It appears that the fire was started in Eccleston Square.
Damian Thompson has written a piece in The Spectator suggesting that the Papal Visit has been infiltrated by none other than Tony Blair's Faith Foundation. The Telegraph columnist has said...
'Parts of the itinerary drawn up for the Pope also read like extracts from a Tony Blair Foundation conference. There are numerous meetings with non-Catholics and “People of Faith”; there is no sign of any visits to a hospice, crisis pregnancy centre or adoption agency which might take the Pope into areas of Catholic teaching from which the Blairs have publicly dissented. These matters are glossed over, just as they were when Mr Blair was discreetly received into the Catholic Church by his friend Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor without being asked to disavow his support for abortion.'
This country is not only a hotbed of hardened atheism, embodied in the 'teachings' of Dawkins, Hitchens and Fry, but liberalism, a brand of liberalism which has decimated entire Dioceses since the same ilk hijacked Vatican II and began to infantilise and subvert the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
It is now being reported that just 'one young person' from every parish in the UK is entitled to go to attend the Papal Visit. Every parish has been asked to stump up the money to upkeep security for the Holy Father, yet so few will be able to see the Successor of St Peter in the flesh. It is all beginning to reminds me a little of the FA Cup Final. Fans dream of seeing their team at Wembley, but know that only season ticket holders and corporate box members will be able to see the final live. Those who are guaranteed a place to see the Holy Father, or at least many of them, appear to be those who are the least loyal and least fervent of his 'fans'.
For evidence of this, click here for the Papal Visit website (should it be renamed the PayPal Visit website?), where you will see there is plenty of opportunity for donating to the running of the events, but no opportunity for getting a ticket. Many, I expect, will just turn up on the day and who can blame them. The idea of being in such close proximity to the Holy Father, yet round a friend's house watching it on TV should make any Catholic worth his salt begin to sweat with frustration and dread.
Many people within the Church view those who love Holy Tradition, those who support loyally Pope Benedict XVI and those who support his desire for liturgical renewal as an elite within the Church. Nothing could be further from the truth and the contingent who are able to see the Holy Father on his arrival in the UK will, it appears, bear a terrifying testimony to that fact. The 'magic circle' are still in operation within Holy Mother Church. Many outwardly profess their loyalty to the Pope, yet inwardly they despise His Holiness and despise what they see as his 'agenda'. They appear to hold all of the cards. Those who truly love the Holy Father are in need of an ace.
It is possible that on the day that Cardinal John Henry Newman is beatified by the Holy Father, the dear Saint will look down and see in the Pope, his only true supporter.
26 comments:
Wait a minute, you mean to say the Church may not be promoting egalitarian values or putting faith before wealth and power? I believe what you have just stumbled upon is Protestantism, Mr. Luther. Welcome aboard, this good ship sails to Heaven, while the seedy, corrupt, nebulous devils sit festering in Rome counting their millions. Long live Truth, Long Live Jesus, Down with Papal Heresy
I don't think the Pope will come..never have done!
I liked the "PayPal" pun! lol
I don't know what we're all getting so worked up about. If you google "Newman" "beatification" "tickets", you'll find a number of travel agents offering packages inclusive of flights, accommodation and guaranteed tickets to the beatification Mass. Easy peasy.
Bishop of Ringwald
One must always take care, to not throw the baby, out with the bath water. Laurence is no Protestant! The very thought.
''Whatever were our opinions about the Council’s various doctrines before its conclusions were promulgated, today our adherence to the decisions of the Council must be whole hearted and without reserve; it must be willing and prepared to give them the service of our thought, action and conduct. The Council was something very new: not all were prepared to understand and accept it. But now the conciliar doctrine must be seen as belonging to the magisterium of the Church and, indeed, be attributed to the breath of the Holy Spirit.'' (Paul VI to the Roman Curia, 23 April, 1966)
Stand up 4 Vatican 2 - how is that quote relevant to this post.
