Irene Mary’s October Letter: An Introduction to Irenianism
The October Letter of Irene Mary is published by the Astronist Institution by way of its imprint Cometanica on 23rd December 2021. This work comprises the first entry in the book series Cause for the Beatification of Irene Mary & Derrick Taylor and comprises of Cometan’s performance of an exegesis on a letter that his grandmother Irene Mary Taylor wrote in 1998 in which many ideas and concepts of Irene Mary’s were introduced which have subsequently come to form the basis of Irenianism, the Traditionalist Catholic theological system established in her honour.
This excerpt from the book includes Cometan’s exegesis of the October letter written by Irene Mary as well as some words from Cometan on the theological system established in his grandmother’s honour.
Cometanica, a subsidiary of the Astronist Institution
160 Cop Lane, Penwortham, Preston, PR1 9AD
First edition published 2021
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission granted by the Astronist Institution either in written or digital formal consent. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department of the Astronist Institution at the address above or by the following email: help@jessemillette.com
You can learn more about the life, works, legacy and Traditionalist Catholic figureship of Irene Mary Taylor at her and her husband Derrick Taylor’s official website: https://www.irenemary.com.
You can also view the full book Irene Mary’s October Letter: An Introduction to Irenianism on Google Books here — https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Irene_Mary_s_October_Letter/YFUlEAAAQBAJ?hl=en
Introduction
When my mother rediscovered a letter that my grandmother Irene Mary Taylor had written over 20 years prior and presented it to me one day, I was thrilled to have regained a connection to someone whose passing five or so years ago had left not only a hole in my life but in the lives of those around me.
I read the letter with haste and fervent joy. I could really hear my grandmother saying the words, I could imagine her typing them on her typewriting all those years ago when I was just a couple of months old. I didn’t realise that the trivial events surrounding the purpose of the letter had even happened before I read it. My parents had never told me about it but my mother had kept the letter with the inkling that maybe some time in the future, it could prove useful or otherwise important to me and this instinct was correct.
After reading the letter and beginning to digest the many layers of ideas that it produced, I named it the October Letter, a simple yet fitting title for a letter written in that month. An alternative name for the letter is also the Baptism Letter. To provide some context as to why the letter was written in the first place, it was written by my grandmother Irene Mary Taylor in order to clarify why my grandfather Derrick Taylor would not be attending my baptism on 18th October 1998.
From what I can gather from the letter itself, rumours had been spread that my grandfather either didn’t want to attend or had fallen out with my mother and father and therefore had refused to attend my baptism. From what the letter says, these rumours had been spread by other members of the Taylor family. However, this is not particularly the area of interest for me. What does interest me and what is relevant to my grandmother’s Cause for Beatification is the religious language and concepts that she sprinkles throughout the letter that, in addition to other accounts and my own personal memories of her, have come to form the basis of the theological system based on my grandparents’ lives and works called Irenianism.
The October Letter sparked both my interest and my motivation to work towards the recognition of my grandparents in the Church they loved so dearly (a form of love called ecclesiophilia) and had dedicated their lives to. I saw within my grandparents’ story great potential, an opportunity really to inspire Catholics the world over to be devout, pious and Traditionally Catholic in spite of ridicule from the world and changes within the Church.
I saw that my grandparents could become two great new figures within the Church as exemplary Catholics from a region in England whose Catholic history is long and that too has produced other notable Catholic figures. My receipt of the October Letter not only inspired me to commence this great endeavour in the name of my grandparents but also encouraged me to continue with my research into my ancestry, especially the ancestries of Irene Mary and Derrick Taylor, to understand completely where and from whom they came, to understand their lives, what shaped them and how they came to be as I knew them during my childhood years of the decade of the 2000s.
All in all, the October Letter inspired me not simply because it was written by my grandmother but because of what it represented. It represented a seed that I shall continue to water in the hope that it will sprout and grow into a beautiful, strong, majestic tree whose life and influence will span the ages. In turn, this will reflect the lives of my grandparents and how their own influence will extend far beyond their mortal existences.
The October Letter and the Wedding Letter are classified as “cause documents” meaning that they constitute two of the documents contributing to the Cause for the Beatification of Irene Mary Taylor as two of the works directly written by my grandmother that have survived to the present today. For this reason alone, they are important but they are also relevant for the inspiration they have given me, in combination with my own memories of my grandmother, to form the system of Irenianism in her name.
It is important that both the October Letter and the Wedding Letter are included as part of the package of documents that will be send to Rome when the time comes. Indeed, this package should also include this work which of course holds my necessary exegesis and commentary of these two surviving works of my grandmother. The October Letter and the Wedding Letter’s classification as “cause documents” elevates them to a status in which they comprise a central role in determining the beatific elements of Irene Mary.
Of course, documents which reveal miracles attributed to the intercession of Irene Mary will play a different role in determining my grandmother’s direct beatification. What these two Letters and The Beatification Story itself serve to achieve is elaboration of the attributes surrounding Irene Mary’s beatificity and also seek to explicate and introduce her beliefs and practices to form the foundations of her theological system Irenianism.
All in all, the October Letter and the Wedding Letter vitally serve as seeds for the tree that will be my grandmother’s beatification whenever that time does arrive. Of course, the Sceptre Bulletin Interview and my associated exegesis of it called the Catholic Conversion will serve the same purpose in my grandfather’s beatification process. To reiterate, what these kinds of documents seek to achieve is to create and establish an idea of who these individuals were. I know who they were and I know their eligibility for recognition in the Church but the world at large does not know so well the extraordinary devotion my grandparents possessed and the religious experiences they endured as a result.
Simply, I want to introduce them both to you, to allow you to see the potential, the opportunity, for the image, identity and lives of my grandparents to change, enhance and enrich Catholic life and understanding for generations to come, both in Lancashire and England but around the world also. There is no greater or more solemn purpose for these documents and letters than this and so their role in each of the Causes for Beatification remains crucial and that without them I likely would not have found the inspiration and motivation to dedicate myself to the advocation of my grandparents’ recognition causes.
