Sat 25th Oct 2014 | Last updated: Fri 24th Oct 2014 at 18:39pm

Facebook Logo Twitter Logo RSS Logo
Hot Topics

Comment & Blogs

Assisi alone is reason enough to beatify John Paul II

The Devil’s Advocate has a necessary task but the late Pope’s virtues outweigh his faults and errors of judgement

By on Thursday, 14 April 2011

Pope John Paul II attends an interreligious encounter in Assisi, Italy, in 1986

Pope John Paul II attends an interreligious encounter in Assisi, Italy, in 1986

The late John Paul II is soon to be beatified. With this in mind, a friend has kindly pointed out to me an article in The Remnant online for March 21 which challenges the whole basis for the beatification. Reading it I see that the traditional and necessary office of the Devil’s Advocate has been doing its work. The article does not deny the late Pope’s personal holiness, but raises a number of points which will all be familiar to readers of “Christian Order” over here (and I note that Rod Pead, the Editor of CO, has added his signature to the list of those opposing the beatification, at the bottom of the Remnant article.)

The indictment against John Paul II states that “in the exercise of his exalted office as Pope” he did nothing to stop the abuses of the liturgy; he did not take the proper steps to investigate the sexual scandals of the priesthood – in particular those connected with the disgraced founder of the Legionaries of Christ; he caused confusion by his “numerous theologically dubious apologies for the presumed sins of Catholics in prior epochs of Church history”; and he caused scandal by the gatherings at Assisi in 1986 and 2002, in which he prayed with animists and other pagans. The article even throws doubt on the miracle that was needed for the process of beatification to go forward.

The charges are grave and, as I said above, the task of the Devil’s Advocate is a necessary one. However, once everything has been weighed up, both in favour of John Paul’s pontificate and against it, and Rome has made its decision, is it not a little churlish at this late stage of the process to try to put a spanner in the works? Beatification does not assume impeccability; it investigates and assesses the heroic virtue of the candidate. In this case the late Pope’s virtues vastly outweigh, to my mind, his faults and errors of judgment.

What springs to mind when I think of the late Holy Father? He was a magnificent defender of the sacredness of human life, marriage and family, and the dignity of women, in a host of inspiring encyclicals and other writings: Familiaris Consortio, Mulieris Dignitatem, Evangelium Vitae come to mind, but there are many others. Indeed, he was a great teaching Pope. He was hugely instrumental, along with President Ronald Reagan, in bringing about the fall of Communism in Russia and Eastern Europe. He was a wonderful communicator of the Faith to young people at the World Youth Days he instituted. How many young men and women have decided to dedicate themselves to the priesthood and religious life as a result of attending one of these occasions?

There is much more than could be cited in the Pope’s favour, but I will simply mention the Assisi gatherings.

I accept I might be biased here, as Francis of Assisi is my patron saint – but what is wrong with a Catholic leader praying alongside those of other faiths? I do not say you that pray ‘in unity’ with them as this is not possible; but to ask the Holy Spirit to come down and do His mysterious, grace-filled work at such a gathering: surely that is an act of charity towards those who, through no fault of their own, lack the fullness of truth?

This morning a Muslim lady taxi driver came to my house to take my daughter to her day centre. She happened to notice the tile stuck on the brickwork by the front door with the words (in Portuguese) “Our Lady of Fatima, bless this house”. “What does this mean?” she asked, pointing at the word ‘Fatima’. I explained that Our Lady had appeared at Fatima, adding I had once read that she had chosen to appear at this particular spot because the name ‘Fatima’ is very important to Muslims as the name of Muhammad’s daughter, and so that Catholics who reverence the shrine might pray especially for the followers of Islam. She was very pleased at this idea.

I then explained briefly (I was in my dressing –gown) about the Blessed Trinity, the role of Mary and the work of the Holy Spirit and we parted with much good will. I would gladly have prayed for her and alongside her if our dialogue had fallen out that way.

  • Auricularis

    John Paul the Great… disaster!

  • Auricularis

    Yep – we can so see the fruits of the consecration can we Mr. Oddie? I hear Russia aborts babies at numbers that more or less equal the population of Ireland. And there is peace in the world isn’t there Mr. Oddie? Just look at all the harmony in Libya and Eygpt – not to mention how Christians and Muslims skip along to the market together in Pakistan.

    The world era of peace is here – we trads are just so dumb to see it.

  • Auricularis

    I believe it was a certain Cardinal Ratzinger who said that truth is not determined by a majority vote.

