Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Welcoming the Pope to the United Kingdom

The Popemobile has landed, the BBC has mobilised and the Benedictaphone is outselling Buzz Lightyear. There will be much genuflecting, ring-kissing, incense-swinging and a bit of beatification hocus pocus. There will be terse summits about ordinariates, whisperings about women bishops, chatter about clerical celibacy and protests against paedophile priests.

All of these will be distractions.

For Pope Benedict XVI comes to the United Kingdom at a time when the Christian conscience is besieged, the national church cowed and our liberties undermined in ways they have not been for centuries. Nurses dare not pray or wear a crucifix; teachers dare not mention Jesus and the school receptionist dare not ask for prayer. If you work for BA, turbans, karas and hijabs are fine, but don’t even think about wearing a cross. Christians are no longer free to be foster parents, registrars, hotel owners or B&B proprietors. Bishops may no longer uphold orthodoxy, street preachers may not quote Scripture, and adoption agencies must act against their conscience or close.

And don’t even think about saying ‘God bless’ in the workplace.

New Labour was so intent on legislating for ‘equality’ and tolerance towards every intolerant minority that they were incapable of seeing that they simultaneously legislated for the intolerance of the tolerant Christian majority. The United Kingdom has become a nation in which Christianity is an ‘eccentricity’ practised by ‘oddities’.

When Christians dare to be convicted, they are portrayed as bigots. When they articulate a view with which others may disagree, they are dogmatic. When they fall short of perfection, they are pilloried and cast as hypocrites. When they defend the unborn, they are unenlightened. When they oppose animal-human embryos, they are anti-science. When they express concern over the fatherless, they are homophobic. When they speak up for the poor, they are wishy-washy liberals. When they defend faith-based education, they are intolerant. When they seek to uphold marriage, they are ‘right wing’ reactionaries.

But New Labour is not solely to blame for this parlous state of affairs (though its own Christian MPs have observed the ‘darkness’ at its heart). No, the genesis of this Godlessness is the spawn of the European Union which repudiates true religion and admits of no divinity but itself. God forbid that a Christian might today aspire to public office while battalions of secularists and sundry other anti-Christians await the bugle call to charge with deadly intent. While the Archbishop of Canterbury is perceived to be aloof and his words impenetrable in the postmodern haze, one might be forgiven for hoping that a plain-speaking pope might bring with him a clear message to swipe aside the more egregious equality directives and cut through the pervasive politically-correct dogma.

It may be that ‘the Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this realm’ but he still has the status and respect to be able to address the gathered Lords and Commons in Westminster Hall.

The Archbishop of Canterbury could hardly attract them to a coffee morning.

Pope Benedict is undoubtedly greatly diminished by recent scandals: paedophile priests will forever be to him what Jews have been to Pius XII, Monica Lewinsky to Bill Clinton and the Iraq war to Tony Blair. It is axiomatic in an age of attention deficit disorder, where the x-factorised masses are satisfied with instant coffee and feed on a diet of email and Twitter, that world leaders are now remembered for just one thing.

And Pope Benedict’s church is damaged. Yes, the institution limps along Semper Eadem, but for many ordinary Roman Catholics the hierarchy is no longer fit for purpose: its authority lacks credibility, its moralising is devoid of sincerity, and its understanding of truth and justice ring hollow. The incommunication of a holocaust denier, insensitive comments about condoms and reigniting Byzantine views of Mohammed have not helped.

There appears to be little media awareness. The Roman Catholic Church has ceased to speak with one voice; indeed, its offices of communication rarely impart anything wholesome, and its communion is impaired. It has become disparate and divided, with ultramontane restorationists ranged against post-conciliar liberals, traditionalists tearing strips of progressives and Herald fundamentalists cursing Tablet heretics for betraying the faith that was handed down from St Peter.

Catholicism seems to have become, well, a little Anglican.

Yet these developments can hardly be laid at the door of Benedict. And it is petty and discourteous in the extreme for any to say that he should not come to the UK.

It is surely an expression of common courtesy – ordinarily extended unconditionally by Her Majesty to any visiting foreign head of state – to welcome Pope Benedict XVI to these islands. He is not simply a religious leader or self-proclaimed universal bishop, but a philosopher-king, a monarch on his throne, a head of state like any other (well, almost). This visit is not merely ‘pastoral’, as was that of Pope John Paul II in 1982, but acutely political, like that of any president, prime minister or potentate to whom Her Majesty might extend such a state invitation.