I will leave you now with a quote from my grandmother’s writings that has always particularly resonated with and might also resonate with those individuals who calls themselves Catholic. Contemplate on these following words.
“We are only Catholics, living Catholic, desiring to live to the teachings of God made Man.”
– Irene Mary
October Letter with exegesis
“To Sean also. With All our Love. 13–10–98”
This part was added afterwards in pen at the top of the first page of the letter. The fact that Irene’s son was addressed only as an afterthought reaffirms that this letter was significantly addressed to Cometan’s mother, Louise J. Counsell (then Richardson; née Warbrick).
Irene Mary also reaffirms her love for both Louise, Sean and Brandon Reece (Cometan) as a way of mitigating the rumours spread about Derrick Taylor’s absence from the Baptism of Cometan, also called the Christening of Cometan.
The date of the 13th October 1998 added suggests it was written five days prior to the Baptism of Cometan on 18th October 1998.
“My Dear Louise,”
Irene Mary uses the word “Dear” in order to emphasise her fondness for the Mother of Cometan which continued even after the separation of the parents of Cometan in 2002.
“There is much chattering regarding Sean’s father not attending the baby’s Baptism, and so I have decided, to write, in order to clarify the reason for his decision.”
Irene Mary immediately addresses the main, trivial purpose of sending the letter and establishes that members of the Taylor family were spreading rumours about the intentional absence of Derrick Taylor from his grandson’s baptism. This immediate purpose of the letter is not particularly important to this exegesis nor to Irene Mary’s beatification, but instead the philosophical and theological aspects are the most significant parts of the October Letter. However, I am grateful in a way that this trivial matter did occur for if it had not then I would have even less writings directly from my grandmother.
“Sadly, I had not realised the date, which we should have pointed out to you. This was my gravest error. In our joy of the Sacrament of Baptism, we overlooked the very special date and time 12 noon which has clashed, with the most important event on Earth. The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.”
Irene Mary’s reference to Mass as “the most important event on Earth” provides insight into her deeply religious mentality and her devotion to the practice of Catholicism. She saw the weekly Mass, however mundane and repetitive it may seek to non-Catholics, as the most important recurring event of her life, an event she and her husband would never miss.
Irene Mary’s reference to “The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass” is also revealing as to her Traditionalist approach. The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass emphasises the fulfilment that the Mass brings to all of the sacrifices of the Old Testament. Also, the Mass signifies the one sacrifice on the alter of Calvary of Jesus Christ and this greatest of sacrifices being revisited each and every Sunday in the form of the Mass. The language of Irene Mary here demonstrates her knowledge and devotion to the Mass and the Church and to Catholicism itself.
These are not lukewarm feelings of devotion, these are deep-seated and pervading with many layers of literal meaning as well as metaphor in Irene Mary’s words.
“You will not know that over the past 30 years, or so, there has taken place a ‘luke-warm’ attitude by Roman Catholics, towards our Saviour’s teachings, but the fact remains, that this does not, in any way, dilute these Divine instructions, for our Salvation, and Eternal Happiness. (Each human being’s destiny).”
The timeline that Irene Mary is referring to when she writes “30 years” is from the early 1960s (around the time of the Second Vatican Council, to which Irene Mary was largely opposed) to the 1990s when she wrote the letter.
A key element of Irene Mary’s Catholic identity is her stalwart adherence to pre-Vatican II doctrine and Church practice which held to a Latin liturgy and a more medieval and Victorian theology that was defined in the First Vatican Council.
The “luke-warm attitude to Roman Catholics, and towards our Saviour’s teachings” that Irene Mary speaks of is the watering down of Church doctrine and liturgy following the Second Vatican Council as she saw it. It was this watering down of the Catholic faith to which Irene Mary was vehemently opposed and foresaw the downfall of the Church as a result of (in Irenian terms, this is what we call meiotism from the Greek word meíosi meaning reduction).
We can see this type of meiotic perspective being undertaken now in other parts of the Catholic community — (Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVSLUJt5yWI).
Irene Mary then continues to state that despite these modern changes to Church liturgy and doctrine, that she turns to the “Divine instructions for our Salvation”. Irene Mary saw the attempts of the Catholic Church to modernise its liturgy as misguided and as attempts to dilute the Catholic faith overall. Irene Mary saw these changes as a very substantial threat to the message of Christ and wanted, in all the ways she personally could, to stand against changes that she saw as undermining Church tradition as it had been passed down by Jesus Christ.
Irene Mary wouldn’t curb to the modern world’s demands of her which has since come to form an important part of her Catholic identity and beatific figureship. Personally speaking as her grandson, my grandmother seemed habitually disappointed that the Church she loved so dearly had fallen prey to the pressures of modernity. Irene Mary seemed torn between the Church that she loved so dearly — to the point at which she was an ecclesiophile or had become ecclesiophilic — and wanted to keep her faith in by contrast to the direction that the Church was taking or had been taken. She still loved the Church but she perhaps had received insufficient reassurances that the path the Church was taking was the right one. Looking at how the Church is fledging in its popularity in the second decade of the 21st century, one might suggest that Irene Mary’s meiotist thinking was accurate after all.
Dilution of the faith was what Irene Mary feared would come of the changes made to the Church during the Second Vatican Council and in hindsight, she was in some ways correct. The Church today has strayed from the kind of solidarity and stalwart devotion among Catholics that was witnessed during the first half of the 20th century as can be said of religion overall. However, the question remains that if the Church had stuck to its Latin liturgy and other facets of identity that were changed during its modernisation, would it have faired any better than it has, in fact, would it have faired worse; that, we will never know as only speculations can be made of it.
“When we realised our error, the best decision we could make was: Dad would represent Mum at the Holy Mass, and Mum would represent Dad at the Baptism.”