  • Helen Westover

    Aj Aj – None of us are denying the primacy of the See of Rome.
    BTY, did you look up the Index of Leading Catholic Indicators? St Robert Bellarmine? Mortalium Animos? Or are you a factphobe?
    Educate yourself before you pass judgement on us “Ultras”.

  • Helen Westover

    Jackie – about WHAT do you agree with AJ? Be specific.

  • Helen Westover

    Nice going. All that was thrown under the bus, to appeal to Protestants.

  • Helen Westover

    Ok, Jackie, I give up. Praying with devil worshippers, honoring the Koran, having half naked women entertain the Pope is ALL just fine!
    So glad to be enlightened. .

  • Helen Westover

    Petrus – and THAT”s really saying something!!!

  • Helen Westover

    As to “fruits”, did you read the article of the Index of Leading Catholic Indicators?

  • Helen Westover

    I dare you to look up what I have posted. All you do is bloviate.

  • Helen Westover

    Petrus – fuggedabboutit. They look up nothing.

  • Helen Westover

    The disrespect may stem from her illicit relationship with the Prince. Ya think?
    What a tempest in a teapot!

  • Helen Westover

    Try to get your facts straight (a pipe dream of mine) – even when there was dispute about his incardination (which has been resolved) NEVER was he “excommunicated”. I know him, and he’s right about the “consecration”. And the facts (SORRY) have vindicated him.

  • Helen Westover

    Every bishop of the diocese has condemned Medjugorje. Where’s your “obedience” now, jackie???

  • Mmchale

    St. Francis of Assisi is probably stil.- bodily speaking-rolling in his grave that this blasphemous, indifferentist, relativist “prayer” meeting is simply refered to as “Assisi”. A catholic should only pray for the conversion of the pagan, Muslim, or Jew; not with them. To do so is an offense against the First Commandment, and the Church Fathers, up until Vatican II ofcourse, have always condemned such a practice.

  • AJ

    God bless you too brother Mariano, may He and His Blessed Mother protect and guide you to His House. Keep the Faith and always bow your head to the ground so you could see where you’re walking not to look up as to be led astray by our own pride.

    “The Church of Rome …in which the authority of the Apostolic office has always stood fast.” (St. Augustine, Epistle 43:7)

  • AJ

    Really? There is a big difference of constructive criticism and plain slander and disobedience. St. Bellarmine didn’t do that so please stop this non-sense of comparing yourselves with our beloved Saints…your not even close.

    Who say’s we are treating the Pope as Dalai Lama, something divine? This is the same charge by radical protestants to Catholics. Sounded from the same feathers.

    As as said over and over, we can discuss, disagree and criticize DURING THE proceedings however, this is the KEY to remember when the FULL AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH is made as on the case of VATICAN II the matter IS CLOSE AND FINAL. Now being after that and you and your friends still obstinately refuse as with your fathers (SSPX etc) to submit to that Authority, you guys made yourself outside of the Church (schism) in your own hearts and thus made yourselves your own little popes and magisterium. Is Bishop Fellay your supreme pontiff?

  • AJ

    In your dreams , missy! eventhough it’s a sad thing indeed, but the destruction was brough by his obstinate refusal and disobedience to God’s given Authority ….EditorCT, it’s much more like this guy named Koher challenging the God given Authority of Moses thing. (if you read the OT book of Exodus).

    So, sorry but the guy is ex-communicated like Luther. No reason to rejoice mind you but it’s his own doing and choice.

  • AJ

    Helen, what I’m trying to say to you is the FULL AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH was made on the VAtican II is is CLOSED AND FINAL the problem starts when someone like you and (SSPX etc) still obstinately refuse to submit to the Authority of the Church. The discussion and criticism was over and done with…the case was already settled and verdict was FINAL and you guys still blaberring things about it as if you are the guys to whom Jesus Christ- God Himself gave the Keys to Bind and Loose.

    Wake up to reality of things Helen, you are NOT PETER.

    Now you are putting some charges about sexual abuse that was already been dealt with, go read some articles by the Catholic League for a start because even the liberal Media who are bent on destroying the Church admitted already that the vast majority of them are bogus (I’m not saying there are none) to begin with motivated by hatred and monetary motives.

    Helen and your friends though I agree with you that JPII shouldn’t had kissed the Koran, it was a mistake for JPII is human being as you and me and he is not impeccable as others would imply, OK? So my only suggestion to you is don’t judge and condemn the man, leave that job to God ALONE becuase it’s none of our business.

    I already posted about the response on the incident about the Pope praying with other faiths in the same room scenario….but since you already made up your mind to condemn the man then it’s useless. May God have Mercy on your soul Helen, that He may not judge you that same way you judge His Vicar.