Pope Benedict will be the first pope in our islands’ long history to be so received.

Those who shame the British spirit of generosity and offend against Christian notions of hospitality with cries of ‘No Pope Here!’ are doubtless those who uttered not a syllable of protest against the state visits of Mugabe, Hirohito, Ceauşescu, Abdullah, Jintao…

Not, of course, that Pope Benedict may in any sense be considered a rogue, vagabond, tyrant, dictator or mass murderer.

Other than by Peter Tatchell or Stephen Fry.

But over the decades, Her Majesty has held her nose as she has shaken hands with sundry unpalatables whose association with her has certainly afforded them considerable political capital back home to continue their programmes of intolerance, oppression and murder.

And now it appears that a religious leader who happens to believe that homosexual practice is an ‘objective disorder’, that abortion is murder and that contraception is a mortal sin, is reviled severally by the secularists, atheists, liberals and Richard Dawkins.

It may have taken 500 years for the wheel to come full circle, but is it not ironic is that this Pope comes to defend those very liberties which his forebears sought to deny us? When he talks of the imperative of the liberty of the Christian conscience, he takes the Protestant theme, for which many suffered horrifically and even paid with their lives.

The Pope will choose his words carefully, but they will not mean precisely what Anglican and Protestant ears will hear: he will not advocate direct human relationship with God, governed by the Bible. And neither will he mean what millions of Roman Catholics will believe him to mean – the liberty to question authority or to reject unscriptural teachings which they find unpalatable. For Pope Benedict, the Christian conscience must be in submission to the Sacred Magisterium, which is non-negotiable: where there is no submission there is grave sin.

When Pope Benedict and the Archbishop of Canterbury pause to pray in Westminster Hall over the very spot where Sir Thomas More was condemned to death, they will undoubtedly be united in their opposition to the ascendant secular intolerance which renders ‘equality’ an infallible dogma and ‘rights’ an immutable article of faith. But their prayers will be scripted for ecumenical niceties, not a religio-political discourse of More’s assertions of his Catholic faith against Henry VIII's claim to headship of the Church. The old theme of Church and State will not be indulged, because it doesn’t fit into a Tweet.

And yet there is a dichotomy.

For Pope Benedict XVI comes to the United Kingdom to beatify England’s second most famous convert to Rome. And Newman was as troubled by the definition of papal infallibility in 1870 as England’s most famous convert is troubled today by papal teachings on sexuality.

Newman rejected the aggressive centralisation of the First Vatican Council; Blair rejects Humanae Vitae and the view that homosexuality is an ‘objective disorder’ or even a sin.

In this attitude, both show themselves to be inescapably Anglican. Article XXI says: Of the Authority of General Councils. General Councils may not be gathered together without the commandment and will of Princes. And when they be gathered together, (forasmuch as they be an assembly of men, whereof all be not governed with the Spirit and Word of God,) they may err, and sometimes have erred, even in things pertaining unto God. Wherefore things ordained by them as necessary to salvation have neither strength nor authority, unless it may be declared that they be taken out of Holy Scripture.

Cardinal Newman argued for the liberty of the Christian conscience and for greater intellectual freedom within the Roman Catholic Church. “Truth”, he wrote, “is wrought out by many minds, working together freely.”

This is the synodical structure, discerning truth with heart and conscience as well as the head. And Newman always placed conscience above Pope, which makes him a rather fitting subject for beatification in a relativist, egotist and materialist culture.

Pope Benedict resisted Gordon Brown’s invitation to bless New Labour on its death-bed in the hope of reviving the disillusioned faithful. But he comes now to sanctify David Cameron’s ‘Big Society’ which is bound with the pursuit of ‘the common good’.

So, His Holiness is welcome to take tea and cake with Her Majesty and address the British Parliament to remind us that Christianity brought liberty, justice and truth.

But it should not need a Pope come from Rome to tell us these things.

55 Comments:

Blogger Man in a Shed said...

Welcome back.

15 September 2010 09:18  
Blogger Botogol said...

the Pope is going to parade up and down the streets of edinburgh and london (surrounding himself with children, no less) in order to receive the approbation of the crowds.

that's inappropriate behaviour at an inappropriate time, by a deeply flawed pope who shoudl know better. I will be standing at the roadside to boo.

He should have vistied the UK as a pastoral visti, not a state one, and behaved with more humility.