Irene Mary returns to the original, trivial purpose of the letter following her short digression on matters of Church politics, of which there are gladly many such digressions throughout the October Letter for if there were not then little relevance would this Letter have in Irene Mary’s Cause.
My grandmother clarifies the decision she and my grandfather had come to regarding their presence at my baptism. They would simultaneously represent one another at each of these events that, if bilocation were one of their abilities, would have both attended both events. My grandfather Derrick would attend the “Holy Mass” in representation of my grandmother and my grandmother would attend the “Baptism” in representation of my grandfather, thereafter all meeting up again for a reception at a local restaurant. This seems likely a fairly logical solution to the problem but it seems other family members at the time wished to make more of the situation than there was substance to it by accusing my grandfather of not wanting to attend my baptism or of somehow choosing the Mass over my baptism.
What this trivial matter of the October Letter actually shows is the devoutness that my grandparents felt for their Church and for the Mass. Their not attending Mass was such a significant point of concern for them, perhaps beyond what any average Catholic would feel. They were completely devoted in an ordinary yet extraordinary way and I love this about them and I think the Catholic world will appreciate this aspect of them too. It is this piousness of my grandparents that I seek to reveal through my writings of them, my memories and through my exegesis of their own words.
“There was no malice, ill-feelings, nor anger, at any human situation.”
Irene Mary reaffirms her stance that there was no desire to harm or offend when Derrick Taylor decided to attend Mass instead of attending Cometan’s Baptism.
“It was solely a spiritual outlook by both of us, and we regret sincerely any disappointment.”
My grandmother’s use of the phrase “spiritual outlook” caught my attention when first reading her October Letter.
I want to expand on my grandmother’s use of this phrase here in order to refer to how one’s spiritual beliefs influence their view of the world around them. One’s spiritual outlook is how one approaches life and especially the spiritual aspects of life and if those two parts of life contradict or otherwise cause friction as a result of their interactions within a single individual.
My grandparents’ spiritual outlook informed the course of their entire lives, it shaped the nature of their relationship, what they did with their time on this Earth and how they interacted with the world around them.
The fact that my grandparents took seriously their commitments to the Church demonstrates the centrality of their spiritual outlook in their lives. Their spiritual outlook moulded and directed my grandparents as individuals and as a married couple.
“Believe me, it is far from our calibre to disappoint deliberately anyone especially our loved ones.”
Irene Mary infers that her and my grandfather’s character is not to disappoint any person, but only to live as they believe they should even if this does not correspond to how other people live or how other people thought they should have lived.
This point is emblematic of a broader aspect of both Irene Mary and Derrick Taylor; that no matter who it was or whatever the situation, they stayed true, firm and loyal to what they believed in as Catholics. Irene Mary reiterates that they were not like this in order to disappoint anyone or to harm any other person but because they did truly believe and where loyal to their faith. Irene Mary and Derrick Taylor believed even if the whole world did not and were not ashamed to show their faith and allow it to direct their thoughts and actions even if this may have caused them further social and familial upset in the short term.
What I am trying to say is that my grandparents were as they were and nobody was going to change this attribute of them. Simply, they believed and nobody can fault them for that in a world that seems so intent on disbelieving.
“Since the priorities of our Nation are no longer ‘ONE’, (as your parents would remember), but more confusing, then the outlook can appear, as a persecution towards the Faithful.”
Irene Mary references the division that England has undergone since the Second World War. Irene Mary speaks of the unwelcoming environment that England has become for those who are religious. She interprets this environment as a persecution of “the Faithful.”
I am interested in my grandmother’ use of the phrase “but more confusing.” I think she is referring to the noise of the modern world at this point, the introduction of technology and its ability to warp the minds of the young. She may also be referring to confusion within the Church itself as to the best way to navigate the muddy waters of modernity in clashing with tradition.
Indeed, Irene Mary is referring to here the influence of political turmoil on Catholic faith in England and how the media’s dissemination of a multitude of narratives seek to confuse in order to undermine the solidity and unity of institutions like the Church itself. My grandmother is certainly right to reference how faith in traditional institutions has been eroded by overlapping and therefore highly confusing narratives, a phenomenon we are continuing to see long after my grandmother’s death. The overall point being made here is that confusion spreads mistrust and panic which stand as the epitomes of faith and hope, two pillars of the Church. What Irene Mary is referencing here is how the mechanisms of modernity only lead to harm the Church and its authority as a traditional institution.
“Thus, misunderstandings, assumptions, and wrong ideas arise so quickly.”
Irene Mary references the tendency of some of her family members to resort to rumour but also the world itself and its preoccupation for fantasy, gossip and sensationalism. Irene Mary reiterates her concern for the world if devotion to institutions like the Church continue to be eroded through confusing narratives, misconceptions and assumptions. Irene Mary clearly understands the nature of the modern world and its predisposition for assuming the worst in something before whatever it is has had the chance to explain itself.
She demonstrates her concern for this phenomenon back in 1998 before any of the epitomes of rumour and scandal — the social media platforms of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and TikTok — emerged. Irene Mary was well ahead of her time in regards to the concerns she had and the erosions to the Church she foresaw. I admire my grandmother’s wisdom in this regard because if even if you are not a Catholic yourself, you can appreciate how the contemporary world resorts to misunderstandings, assumptions and wrong ideas if the ideas presented are new or not so easily understood as I have witnessed with my founding and presentation of Astronism.
“Recently, Politics have deprived some, of true freedoms and so like the Martyrs of yesteryear, a few, seeing much at stake, desire to ‘stick their neck out’ and rise up to be counted.”
Irene Mary references her disdain for the way politics has brought about not only the division of the family but the undermining of the Church as the one divinely-inspired institution that is supposed to protect not only the family, but human life as a whole.