    Peace.

  • AJ

    A Council with all the Bishops of the World and with Peter at the helm like what happened in Vatican II CANNOT CONTRADICT Tradition. Why? is it because of the impeccability ( the way you put it) of the Pope and Bishops? NO! it is because of the Promise of God to Peter and His Church.

    The “idea” of contradiction that sinks into your minds (SSPX) is just a product of your opinion and interpretation of Tradition.

    Appeal to Tradition and Scripture is an appeal to one’s interpretation of Tradition and Scripture. They are all in the need just a mere human opinions nothing more even how eloquent they may be. What separat us from the heretics IS…….APOSTOLIC SUCESSION of the CHAIR OF PETER.

    Even heretics appeal to Tradition and Holy Scriptures.

  • AJ

    As much as I agree with you on this only comment you made but you called us “papolatists” I say thank you! It’s a great honor to called that name…truly I’m a papist. When I debate my protestant adversaries some die-hard fundamentalists charged us Catholics with the same deregatory name…to which I say same birds flock together.

    The authority of the Church HAS passed judgment on the SSPX. John Paul II excommunicated Lefevre and five others for participating in an unsanctioned episcopal ordination in direct contradiciton to Church law. All priests associated with the SSPX were then denied faculties to exercise their ministries, a command they chose to disobey. By this they were schismatic.

    Our current Holy Father has removed the sentence of excommunication from the four bishops still living (he did not retroactively declare null all of the excommunications, he said that he is showing clemency), with the hope that they will return to full communion. The “schism” has been healed partially on the part of the Holy See out of their clemency, however the lack of full communion still exists as SSPX priests still deny obedience to the Holy Father and bishops in communion with them, and hence their actions are scandalous to the faithful, who deserve clergy who practice what they preach.

    The organization in itself has never been declared heretical, but just because something is not heretical does not mean it is good. The SSPX remains Catholic — as does a pro-choice Catholic politican. That does not mean we should endorse pro-choice Catholic politicians. In fact, we should not. Even though no pro-choice politican has been formally declared a heretic, by their actions they disobey the Church. Likewise, the SSPX disobeys the Church.

  • AJ

    Petrus and the Editor, do I have to spell it out to you so you could clearly understand. The Finality of the Vatican II was already made, this particular 21st Council was closed…as St.Augustine said, ..”Rome has spoken, it is close.” Nobody say that there can’t be another Ecumenical Council, of course we can, this is characteristic sets us apart from the Orthodox Churches who because they no Visible Head as a sign of Unity can’t be able to convene an Ecumenical Council. Do you even know that?

    The authority of the Church HAS passed judgment on the SSPX. John Paul II excommunicated Lefevre and five others for participating in an unsanctioned episcopal ordination in direct contradiciton to Church law. All priests associated with the SSPX were then denied faculties to exercise their ministries, a command they chose to disobey. By this they were schismatic.

    Our current Holy Father has removed the sentence of excommunication from the four bishops still living (he did not retroactively declare null all of the excommunications, he said that he is showing clemency), with the hope that they will return to full communion. The “schism” has been healed partially on the part of the Holy See out of their clemency, however the lack of full communion still exists as SSPX priests still deny obedience to the Holy Father and bishops in communion with them, and hence their actions are scandalous to the faithful, who deserve clergy who practice what they preach.

    The organization in itself has never been declared heretical, but just because something is not heretical does not mean it is good. The SSPX remains Catholic — as does a pro-choice Catholic politican. That does not mean we should endorse pro-choice Catholic politicians. In fact, we should not. Even though no pro-choice politican has been formally declared a heretic, by their actions they disobey the Church. Likewise, the SSPX disobeys the Church.

  • AJ

    EditorCt,

    let me re-phrase what you said to me to YOU, “That is SUCH a daft position to hold but many people do adhere to it: If only they realised that what they are really saying is “I’d rather be wrong with the Pope than right about the MY VERSION of the Faith.”

    Your version means NOTHING to me or any abiding Catholics.

  • AJ

    You really sounded like the protestants I used to debate with, they really think our Pope is impeccable and sinless. Same birds flock together.

  • AJ

    Wow, listen to yourself, congratulations you are now a bonafide judge. Maybe the Church should consult you on canonization rites?

  • AJ

    They should elevate you then as the new Madam Pope Francis II or I ? Why don’t you start a new church as well, like the pro-choice catholics have done?

  • AJ

    Petrus, who said again we worship the pope? Or he is impeccable and sinless? It’s only you and the people like you and the protestants I debated with.