Bishop of Ringwald - the Church is sometimes corrupt because it has humans in it. THe same is true of Protestant Churches.
This is rather depressing.
Yes, but a Protestant follows her own conscience, the Bible, the learned authorities, and listens to God. No one has a final say on the matter other than the person whose soul is at stake. IF you will insist on giving a fruity old ex-Nazi power of subpoena over your soul then don't complain when he doesn't do what you wanted him to (or just abanon the corrupt Church and follow the one True faith)
Bish ringwald said
"Yes, but a Protestant follows her own conscience, the Bible, the learned authorities, and listens to God."
We (Catholics) decided what is and is not, your Bible.Fact. We are, the learned authorities, and Jesus, promised to be with us, to the consumation of the world. Get on board , bish. You are gonna make a great Catholic one day, and proclaimer of Christ Jesus, in these days....
Check out Tim Staples videos on youtube, a really angry anti catholic (well, not anymore, but....anything you could find fault with, he did, and still converted to Rome eventually).
God bless, and guide you, brother/sister.
Please feel free to get really hot or cold with my comment, it's only the lukewarm Jesus spits out!
If Catholic humans decided what constitutes the Bible how can you also hold it is the word of God? Humans did not decide on the Bible, God did when he gave it to Man. If you accept that humans chose the books of the bible and it could have been otherwise what is to make you accept it was God's voice? Once again, Catholics have shown how flimsy and relativistic their beliefs are when compared to the Truth of the original faith (before Rome corrupted it)
Tell ya what bish, just for you, I am going to post one of his (Tim Staples) videos to my blog. I was running out of focus on my blog,thought about giving up, if I'm honest, due to in-house catholic fighting. You have re-invigorated m and re-united me, with my Catholic brethren, bless you for that! See, the Holy Spirit already has you working for Him! I am going to post one of his videos every few hours, just for you bish. You have reached a stage in your christian walk, where you refer to yourself as a bishop and a 'she' in comments. That intrigues me. Hope Tim Staples testimony, totally scripture based and founded, does the same for you.
God bless and keep you.
I do not refer to myself as a she. I used the female pronoun out of sympathy with females who are subsumed under the male pronoun. I am a male (indeed I am the Bishop of Ringwald, a small anti-papist village)
Thanks for the Tim Staples video. If I send you a link to a Catholic defector who has come to see that Luther was right will you post that also?
Btw I am a bit confused about the video you selected - he does not advance one single argument in favour of his/your claims (aside from saying the Church is old, which no one disputes)
Catholicism is not, as he claims, the fullness of Christianity. Simon, who was called Peter, recognised the divinity of Christ, and was instructed to found a Church to proclaim His gospel. All subsequent apostles of Christ are in his lineage, not only those elected by the Church. To assert this is to commit a grave heresy, and to renounce the simple truth of the message that was proclaimed in favour of a system developed by corrupt human minds interested in advancing their own power. I will pray for your soul, you have been tempted by Satan
Though not a specialist in the subject, Ratzinger over the years has made a particular study of the liturgy, which he loves. Here also, in view of his later record, Highlights is a startling read. The book leaves no doubt that its author wholeheartedly welcomed the liturgical reforms of Vatican II. Indeed, his judgment on past liturgical practice is severe, his critique thoroughgoing. “In the late Middle Ages,” he writes, “awareness of the real essence of Christian worship increasingly vanished.” When Martin Luther attacked, the Catholic Church registered its reaction at the Council of Trent—a reaction Ratzinger deems inadequate. Trent, he writes, centralized all liturgical authority in the “purely bureaucratic” Congregation of Rites. Lacking “historical perspective,” the congregation “viewed the liturgy solely in terms of ceremonial rubrics.” A sort of “court etiquette for sacred matters” prevailed, reducing the liturgy to “a rigid, fixed, and firmly encrusted system.” No wonder Ratzinger thinks that none of the saints of the Counter-Reformation—Ignatius, Teresa of Ávila, John of the Cross—drew their spirituality from the liturgy.