Irene Mary writes of her admiration for the “Martyrs of yesteryear”. My grandmother had a great fondness for martyrs. I think she saw in them something that she wished the world would emulate. Unwavering love for the Church, the determination to endure hardship, and staying true to one’s beliefs in the face of resistance and ridicule. From my perspective, I think my grandmother is making a contradistinction here between herself in the modern crisis of the Church as she saw it and the crises that have plagued the Church in centuries passed.
Of course, what my grandmother didn’t realise that with her old age and death — which I suspect she saw as emblematic of her failure to ignite change — actually set the grounds for her and my grandfather to epitomise the change they hoped for posthumously. This points to a principle that I have had to accept and remind myself of often; that one must use the scope one has been provided during their lifetime to make change but that the singular life of which I speak is so minuscule that problems so large will take a multitude of lifetimes to fix and that is fine. A small problem can be fixed with little action while a big problem with multiple facets requires the voices of many and the actions of a few special people who can really make the changes necessary. I have had to accept that Astronism’s establishment and recognition and all that I hope Astronism will become is not so likely to happen all within my singular lifetime. I have realised that in asking for things to happen quickly, the endeavour of hardships endured to reach them is undermined by a prize that is hallow or is not as whole as it could have been.
“Much at stake” is what Irene Mary refers to as the future of the Church and her deeply held concerns for its longevity, especially following the watering down of the faith and its components following Vatican II. I think this is why I remember my grandmother held a real, solemn sombreness and despondency core to her character. She wasn’t like that all of the time so please don’t misunderstand but she was distinctly like that, she had a distinct disappointment or worry for the world and humanity’s path to salvation.
The individuals “[sticking] their neck out” means persevering through persecution and ridicule in the name of one’s faith to ensure their religion stands in truth and integrity. Irene Mary references in her own way and wording what it means to do and speak when others do not and remain silent — a powerful and useful principle for any person who calls themselves an activist. What my grandmother means here is that being true to yourself and your faith is about standing up and speaking out when nobody else will. Its about standing firm in what you believe even if the world is changing around you.
Everyone else can flock to modernity but if you still believe in tradition then that is where you must stay and that is exactly what my grandparents did. Irene Mary and Derrick Taylor didn’t continue to attend only Latin Mass because they had intentions to defy the Church and the authority of its decisions nor did they do it to intentionally stand out of the crowd. They continued to attend Latin Mass and subscribe to pre-Vatican II doctrine exactly because that’s what they believed. For them to have been swept away with the modernisation of the Church would have meant they changed to suit the world rather than have the world accept them for who they were and what they believed. This, I see, as the central concern of my grandmother in how she speaks about Vatican II, that she was worried that the Church had “caved in” to the modern, secular world only to bring about its own demise as she prophesied it (a belief have labelled meiotism).
I think the individuals that Irene Mary is referring to as “[rising] up to be counted” includes herself and my grandfather. I think she is referring to any and all Traditionalists and their stalwart adherence to the old creeds of the Church and its traditions. I like this phrase my grandmother has used because it emblematises her unwavering attitude in her voice being heard even if her opinions had become unpopular in the modern world. The idea of “rising up to be counted” epitomises my grandmother’s beatific figureship. It means doing, not just saying you are going to do something to change the status quo and on the basis of this principle, I must say once again that I admire my grandmother even more, not simply as her grandson, but as someone who he himself wishes to be heard but sometimes hasn’t the confidence to actually do, not simply just to say what I will do. We should all rise up to be counted in whatever field we feel passionate. Sitting down in silence when the world needs strong voices is not the way to change the matters at hand but is only a means to perpetuate and worsen the situation.
I see my grandmother and grandfather as modern martyrs, those who dared to speak out despite the consequences of social ostracism, ridicule and persecution from the society at large. Indeed, what I mean by the phrase “modern martyr” is one not who dies for their faith physically but one who would die for their faith if needs be. I do think that my grandparents were pious enough that where they to be threatened with death unless to recant their faith that martyrdom would have come upon them. I base this belief on what I knew of my grandparents and the depth to which they were loyal to their beliefs and the institution — the Church — that is supposed to act as the preserver and heralder of Christ in the material world.
I think when my grandmother uses the phrase “true freedoms” she is referencing religious freedom, the solemn right of every human being to worship and believe as they so wish. I do not think that my grandmother was opposed to the parts of Vatican II that supported religious freedom. I do, however, believe that she was opposed to any kind of political interjections that created either direct or indirect obstacles to belief in and practice of one’s religion no matter how traditionalistic their version of the religion is.
“These days the idea of going to Mass, is merely going into a church building, saying a few prayers, and coming out again. — Not so –”
Irene Mary here makes reference to the ordinary, mundane obligation of going to Church and the popular opinion that this is all the Mass embodies or represents. She refutes this opinion based on her belief in the literal powers of the Mass in bringing about the salvation of humanity through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Irene Mary saw how the function of the Mass was literally imbued with soteriological effect which I suspect many Catholics have either forgotten or were simply just not taught. Irene Mary intends to reiterate the gravity of the Mass, its centrality to the life of Jesus Christ and the very existence and purpose of the Church he founded.
Irene Mary’s reiteration of the centrality of the Mass confirms her adherence to ritualism and the importance of the role she saw ritual play in Catholic doctrine. My grandmother, through this sentence, demonstrates her discontent with the status quo and the body of misconceptions about what the Mass is, what it means, and why it is important to attend it no matter how repetitive it may seem to some.
I think my grandmother, in this sentence, is also demonstrating her concern for the future of the Mass particularly in reference to her frustrations with Vatican II. I think she saw the results of Vatican II as degrading the gravity of the Mass as it should be told in Latin as it had been for centuries. Here, she is reconfirming her concerns by accusing the Mass of becoming exactly what she feared. I myself remember her speaking in this way of the modern Mass, that in all the handshaking and the addition of music, the true and most important elements of the Mass had been forgotten. This is what Irene Mary feared and it is for this reason that she writes about how she sees the Catholic Mass as having become watered-down to the detriment of Christ’s message in which we can clearly see the undertones of meiotist thinking.