(oh, and welcome back!)

15 September 2010 09:22  
Anonymous Asian Colonial Subject said...

Your Grace,

It seems that despite whatever had befallen you earlier, it has not dulled your powers of exposition and analysis. Excellent, consise, clear and an enjoyable read, as we've come to expect of Your Grace's writings.

Although I have a minor disagreement with Your Grace, in that I just love the way His Holiness throws political correctness to the winds and comes right out to say utter offensive things like gay marriages are "insidious and dangerous" at a recent public rally in Portugal. How can you not love such a Pope who sends the rabid secularists foaming in the mouth in outrage? Perhaps he might deliver another awesome ass-kicking one-liner punch to the secularist's gut in his time in Britian.

Yours,

Asian Colonial Subject

15 September 2010 09:27  
Blogger Laurence Boyce said...

"When Christians dare to be convicted, they are portrayed as bigots. When they articulate a view with which others may disagree, they are dogmatic. When they fall short of perfection, they are pilloried and cast as hypocrites. When they defend the unborn, they are unenlightened. When they oppose animal-human embryos, they are anti-science. When they express concern over the fatherless, they are homophobic. When they speak up for the poor, they are wishy-washy liberals. When they defend faith-based education, they are intolerant. When they seek to uphold marriage, they are right wing reactionaries."

Yes, Christians can be some or all of those things . . . but it's all by the way.

Christians are simply wrong. There is no God. That is all.

Welcome back.

15 September 2010 09:29  
Blogger Rebel Saint said...

Thank God you're back YG. I have searched for over 100 days for writing like this, but despite there being 15+ billion pages, none would satisfy.

"Catholicism seems to have become, well, a little Anglican" ... what an indictment!

"The Pope comes to defend those very liberties which his forebears sought to deny us?" ... and what a damning indictment on the Church of England that it should take the Church of Rome to do this.

15 September 2010 09:50  
Blogger Graham Davis said...

Cranmer said...

.....offend against Christian notions of hospitality with cries of ‘No Pope Here!

Rest assured that I will be one of those will let this “ungodly” hypocrite know that he is as unwelcome to these shores as any other dictator. Your flimsy argument and blatant sentimentality does you no credit Cranmer, perhaps your stay in the wilderness was not long enough.

It sickens me to see the respect accorded to this man, his moral authority is zero and yet many here will doubtless be blinded by his “goodness”. The absurd spectacle of the unquestioning, unthinking masses hanging on his every word is testimony to the evil grip of an immoral religion that cares only for its own survival and not for the millions who follow it worldwide.

15 September 2010 10:11  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Your Grace

Brilliant!

‘But it should not need a Pope come from Rome to tell us these things.’

The fault lies within us, for we have turned our backs on Him.

15 September 2010 10:44  
Blogger Rebel Saint said...

Graham Davis said, "The absurd spectacle of the unquestioning, unthinking masses hanging on his every word"

What an absurd & ignorant statement ... unless, of course, you got confused are referring to the devotees at a Richard Dawkins seminar.

15 September 2010 10:50  
Blogger Laurence Boyce said...

Ah yes, Dawkins and the Pope, two of a kind really.

Because the Pope always encourages people to think for themselves.

Heavy irony.

15 September 2010 11:12  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank heavens you are back on air!

15 September 2010 11:45  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Your Grace

Thank you for pointing out one of the major sources of our country’s ills:

‘But New Labour is not solely to blame for this parlous state of affairs (though its own Christian MPs have observed the ‘darkness’ at its heart). No, the genesis of this Godlessness is the spawn of the European Union which repudiates true religion and admits of no divinity but itself. God forbid that a Christian might today aspire to public office while battalions of secularists and sundry other anti-Christians await the bugle call to charge with deadly intent.’

I do hope that your celebrations on Battle of Britain day go well.

"What General Weygand called the Battle of France is over. I expect that the Battle of Britain is about to begin. Upon this battle depends the survival of Christian civilization. upon it depends our own British life and the long continuity of our institutions and our Empire. The whole fury and might of the enemy must very soon be turned on us now. Hitler knows that he will have to break us in this island or lose the war. If we can stand up to him, all Europe may be free and the life of the world may move forward into broad, sunlit uplands. But if we fail, then the whole world, including the United States, including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age, made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science. Let us therefore brace ourselves to our duties, and so bear ourselves that, if the British Empire and its Commonwealth last for a thousand years, men will say, "This was their finest hour."