    The authority of the Church HAS passed judgment on the SSPX. John Paul II excommunicated Lefevre and five others for participating in an unsanctioned episcopal ordination in direct contradiciton to Church law. All priests associated with the SSPX were then denied faculties to exercise their ministries, a command they chose to disobey. By this they were schismatic.

    Our current Holy Father has removed the sentence of excommunication from the four bishops still living (he did not retroactively declare null all of the excommunications, he said that he is showing clemency), with the hope that they will return to full communion. The “schism” has been healed partially on the part of the Holy See out of their clemency, however the lack of full communion still exists as SSPX priests still deny obedience to the Holy Father and bishops in communion with them, and hence their actions are scandalous to the faithful, who deserve clergy who practice what they preach.

    The organization in itself has never been declared heretical, but just because something is not heretical does not mean it is good. The SSPX remains Catholic — as does a pro-choice Catholic politican. That does not mean we should endorse pro-choice Catholic politicians. In fact, we should not. Even though no pro-choice politican has been formally declared a heretic, by their actions they disobey the Church. Likewise, the SSPX disobeys the Church.

  • AJ

    Judgment, judgment and more judgment of condemnation to the poor man, JPII. May God have mercy on your soul Ms. Helen, may He may not judge you as you have judged His Vicar.

  • AJ

    Frank,

    So sorry my brother but I don’t agree with your interpretation and thus your assertion with this particular document of Gaudium et Spes, section 24, para. 3.

    You are taking the particular paragraph out of context.

    What the Council was referring to was to our pure human “nakedness” (as our first parents, Adam and Eve) created by Love to be pure, immaculate from the beginning with at the same time has a gift of free will and freedom from God and with this as its masculinity and femininity seen as a mystery of creation for procreation as well as in the natural order. They have the capacity to express love that becomes a sincere gift of himself to herself and vice versa which in a sense for his own end as for only to the purpose of continuum of the human species but ultimately for the glory of God.

    Further reading: http://www.ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2tb14.htm

    Frank when I debated protestant apologists they always appeal to Scripture and Tradition to support their false doctrine of “Solas” and I always say to them an appeal to Scripture is an appeal to one’s interpretation of Scripture even how eloquent they may be. It’s just a mere human opinion nothing more including you and me. what separates us from them (protestants and orthodox) is that when the Catholic Church proclaims a Teaching to us we have the utmost CERTAINTY of its Truthfullness as if Jesus Himself speaking to us. Why? because we have the Apostolic Succession as with the Chair of Peter.

    Matthew 18:15-18:

    Jesus said, “And if he (cause of dispute) shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the CHURCH: but if he neglect to hear the CHURCH, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

    18Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

    I don’t see Jesus was saying: go to the your conscience of what you think is right or go to sspx or go to your version of tradition, do you?

    Peace and Grace to you.

  • AJ

    “What kind of pope refuses to proclaim Jesus Christ”

    This is just a plain lie. As i said before JPII shouldn’t have kissed the koran, I’m with you on that, he made an error, however I don’t agree with your condemnation of the man. The guy is not perfect like you and me. Leave that business to God Alone.

  • AJ

    Petrus, while I agree with you on the errors of judgement (i place that on the Hands of God and God alone) but I don’t judge the man , he’s not perfect. Like when Paul reprimanded Peter (Galatians 10) about his errors (not Teachings) with judaizers. If he made some mistakes then let God do the judging, stay away from His business or you’ll be judged!

    However, our argument is not about the personal sins of the pope BUT your submission to the Full Authority of the Church about Vatican II. Don’t muddy the waters please.

    Vatican II, was the twenty-first Ecumenical Council of the Catholic Church, my point is don’t pick and choose like our protestant brothers have done,

    EITHER YOU ACCEPT ALL THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS FROM THE VERY FIRST ONE- COUNCILS OF JERUSALEM , TO NICEA, CONSTANTINOPLE, CHALCEDON, TO THE PRESENT VATICAN II THAT’S GUARANTEED FREE FROM ERROR BY THE SAME HOLY SPIRIT or NONE AT ALL!… there is no room to pick the council of your choice as being Orthodox and True, either you trust the Great Promise of Jesus to His Church in ALL TRUTH OR NOT, very simple. Please don’t be like the protestants (which really you guys sounded like) where they have a cut-off period like only the first 300 years of Ecumenical Councils of Christianity were considered Orthodox. They don’t accept Councils of Nicea, Chalcedon etc.

    Do you want to be in their position as judges? Your Choice perhaps.