I think my grandmother wanted to re-reinvent the Mass. She acknowledges the changes made in Vatican II but wanted to preserve the tradition of the liturgy too. It is likely that this taking away from the heart and soul of the Mass that Irene Mary saw as the consequences of the Vatican II certainly contributed to her worldly dissatisfaction and her habitual disappointment with the Church’s situation since the 1960s.
“The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, is Our Blessed Lord ‘Jesus Christ’ Crucified at Calvary 2,000 years ago, perpetuated through History.”
Irene Mary makes an emphasis on the fact that the Mass is literally Jesus Christ. The Mass is the life, ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. I admire this literal interpretation of the Mass which I think definitely captures how Irene Mary saw the Mass and underscores once again how saw its function in the purpose and endeavours of the Church. Because Irene Mary saw the Mass as literally the present form of Jesus Christ, altering the Mass was tantamount to altering Jesus Christ himself and it is that Irene Mary could not accept when the changes of Vatican II were announced. Irene Mary saw the Mass as untouchable, unalterable, already perfect, so when the Church came to the decision to change the Mass, Irene Mary saw this as the ultimate betrayal of how “God made Man” had intended for the Mass to be. I think my grandmother could get her head around why the Church did what it did during Vatican II but I don’t think she could ever accept any kind of rationality for changing such an integral, and as she saw it, divinely prescribed part of the Catholic religion. This Traditionalist stance was of course her position for the remainder of her life and posthumously, has become an important part of her Catholic figureship.
In Irene Mary’s use of the word “perpetuated” we come to one of her identified ‘key concepts’ of perpetuation. In Irenian theology, perpetuation refers to Irene Mary’s view that the role of the Mass is to continue and preserve the literal body and blood of Jesus Christ. Although this concept of the preservative role of the Mass did not begin with Irenian thought, it is a concept renewed and revived through Irenianism and saw especial emphasis in the direct writings of Irene Mary during her penning of the October Letter.
Irene Mary’s deliberate use of capitalisation establishes an emphasis of certain ideas. For example, Irene Mary’s capitalisation of the word “History” is used to show that she is not referring to secular or world history but divine history, Christian history and the history of the Church. Irene Mary also makes a point to reuse the phrase “Holy Sacrifice of the Mass” as a means of reasserting her view that Vatican II had dispossessed the Mass of its core, necessary elements that had been passed down by Jesus Christ from the Last Supper.
When proposing my grandparents for beatification, some Church officials may be skeptical in elevating Traditionalists to such a status especially in an age when the Church seems to want to appear to have become modern and progressive, but I think in recognising and beatifying Traditionalists, perhaps synonymous with the core of the Catholic base, the Church would demonstrate its fondness for the differences of opinion existent within the Catholic community. Although Catholics are a large group of human beings united in their faith, this is not a homogenous community of over a billion souls for that would be an impossibility. Instead, the Catholic community shows great diversity within it which is important for any real community to develop and survive.
The Church’s acknowledgement that Traditionalists like my grandparents still exist in the world and are not just part of some begone era through their recognition and beatification would demonstrate the Church’s commitment to freedom of belief and would also show how a diversity of opinions is positive for a community to thrive, to stay part of the world’s dialogue even if parts of that community are less progressive or more resistant to change that other parts of the community want. By beatifying people like my grandparents, the Church would demonstrate that it isn’t only just acceptable for Catholics to hold differences in opinion on liturgy but that we as a Church embrace their right to hold such opinions and to freely put those beliefs into practice. Moreover, I think that the Traditionalist stance of my grandparent should not in any way hinder the Church’s endorsement of their figureship and its acceptance of their beatification causes. At least, I hope that this will not be the case.
“Those who have criticised Dad as being ‘funny’ or ‘awkward’, may now understand. — Untrue –”
Returning back to the worldly purpose of the letter itself, Irene Mary reiterates the falsity and fabrication of the rumours spread of her husband Derrick’s intentional absence from Cometan’s baptism. Irene Mary establishes once again her tradition of refuting misconceptions about the Church and the Catholic faith. It was important for my grandmother to establish her refutations of the misunderstandings that concerned her the most through her writings as a means to making her position on topics in question as clear as possible.
“We are only following the Faith of our Fathers as our children should.”
Irene Mary was all family, all faith and all forgiveness.
Irene Mary’s reference to “our Fathers” may literally mean Irene Mary and Derrick’s fathers but is also likely to refer to the Fathers of the Church, that series of early theologians whose writings came to establish the foundations of Catholic theology.
Irene Mary’s addition of “as our children should” highlights the pivotal disappointment of her later years that I myself can attest to, that my grandmother was habitually and deeply disappointed that her children did not share the same Catholicity as she and my grandfather possessed.
This key characteristic of habitual disappointment too constitutes a core part of Irene Mary’s overarching identity. Irene Mary’s disappointment with the world and those around her and even with the Church itself seemed deep to her core. It had been festering for some time by the period that I spent with her during my childhood in the 2000s and it had infiltrated her mentality to such a degree that even as a child I noticed this “habitual disappointment” quality of her was deep-seated.
As I see it, there existed two sides to this characteristic of my grandmother, the first I refer to as her habitual disappointment while to the second I ascribe the phrase worldly dissatisfaction.
Irene Mary’s worldly dissatisfaction was my grandmother’s deeply held feelings of discontentment and vexation with the modern world, a world that she saw as overrun by the work of the Devil.
Irene Mary’s habitual disappointment is evident whenever in my grandmother’s writings or in mine or other’s memories of her that the dissatisfaction she felt for her family, the world and the Church manifest in her emotionally through her expression of disappointment.
Although my grandmother indeed possessed many other dimensions to her personality and character, this aspect of her especially stood out to me and has continued with me to the present day regarding my thoughts and memories of her which has caused a lingering sadness for me based on this fervent disappointment I felt emanating from her.