Winston S. Churchill

15 September 2010 11:49  
Anonymous len said...

The real tragedy of (or should I say travesty) of this visit by the Pope is that the public will perceive the outright hypocrisy of this religion with its principle figurehead( a mortal man) and will treat it with the contempt it so rightly deserves.Many people will feel inclined to reject religion because of this hypocrisy and will totally misunderstand the true purposes and intentions of God.Jesus Christ never came to start a religion but to restore man`s broken relationship with God. Religion actually 'hijacked; God`s original intention and made it serve their own purposes.

True 'religion' has as its head the Lord Jesus Christ with the attributes,of truth, compassion,honesty, and love.

Jesus said,
"The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound"
(Isaiah 61)

15 September 2010 12:11  
Blogger Windsor Tripehound said...

I'm currently reading Michael Dibdin's End Games in which a character remarks "Atheists are such bores. They talk about God all the time".

Laurence Boyce please take note.

15 September 2010 12:46  
Anonymous martin sewell said...

Botogol should read one of my favourite American philosophers Thomas Sowell who recently castigated the mealy mouthed way in which the politically correct mangle language.

He recently remarked that had they been influential years ago we would not refer to "Ivan the Terrible" but "Ivan the Inappropriate"

If you were not a man of faith, Your Grace I would be urging you to give up the attempt to dialogue with such folk as it really seem to be a case of "Pearls before swine" but I suppose we are called to seek out the lost sheep.

15 September 2010 13:05  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You Grace: You may find the remarks of Metropolitan Hilarion of the Russian Orthodox Church, when he spoke at Lambeth Palace recently, to be of interest: http://tinyurl.com/33a2fdx

15 September 2010 13:36  
Blogger DaveF said...

This is what the blogosphere has been missing since June - an incisive analysis by a principled Christian. I fear that to those orthodox, scriptural Christians who welcome this visit, the Pope - while representing a bulwark against the tide of aggressive secular relativism - is actually a false friend. The body he represents has historically been either supportive of - or ambivalent towards - repressive regimes which have been inimical to personal and social liberty.

15 September 2010 13:37  
Blogger Laurence Boyce said...

Thanks Windsor. I have indeed noted the double standard whereby atheists are "boring" when they talk about God, whereas Christians presumably are not.

15 September 2010 13:38  
Anonymous Flossie said...

O happy day, O happy day! I haven't stopped singing this since yesterday. Nobody writes quite as well as Your Grace.

Peter Tatchell has covered up child molestation by failing to report underage sexual activity to the police. He should be arrested. Should we tell Dawkins?

http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2010/09/who-said-not-all-sex-involving-children-is-unwanted-and-abusive-answer-the-popes-biggest-british-cri.html

15 September 2010 13:52  
Blogger Windsor Tripehound said...

@Laurence Boyce

I didn't assert that Christians weren't boring; just that people who bang on about what they don't believe in certainly are.

15 September 2010 14:18  
Blogger Laurence Boyce said...

Yes, I guess you're right. All the boring "new" atheists should just shut up and allow the Church the free ride it has always enjoyed and still regards as its divine right.

Good point.

15 September 2010 14:33  
Blogger Windsor Tripehound said...

I rest my case.

15 September 2010 14:34  
Blogger Laurence Boyce said...

If you actually had a case, then you might make it, instead of throwing around casual abuse.

15 September 2010 14:43  
Blogger Demetrius said...

If only Cardinal William Godfrey could have been granted more years we could have had a Scouser Pope and the Gwladys Street end at Goodison Park might have become a major pilgrimage destination.

15 September 2010 15:07  
Blogger Jared Gaites said...

Excellent piece as usual Your Grace. I love you. Thank God you have been able to come back to us.

15 September 2010 15:19  
Anonymous IanCad said...

I'm not so sure YG. Rome will present a fair face when it can do no other. Its political nose is probably telling it that there is a conservative groundswell that will respond to a little stroking now and then.

15 September 2010 17:52  
Blogger Jared Gaites said...

Your Grace,

I have just seen this via a tweet from the Conservatives (which shows that twittering is not such a bad thing). I am not a Conservative, and I have until now been suspicious of this lady, but I have to say that I like what she has to say about The importance of faith to life in Britain. by Sayeeda Warsi.