In the Baroque era, High Mass “became a kind of sacred opera,” during which the people in church would be busy with their own devotions, reciting the rosary. “They were united with the priest only by being in the same church with him.” In endeavouring “to preserve old forms,” the Vatican Congregation of Rites had brought about “the total impoverishment of the liturgy.” Yet Ratzinger insists that “for the church, divine worship is a matter of life and death.” Thus, if the liturgy’s proper function was to be recovered, “the wall of Latinity had to be breached.” But even more than that was necessary. “It was now clear, for example, that the selection of biblical texts had frozen at a certain point.” So “a new theology of divine worship” had to be worked out.
Hey lorrie darling,
Vincent Nichols has written a good article in this week's The Tablet.
U read it?
Somewhere on a shelf in the Vatican lies the 1998 ICEL missal, the fruit of thirteen years of work, denied Rome's approval. Though it was passed by all eleven bishops' conferences as the long-awaited revision of its 1973 precursor, it has never been seen by the English-speaking world at large. Its rendering of the Mass achieves a beautiful flow, and the abbreviations and paraphrases that so seriously marred the 1973 version have been addressed. The quality of what it contains can be gauged from the collects. These opening prayers had drawn vehement and damaging attack as the weakest element of the 1973 book. Among the completely redone translations, here is one for the twenty-seventh Sunday in Ordinary Time:
Almighty and eternal God,
Whose bounty is greater than we deserve or desire,
Pour out upon us your abundant mercy;
Forgive the things that weigh upon our consciences
And enrich us with blessings
For which our prayers dare not hope.
shadowlands - I had a look at your blog site, there is only one postings on it (and even that one is rubbish)!
"ex-Nazi"
When you resort to libel how can we trust the rest of your argument?
That is NOT libel, it is a FACT. Ratz was a Nazi. He joined the party. If you wish to dispute this I can send you the dossier of images I have (over 50); each one shows Ratz in his little Nazi uniform saluting the Nazi authorities. If there is such a thing as original sin then Ratzy boy committed it by joining the Nazi party. He had a free chocie, just like every other sinner. He also had a free choice to NOT join the DEVIL in the Vatican, but he did. Therefore Ratzy boy and you go to HELL and burn
He was a member of the Hitler Youth (as were the majority of boys of his age) before being conscripted into the Wehrmacht. Not the same as being a member of the Nazi party. But why let the truth get in the way of your warped prejudices?
Wehrmacht servicemen were automatically added to the party roster. I would have thought that a man who is so committed tot he absolute freedom of the individual to resist social and historical forces would have made a principled stance against Fascism. Guess he liked the pomp that surrounded it. When the Nazis were eradicated, the Church was the next best thing - sinful iconographic poison that it is. The Devil IS the Catholic Church
"Wehrmacht servicemen were automatically added to the party roster"
You just made that up, didn't you? Earlier you were saying that he joined the party. Make your mind up (if you have one).
How old was he again? 14, or younger? Nearly every 14 year old German was in Nazi Youth.
I don't ever hear anyone having a go at the German Prime Minister's dad or granddad.
According to a German friend of mine, while not compulsory, membership of the Hitler Youth was "advisable". My friend's father was a member and he's certainly no Nazi. Strangely enough, while he has his critics in the land of his birth (and there are many who are openly and vehemently hostile), accusations of Nazism are never levelled at Papa Ratzinger in Germany.
Yes, I can perfectly well understand that social pressures make certain ideas expedient. That is why I think the Catholic doctrine of free will is absurd (supported, I might add, by Nazi boy). If a child is born into a Hindu, or Muslim social world, what condemns them to Hell? Presumably the free choice to be a Hindu, or a Muslim. Well, so be it, but Ratz will be first ont he pyre for his disgusting kow-towing to the expedient of Nazism
the smoke of satan has entered the church... and it's called trad dissent
Post a Comment