In the Wedding Letter from 2009 which is included with commentary later in this book, some of my actions in pushing my grandmother away in my attempt to gain a sense of self and achieve my own identity are revealed. I’m afraid I may have added to the level of disappointment she felt which only contributes further to the sense of sadness I feel about how our relationship changed as I grew into a young adult. My innocence, naivety and malleability as a child had been replaced with a growing sense of my own self-understanding and self-identity which in turn brought about my fervent questioning of the world and people around me. This is a process that all young teenagers go through but which I felt held a negative emotional effect on my grandmother which I too sensed thereafter due to her emotional distance from me when I was 11 to 17.
In this point, I touch upon the fact that there exists two distinct periods in mine and my grandmother’s relationship which are prepubescent (0–11 years) and pubescent (11–17 years). It is the prepubescent period that I feel more positive about and have fonder memories of than that of the pubescent period.
I think my ability to clearly distinction between these two periods in the nature of the relationship between myself and my grandmother perhaps says more about her than it does myself. It implies another of the key concepts of Irene Mary’s I want to identify and explore called the Children of God. Irene Mary’s relationship with me as her grandson is emblematic of her relationship with many other of her family members and how she saw children in the world in general. A word that I use to refer to her approach to childrearing is insulationism.
Essentially, because Irene Mary literally saw the world as a dangerous, evil place filled with temptations from the Devil, she would logically then want to protect those she loved most — her children and grandchildren — from such evil. In doing so, Irene Mary attempted to insulate from the world her children and those grandchildren she could practice this with (myself being one of them due to my precarious home life which was caused for the most part by the separation of my parents when I was four years old).
I think this sentence used by my grandmother also reiterates the idea that she and my grandfather were simply ‘seeing through’ their faith as it was taught to them. Nothing more, nothing less, just the Catholic religion as it was taught for centuries was what my grandparents held to during the times of “turmoil in the Roman Catholic Church” of 1977 as Irene Mary described it on a separate hand written note she had left for my father which was given to him after her death in 2015. The turmoil that my grandmother was referencing was indeed in reference to the growing tensions between Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, his Society of St. Pius X and the Vatican during the 1970s which indeed culminated in the 1980s with Lefebvre’s excommunication. The “Dei Gratias Note” which is the title I have ascribed to the note from my grandmother can be found after the section of the Wedding Letter along with transcriptions of other notes written by Irene Mary that were given to my father after her death.
“Maybe they have not yet realised what a good sincere honest character, God has blest them with as a father. He would be so happy if they followed him.”
Much of the disappointment that I felt emanating from my grandmother during my childhood emerged as a result of her disappointment felt because of her children. Not only their lack of religiosity but their ignorance to their father Derrick’s good nature.
Much of the personal strife that Irene Mary faced during her lifetime has translated to her post-corporeal Catholic identity of which I write about here in my exegesis.
The fact of my discussion of these personal aspects of the life of Irene Mary emblematises the familial dimensions of her figureship. One of the unique parts of her figureship is that Irene Mary was a mother and she had the same fears, hopes and worries as any other mother would for her children and grandchildren.
This touches on an aspect of Irene Mary’s figureship that I wish to highlight, that is her relatability. Irene Mary shares the same relatability as Saint Gianna Beretta Molla, an Italian paediatrician who refused abortion and hysterectomy during her dangerous fourth pregnancy which ultimately caused her death.
The story of Saint Gianna brings to my mind a similar though markedly less fatal ordeal that Irene Mary herself endured during the pregnancy and birth of my father, a story that my Aunt Thérèse told me recently.
Irene Mary was told by doctors tending to her pregnancy that my father, who would be named Seán, would have defects and that Irene Mary should consider abortion discriminated on the fact this was Irene Mary’s twelfth pregnancy.
Of course, Irene Mary refused and ensured that no decisions could be made without her full consent by enduring the birth without any painkillers to ensure she was sound of mind throughout.
Irene Mary’s dedication to protect her son in spite of the pain she had to endure during childbirth was not necessarily extraordinary but it was certainly admirable and something that all Catholics should be able to appreciate due to opposition to abortion remaining a prominent doctrine of the Catholic Church.
The relatable characteristics of Irene Mary’s figureship include her opposition to abortion, her protective motherly nature, her sacrifices for her family, and her dedication, her affection, and her devotion to the Lord’s teachings on unborn children.
“The attitude these days are, if anyone is religious, they are Mormons; Jehovah’s Witnesses; or even mental. That’s only politics.”
Irene Mary writes of the same ridicule that I face today for having my own faith in Astronism and for this, I appreciate her writings otherwise even before my own birth and baptism. My grandmother faced these same forms of contempt and criticism for simply just holding steadfast to her faith.
Irene Mary attributes this harsh environment for the religious population to political forces with which I concur due to the ability for politics to subvert faith and belief.
I admire that my grandmother could sense what she did about the environment for the religious during her later years. I also admire her resolve to stay true to who she was and what she believed even when the whole world around her told her not to, would have preferred her not to be who she was, not to believe what she believed.
My grandmother’s words here certainly pertain to the political environment for certain religious communities in England and other countries in which being religious to some means that one is radical or a fundamentalist, another misconception planted by political forces that my grandmother attempts to dispel through her writings.
Indeed, it is clear that my grandmother felt for some time an attitude imbued with hostility towards the religious and the believers. She felt this enough to write it down which always makes me feel as though this thought was even more sincere than if she had just thought and said those words aloud. We all say things everyday that when put to paper may not be as we intended but by my grandmother writing these sentences down and sent it out means it wasn’t just a whim. Indeed, this was an attitude and sense of hostility that she had felt considerably and consistently. I feel dejected at the thought of my grandmother feeling mockery and antagonism from others simply because of her faith. It is for this reason that I today work in the human rights field of scholarship, specifically in freedom of religion or belief (FoRB) and recognition of religion or belief (RoRB) so that I can make my contributions to end the kinds of injustices faced by those with beliefs and those without in different countries around the world.