15 September 2010 18:12  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

***It may have taken 500 years for the wheel to come full circle, but is it not ironic is that this Pope comes to defend those very liberties which his forebears sought to deny us? When he talks of the imperative of the liberty of the Christian conscience, he takes the Protestant theme, for which many suffered horrifically and even paid with their lives.***

Absolute rot. Read your history.

15 September 2010 19:14  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

***The Pope will choose his words carefully, but they will not mean precisely what Anglican and Protestant ears will hear: he will not advocate direct human relationship with God, governed by the Bible. And neither will he mean what millions of Roman Catholics will believe him to mean – the liberty to question authority or to reject unscriptural teachings which they find unpalatable. For Pope Benedict, the Christian conscience must be in submission to the Sacred Magisterium, which is non-negotiable: where there is no submission there is grave sin.***

Outrageous ignorance. Truly, truly, you do not know what you are talking about. You learned your Roman Catholicism through the words of a bigot, and far from questioning for truth you never questioned it at all. Shame on you.

15 September 2010 19:20  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

***For Pope Benedict XVI comes to the United Kingdom to beatify England’s second most famous convert to Rome. And Newman was as troubled by the definition of papal infallibility in 1870 as England’s most famous convert is troubled today by papal teachings on sexuality.***

You really need to find a confessional right away. Newman had no trouble with the definition of papal infallibility, his question concerned the wisdom of making what was always true explicit. He felt that making it explicit would lead to misunderstandings, especially by those not grounded in Tradition. Asses like you in other words.

"I have for these 25 years spoken in behalf of the Pope's infallibility. The other day a review (I forget what) observed with surprise that even in my article on la Mennais in 1838 I had tacitly accepted the Pope's infallibility. I think I have spoken for it in my Essay on Development of Doctrine in 1845. In 1850 I have introduced the Pope's Infallibility several times into my lectures at the Birmingham Corn Exchange. In 1852 I introduced it most emphatically and dogmatically into my lectures delivered at the Rotundo at Dublin. In 1856 I spoke of it in a new Preface I prefixed to the new Edition of my Church of the Fathers—and in 1868 I reprinted the passage from my Dublin Lectures in a collection of passages made by a Roman Jesuit Father on the dogma, in an Italian translation."

[From letter to Alfred Plummer, July 19, 1872. Letters and Diaries of John Henry Newman, C.S. Dessain and T. Gornall S.J. editors, Volume XXVI, p. 139 (1974).]

15 September 2010 19:28  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

***n this attitude, both show themselves to be inescapably Anglican.***

Well you have it arse ways. True Anglicanism is Catholic. The extent to which it is debased today is the measure to which it is poisoned by the ego centrism of Protestantism.

15 September 2010 19:33  
Blogger OldSouth said...

So very good to have you back, and in such fine form!

15 September 2010 19:36  
Anonymous Alexander said...

Dear Cranmer

Welcome back.

Would it be possible for you to publish links to your various essays on Roman Catholic social doctrine? I seem to remember that such links were previously available on your blog.

Yours faithfully

Alexander

15 September 2010 21:04  
Anonymous CRUX SANCTI PATRIS BENEDICTI said...

insensitive comments about condoms?

On the contrary, the Pope Benedict's views on condoms are scientifically correct.

According to Dr. Edward C. Green (director of the AIDS Prevention Research Project at the Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies)

“There is a consistent association shown by our best studies, including the U.S.-funded ‘Demographic Health Surveys,’ between greater availability and use of condoms and higher (not lower) HIV-infection rates,”

In reality, those who continue to attack the Pope on this issue are ignoring the science and unwittingly contributing to the spread of HIV and many other venereal disease. Please examine the evidence before jumping on this bandwagon.

15 September 2010 21:56  
Blogger Preacher said...

Glad to see you haven't lost your touch or your fire my friend.
Well nobody is going to stop me speaking out for the Lord or wearing a cross or any of the other pc rubbish that the state has tried to implement. The problem with the Pope is, well; he's the Pope & history shows that his forebears have let's say a very poor record when it comes to playing with a straight deck. One might even say that the closest that many Popes came to the Bible is that both they & Satan had forked tongues.
The thing that worries me most about the protestant faith at the moment is that much of it has fossilised through the brain washing of Westminster whilst many of the charismatics have lost the gospel somewhere in the partying, & I speak here as a believer in all the gifts of the Holy Spirit being essential for the healthy growth of the church & the salvation of the lost, we would do well to heed the old saying "All Word & we dry up, All Spirit & we blow up, but Word + Spirit & we grow up".

