish at that time (1953 into the ’60s) envisioned a trek to Rome. after all they had a perfectly good parish of their own only 4 or 5 blocks away! We were rather proud to be a ‘flagship parish’ of Anglo-Catholic substance, and one of the few places where people could go to confession without upsetting the rector of their own parish. that all changed after Fr. Jordan’s death. His successor, Fr. Jack Barker is now an RC priest somewhere. When the corner lot was turned into a bank building with a huge rental payment, everything seemed to change. The parish no longer depended on the people for its income, the bank was responsible for the ongoing expenses of the parish. I feel really sorry for Fr. Kelley and his flock, and also for the ‘remnant’ group that seems to have the keys in their possession. It is a sad ending for a place that had great prospects.
History has a mind of its own, and it is hard to change……..
Mr. Bruce has a very active and fruitful imagination.
I also heard that he was once the Treasurer of St. Mary’s.
Makes you think, doesn’t it?
I would hate to be his banker!
Mr. Bruce posted a number of entries on his blog, commencing with: Who is…………….?
He mostly got it so very wrong. Especially in trying to lure out the slandered subjects of his machinations to disclose their academic qualifications.
If he is to be believed all clergy in the TAC are illiterate individuals with skeletons in the closet. Juicy!
Now let us examine the “Cold Case” from another angle:
Who is John Bruce?
1. Academic? He’d certainly like to think so.
2. Creative writing skills? Advanced.
3. Nodding acquaintance only with the truth? You decide for yourself.
4. Confidante/ protector of the alleged victims? No doubt.
5. Kicking up dust in order to camouflage the true facts? Sure thing.
6. Lily white and smelling like a rose? Now that is a question!!!!!! (Reminds me of a toddler saying: Mommy do not look behind the curtain now, Mommy……..)
7. What is in it for him? To be determined.
My vote for the Golden Paddle Award for Stirrer of the Year goes to……………………..JOHN BRUCE.
He might consider a disclaimer to his blog:
All characters appearing in this work are fictitious. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.
Here’s an old posting from Fr Smuts: https://frstephensmuts.wordpress.com/2012/11/25/who-is-john-bruce/
He winks ccetibus
Fascinating – I would like to hear more from you…