“We are only Catholics, living Catholic, desiring to live to the teachings of God made Man as He taught us, through the Church, He Himself established 2,000 years ago, when he walked this Earth. Does that really worry our family?”
Irene Mary’s phrase “we are only Catholics” means to make reference to the ordinary lives of my grandmother and grandfather in that they were simply Catholics, no more and no less. They self-identified as they intended and believed as the catechism taught them, no more and no less.
Irene Mary’s reference to her own ordinary life may not seem to hold significance for her beatificity but it does because it reiterates the fact that she and my grandfather were parents, grandparents and Catholics just as there are millions of others in the world but this reinforces both of my grandparents’ relatability. They were not martyrs, great intellectuals, clergy, prophets, or apostles. They were ordinary people with an extraordinary devotion to their religion in such a way that it pervaded all aspects of their lives and to the degree that they both experienced spiritual awakenings of different manifestation during their lifetimes.
Indeed Irene Mary was ordinary in some ways but as someone who knew her personally, she was anything but wholly ordinary. She may have been a mother, grandmother and Catholic just like many other women but she had ways particular to her and she went about things in life in a way unique to her. She would wonder off, trailing to churches across the country, even if this meant walking for miles, alone or with her children or grandchildren. She would sit in devotion and contemplation for hours at a time, ruminating on the message of Christ as many mystics and visionaries have for over two thousand years.
In the words “living Catholic”, we arrive at the primary key concept in Irene Mary’s figureship. Living Catholicism is the manifestation of Irene Mary’s ordinary roles of mother and grandmother in the realm of theological theory. It pertains to the living out of Catholic teaching in one’s domestic life. The family and the home were central to the life of Irene Mary and so it makes sense that in the theological system established in her name and honour, that family life would play a central role also.
Living Catholicism is therefore the practice of integrating in very close a manner Catholic theology in one’s everyday activities in a way that mixes the ordinary with the Catholic. Although with origins in this October Letter, Living Catholicism will be explicated in much greater depth in my upcoming work The Beatification Story of Irene Mary & Derrick Taylor.
I would say that the first part of this sentence is the most important phrase that my grandmother uses out of all of her writings. It is poetic, insightful, multi-layered and ultimately, simply Catholic. It captures the beatific figureship of my grandmother and solidifies her Catholic identity, perpetuating her words and ideas in a simple proverb forevermore. It is these words in particular of the lady I speak of called Irene Mary which I will remember and cherish that she wrote them all those years ago because what she wrote inspires me today to press on with her recognition cause in the Church. In this single phrase, Irene Mary captures three main aspects to her figureship:
- Ecclesiophilia (her love of the Church and its traditions).
- Simplicity (her living as ordinary Catholics should).
- Traditionalism (her adherence to the Latin liturgy).
These three components of my grandmother’s figureship are what I like to label as Irene Mary’s Three Honours to remind Catholics that to be a Catholic is a privilege, it is to know truth and love and light in the way it was intended by, as my grandmother says, “God made Man.” Catholics have the honour of loving their Church, its mysteries and its wonders. Catholics have the honour of adhering to the Latin liturgy, the richness of its eccentricities and the marvels of its longevity. Finally, Catholics have the honour of living simply, living ordinarily, and living Catholic.
“We convey our sincere apologies, for all the confusion and disappointments, and hope that you will understand. Please forgive us for not realising the time.”
Irene Mary asks for my mother’s forgiveness regarding the confusion and misunderstandings surrounding my grandfather’s absence from my baptism at St Joseph’s Church, Brindle.
“We both thank you for all your efforts in celebrating this Sacrament. We are delighted at the child’s Baptism, and look forward to your generous invitation afterwards at the Vineyard.”
Irene Mary thanks her son Sean and my mother Louise for indulging in the Catholic sacrament of baptism which again demonstrates Irene Mary’s longing for her family to share her same Catholicity.
A fun fact about my grandmother that I have just remembered as I perform this exegesis is that she was an excellent drawer. She drew my father when he was a baby sleeping and although I never saw the drawing myself, I was told it was brilliant. I hope that one day in the future one of my grandmother’s drawings will resurface so that I can show people that she had a talented and steady hand for illustration.
“We love you all very much and desire many many Blessings on Brandon Reece, a marvellous GIFT OF GOD.”
In this, one of the final parts of the October Letter brings about another of the key concepts of Irenianism, that is Gift of God which is integrated with the aforeintroduced key concept of the Children of God.
Irene Mary saw every child as a Gift of God which highlights the logic underlying her opposition to abortion even in the case of defected newborns.
The Irenian concept Gift of God pertains to the seeing of certain occurrences in life as originating from divine will.
“Sincerely, with love and prayers,
Sean’s mother”
Irene Mary’s signing of the letter as “Sean’s mother” creates a sense of informality between her and my mother than if she had signed it Irene Taylor.
Finally, Irene Mary reaffirms the importance of prayer and her integration of communication with God with love itself.
Introducing Irenianism
Irenianism, also called Irenian theology, or Irene theology, is a Catholic theological school of thought and philosophical system comprised of a series of concepts, beliefs and practices that emerged from the life and works of a married couple from Leyland, Lancashire named Irene Mary Taylor (1932–2015) and Derrick Taylor (1930–2011). The couple were Traditionalist Catholics and held to the orthodoxy of the Latin Mass even after the pronouncements of the Second Vatican Council in 1965 which heralded the Church’s modernisation.
As a theological and philosophical system, Irenianism presents an approach to Catholicism based on Traditionalist views of Church doctrine. This approach is intertwined with the events in the life of Irene Mary and Derrick Taylor. What happened to this couple during their lives separately and together has logically come to form the theological system established in their name.