15 September 2010 22:23  
Anonymous no longer anonymous said...

"True Anglicanism is Catholic"

Have you read the 39 Articles?

15 September 2010 23:11  
Blogger Tony Lorusso said...

The christians are victims now theme would be touching if it was not for the fact that just recently that 10 christians complained to the ASA about an advert which offended them and got it banned.

Any of you faith heads bothered publicly criticising this decision of christain censorship? Answers with a link to this comment section.

16 September 2010 01:34  
Anonymous non mouse said...

Wonderful to have you back Your Grace; and in such fine fettle, too.

Time is problematical for me, right now. As ever, though, I believe in upholding the British Church: for independence; and for the right to Protest for Christianity as it is meant to be (i.e. non-Puritan, also).

Oh - btw: my grocery tab came to 6.66, the other day! The young man at the till said: "Oh, that's terrible. We'll have to do something about that for you," and he changed it to 6.65! Of course, I returned the one 'pence' for him - just didn't sign up to the offending number.

But I'm chuffed we're not the only ones who won't kowtow to the Beast and all the frogs of his mouth. More and more people understand what's going on, I think.

16 September 2010 02:06  
Anonymous non mouse said...

P.S and Afterthought -- if we end up with el papa grande in charge, we'll also end up paying even more taxes to euroland. And they'll not be long in 'justifying' an overt land grab, to boot.

Our 'Enery was as flawed as anyone, but at least he knew which side the heads were on; and his was on our side!

16 September 2010 02:16  
Anonymous Michael said...

What an amazing spin. It takes a lot of guts and a very dedicated mind to call upon Sir Thomas More to decry perceived intolerance towards the church.

And comparing cover-up of paedophilia of the catholic priests and subsequent wrist-slapping comparable to Monica Lewinski scandal - that takes a lot of nerve.

16 September 2010 03:23  
Anonymous Michael said...

Correction: Scratch "comparable"

16 September 2010 03:33  
Anonymous not a machine said...

It is good to view your Graces thoughts once more , I had nearly lost all hope , but not quite !.

your recollections on Newman are appetaising and timely prior to his beautification.

Christ spoke as he spoke never mind which churches failings come after him .

Onward we must go with brave hearts , pope included into discerning the evils that beset mens (and womens) minds into the viel of evil that spout forth from the clever tongues of spin doctors who trade the alpha and omega , with usefull idiots , and call it complete understanding .

His holiness is a great theologian only such a man could bring forth the the antichrist speakers of half truths into the open .
let us all hope we can bear the plumb line once again to bring forth light ordained since the beginining of time , unto the darkeness so bequeathed by the last 13 years .

16 September 2010 05:31  
Anonymous len said...

His holiness is a great theologian? Where does his theology come from?

Catholicism is steeped in paganism!

"...The world, cloaked with a form of righteousness, walked into the church. Now the work of corruption rapidly progressed. Paganism, while appearing to be vanquished, became the conqueror. Her spirit controlled the church. Her doctrines, ceremonies, and superstitions were incorporated into the faith and worship of the professed followers of Christ." -(The Great Controversy, p. 50)

16 September 2010 08:18  
Anonymous Voyager said...

New Labour was so intent on legislating for ‘equality’ and tolerance towards every intolerant minority

Yes but the legislation was required under EU Directives on Employment Law. Labour simply let Baroness Summerskill's nephew Ben have free reign to extend it whilst simultaneously exempting Gay Groups from being liable under the legislation.

We all know that Labour is Communism by stages as opposed to Bolshevism in one gulp, and the electorate happily sold their birthright for a mess of potage...only to find they sold it for a giant IOU drawn on their future earnings.

Modern Democracy is the right to participate in sham elections in return for being readily and steadily expropriated to support a new oligarchy with its own retinue to fund and favour

16 September 2010 09:45  
Blogger Maturecheese said...

Good to see you back, Your Grace.