The basis of Irenianism rests in what is referred to within the system as Tridentinianism, or Tridentinian theology, that is adherence to the Latin Mass and Catholics traditions after the Second Vatican Council. Both Irene Mary and Derrick Taylor made no secret that they adhered to “the old ways” and opposed the reforms brought in by the Council of the 1960s. This Tridentinian fervour came to shape how the couple not only brought up their children and how they practiced their faith, but also how they interacted with the outside world.
Irene Mary and Derrick Taylor’s adherence to Tridentinian thought was based on the idea that is to be henceforth referred to as meiotism. Based on the Greek word meíosi meaning reduction, meiotism states the belief that the watered-down version of Catholicism that the Second Vatican Council established would see the downfall of the Church. Meiotistic thinking is therefore both apocalyptic for the Church and staunchly contradictory of the principles emerging from Vatican II. Meiotism constitutes, to varying degrees of severity, a core part of Irenian thought and theology.
The third core element of Irenianism is that called Living Catholicism, Living Catholic and more recently Animatic Catholicism. Living Catholicism is an approach that incorporates Catholic doctrine into everyday life, combining the ordinary with the divine. This approach is indeed based on the ordinary roles that both Irene Mary and Derrick Taylor fulfilled during their lives, namely that of mother and grandmother as well as father and grandfather respectively. Living Catholicism is the embodiment of Derrick and Irene Mary’s attempts to incorporate Catholic doctrine into their marriage and their domestic family life. It is intended that with the development of Living Catholicism, other ordinary Catholics around the world will also be able to integrate their Catholic faith into their own familial and marital lives in the same way as Irene Mary and Derrick Taylor did during their lifetime.
The fourth theological contribution of Irenianism is that which is referred to as the Children of God or Gift of God. Irene Mary firmly opposed abortion for any reason, seeing every child as a marvellous miracle gifted by God not only to the parents but to the world. Moreover, it was Irene Mary’s belief that no child simply just belongs to its parents. Even for her own children, Irene Mary believed that it was God first to whom her children belonged and only her and husband Derrick in a secondary capacity. This view of her children and grandchildren shaped the life and motherhood of Irene Mary. We were indeed her children and grandchildren but we were the property of God first and foremost and so abortion was seen by Irene Mary as not only the taking of a child’s life but taking away from God, the Lord of All.
Eternal happiness is the fifth major element of Irenianism that focuses on the role of the afterlife to firstly effectuate eternity and secondly to effectuate happiness. Eternal happiness is the phrase that Irene Mary uses to refer to the bliss awaiting her in heaven with God that she and every other person are blessed with as a result of their following of Christ. The eternal happiness that Irene Mary speaks of stands in direct contrast to the worldly dissatisfaction and despondency she exhibited during the latter years of her life, particularly as a result of the modernising Church and the irreligiosity of many of her children and other family members.
The sixth and final major element presently considered part of Irenian theology that originate with Irene Mary herself is the concept of perpetuation. In her writings, Irene Mary paid particular emphasis to the importance of the perpetuation of Christ’s message. The act of perpetuation and its related concept play into the Traditionalist views of Irene Mary, particularly in the sense of maintaining tradition in the face of the pressures of modernity. Perpetuation, albeit indirectly, supports the Traditionalist stance in the name of preserving customs, liturgy and belief as close to those passed down from Christ as much as possible which almost always does not accommodate modern theological and liturgical inventions as Irene Mary and other Traditionalists see it. Perpetuation is therefore an important part of the school of theology of Irene Mary and Derrick Taylor.
The second part of Irenianism is Irene Mary and Derrick Taylor’s approaches to orthopraxy. For this work of course the focus will be placed on known practices of Irene Mary while the upcoming 2022 book Catholic Conversion will cover Derrick Taylor’s contributions to Irenian theology and orthopraxy. Returning to the orthopraxy of Irene Mary, we have the two elements of particular devotion and spiritual outlook. Particular devotion is indeed Irene Mary’s encouragement of practicing devotions and contemplations on certain saints and blessed. For Irene Mary, her presently known particular devotions include Thérèse of Lisieux, Dominic Savio and Josemaría Escrivá. Irene Mary believed in the power of devoting oneself to the imitation of a select group of saints. Her theory was that through especial devotion to certain saints, this would give oneself focus in contemplation because one would be able to give the small group of saints one has selected the time and energy to truly understand their stories and reasons for their sainthood with the aim of emulating them. In this vein of thought, Irene Mary bought every book she could find of these three saints, carried prayer cards of them at all times and put pictures of them up in her house to remind of her obligation to their particular devotion. This approach altogether emerged in Irene Mary resembling the characteristics in real life of the saints to whom she was devoted which altogether enriched and deepened her Catholic faith and practice.
The final element of Irenianism and in particular Irenian orthopraxy, Irene Mary’s concept and practice of the spiritual outlook is the natural, deeply engrained interweaving into how one acts, behaviours and communicates as informed by the belief system to which they adhere and identify. The spiritual outlook is therefore both a concept and a practice that ironically transcends not just one’s personal thought and actions but comes to effect one’s environment, how we go about our daily life and how we interact with those around us.
I briefly wanted to list some of the individuals involved in or of relevance to Irenianism so far: Irene Mary, Derrick Taylor, Cometan, Marcel Lefebvre, Patrick McNally, Paul Aulagnier, John Carmel Heenan, Hugh Ross Williamson, Evelyn Waugh, and Mother Mary Angelica of the Annunciation. Each of these individuals has either influenced the founding of Irenianism or has contributed to it in some way or another, a list which is expected to grow as Irenianism develops into a fully-fledged Catholic school of thought.
What can be taken from this short introduction to some of the main elements of Irenianism is that this approach to Catholicism is multifaceted with elements of theology and orthopraxy. The purpose of Irenianism has always been to embody and organise the words, works, lives and teachings of Irene Mary Taylor and Derrick Taylor, to immortalise their identities and to solidify their contributions to their beloved Church. As the years go on and the figureships of both Irene Mary and Derrick Taylor continue to develop posthumously so too shall the theological system associated with them expand.