16 September 2010 09:47  
Blogger John Ward said...

An outstanding piece.
The Church of Rome that once pulled arms from sockets and burned folks in order to gain converts now stands as a relative beacon of sound sense - albeit in a world desperate to prove that the Pontiff himself is a pervert.
I think this is because the Vatican State (like our Queen) nolonger has much real power. Take power away from those who wish to lead, and they become harmless.
Give them too much power,and they become mad. Nowhere was this more evident than in the EU yesterday...
http://nbyslog.blogspot.com/2010/09/sketch-fear-and-loathing-in-eus-tower.html

16 September 2010 10:33  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Have you read the 39 Articles?

Yes. Have you? Do you understand them?

http://www.newmanreader.org/works/viamedia/volume2/tract90/index.html

16 September 2010 13:42  
Blogger ENGLISHMAN said...

No longer any need to mention condoms as the americans have spent over half a million on teaching negroes to wash thier genitals after sex,however this leaves the rapist at something of a disadvantage unless the other half of the million is spent on portable gell.Meanwhile the anti-christ stalks unopposed through protestant England and his version of religion compliments the eussr totalitarianism perfectly,as does mrs winsors "indulgence"for the betrayal of the English people.

16 September 2010 14:53  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I personally do not see the 'whisperings', 'protests' and cries of outrage as distractions. People are protesting out of a deep anger over what they deem to be injustice.

The demise of religion is apparent; but, for me, Jesus did not come to protect the rights of the religious and pious - he came to help the suffering and the oppressed.

Those suffering in our time are the victims of child abuse and rape, and those oppressed include, amongst many others, women in the history of the church.

16 September 2010 15:38  
Anonymous Voyager said...

"The demise of religion is apparent"

Religion ? What is that ? You mean Politics....that is dead and discredited in every major polity. Once Politics became fused with Socialism it was doomed to irrelevance, for without Dictatorship Socialism lacks the Enslavement that makes it function

16 September 2010 17:14  
Blogger Owl said...

Excellent posting YG.
I am glad that those old ashes have returned to cybernetic life again. Also a warm welcome to Mr. Singh who will take up the gauntlet once again in the face of our resident atheists.
BTW, have you noticed the way the discussion turned to a Catholic vs. Protestant issue rather than a Christian vs. Atheist issue. Luckily, Mr. Singh and myself know that the foe loves the divide and conquer tactic. The foe does not realise that Mr. Singh and my humble self have more in common than our small differences of approach and understanding of history might suggest. No christian stands alone.

16 September 2010 22:22  
Anonymous len said...

I believe the last great battle will not be with atheists, agnostics ,the secular world but with Religion,Religion devoid of God,devoid of the Power of God bent and twisted to obey, to conform to the will of man.
Religion takes what belongs to Christ and makes it it`s own, it steals the Glory and the Worship which belongs to God alone.The simple message of the Gospel becomes corrupted and looses all power and credibility.
Religion married with the World becomes a monster consuming all who enter her.

17 September 2010 08:48  
Anonymous Oldphart said...

UK Please prepare for sharia law (I can't bring myself to captalize it). The result of apostate clergy of all stripes deserting the Gospel as in Gal 1:6 and cringing politicians and media barons bowing, in the name of P.C., to the outright thuggery that is part and parcel of the ideaology of Islam "The religion of peace". Just as Chambelain appeased Hitler so too are the UK powers that be appeasing Islam. And we all know the consequences of that little strategy.

17 September 2010 09:21  
Blogger Colin said...

So here we have it...the pope who is suppose to represent Jesus Christ??? All the powers of Britain sit before him and he delivers his speech and guess what...Jesus Christ, The head of the people of God, our King, the Messiah...is never mentioned once by the pope?

Doesn't that tell you something?

17 September 2010 22:57  
Anonymous writermannkl said...

"When you land at Heathrow you think at times that you are in a Third World Country."

So sayeth Cardinal Walter Kapar after withdrawing from the Pope's entourage and staying behind in Rome.

With some shame (not a lot really) I took his remarks to mean that the Heathrow catchment area was full of Asians and Blacks and endless corner shops and dubious money exchange wallahs... but NO what he was on about was that the citizens of UK were given over to "aggressive atheism".

While this is undoubtedly a nasty disease of the rottweiler family of viruses there is something more insidious out there and that is the terminal illness of "God Spake to us personally so it must be true" which is characterised by an extremely unpleasant smell called: Kill the secularists!

And Dave our beloved leader, here's a question: Does the Big Society include God? Dawkins? Or the recently converted Tony to RC? Or Gypo's? So what exactly do you believe in Mr Dave (no referendum Europe lover) Cameron?

18 September 2010 19:49  
Anonymous Hilda said...

As long as the Pope can persuade the Muslims to allow us to keep Christmas, I am happy.

20 September 2010 04:42  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older