    What does it stop someone to believe that the first Council in Jerusalem is false or true? Does it make sense?

    The authority of the Church HAS passed judgment on the SSPX. John Paul II excommunicated Lefevre and five others for participating in an unsanctioned episcopal ordination in direct contradiciton to Church law. All priests associated with the SSPX were then denied faculties to exercise their ministries, a command they chose to disobey. By this they were schismatic.

    Our current Holy Father has removed the sentence of excommunication from the four bishops still living (he did not retroactively declare null all of the excommunications, he said that he is showing clemency), with the hope that they will return to full communion. The “schism” has been healed partially on the part of the Holy See out of their clemency, however the lack of full communion still exists as SSPX priests still deny obedience to the Holy Father and bishops in communion with them, and hence their actions are scandalous to the faithful, who deserve clergy who practice what they preach.

    The organization in itself has never been declared heretical, but just because something is not heretical does not mean it is good. The SSPX remains Catholic — as does a pro-choice Catholic politican. That does not mean we should endorse pro-choice Catholic politicians. In fact, we should not. Even though no pro-choice politican has been formally declared a heretic, by their actions they disobey the Church. Likewise, the SSPX disobeys the Church.

  • AJ

    So in other words when the chief of police says to the crowd of protester don’t throw eggs then it follows nobody threw eggs.

    If the pope says, no one should commit sin, then it follows that everybody didn’t sin.

    Is this is the logic you profess?

  • AJ

    Hello Petrus,

    2 Questions for you:

    Did you hear about traditionalist who consider you guys too liberal and thus split from SSPX? TOO LIBERAL! Here they are:

    Society of St. Pius V — In 1983, nine U.S. SSPX priests broke with or were forced to leave the SSPX’s Northeast USA District partly because they were opposed to Lefebvre’s instructions that Mass be celebrated according to the 1962 edition of the Roman Missal issued by Pope John XXIII. Other issues occasioning the split were: Lefebvre’s order that Society priests must accept the decrees of nullity handed down by diocesan marriage tribunals; the acceptance of new members into the group who had been ordained to the priesthood according to the revised sacramental rites of Pope Paul VI.[34] The nine priests went on to form the Society of Society of St. Pius V.

    Istituto Mater Boni Consilii (Italian for “Institute of the Mother of Good Counsel”) is a traditionalist congregation of priests that follows the Sedeprivationist school of thought. The founders of the institute seceded in 1985 from the Society of St. Pius X under the leadership of Fr. Francesco Ricossa, onetime faculty member of the seminary at Econe. In contrast to the North American-based SSPV, this Institute is based in Europe
    .
    2. Did you hear about traditionalists who have broken with the SSPX and reconciled with Rome?

    Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter — The Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter was established in 1988 after the Ecône consecrations. Responding to the Holy See’s declaration that these constituted a schismatic act and that those involved were thereby automatically excommunicated, twelve priests left the Society and established the Fraternity, in full communion with the Holy See.

    Personal Apostolic Administration of Saint John Mary Vianney

    Institute of the Good Shepherd — The Institute of the Good Shepherd (Institut du Bon-Pasteur, IBP) was established as a papally recognised society of apostolic life on 8 September 2006 for a group of SSPX members who maintained it was time for the Society to accept reconciliation with Pope Benedict XVI.
    The Sons of the Most Holy Redeemer joined the Holy See in June 2008.

    You see Petrus every abiding Catholic can be a ture Traditionalist without the SSPX. We don’t need the SSPX to be a Traditionalists. What I can see clearly is SSPX is undergoing what the protestant sects are undergoing during 500 years after the Reformation…..split from split from split.

    Peace to you.

  • AJ

    Oh really? but the pattern is more to yours.

    You see Francis every abiding Catholic can be a true Traditionalist without the SSPX. We don’t need the SSPX to be a Traditionalist. Look at my above post of some traditionalist groups who split from SSPX that consider it TOO LIBERAL! What I can see clearly is SSPX is undergoing what the protestant sects are undergoing during 500 years after the Reformation…..split from split from split.

  • http://spreadthyfragrance.blogspot.com/ Jackie Parkes

    Since our parish is the Birmingham Oratory we go to the Latin High, the EF, there are no eucharistic ministers, we kneel, many cover their heads if they choose..our sons only serve..

  • AJ

    Look at this article to explain to you about the Novus ordo Mass. I already answered this kind of allegation which is baseless.

    http://www.catholicintl.com/catholicissues/noorvalid.pdf

  • http://spreadthyfragrance.blogspot.com/ Jackie Parkes

    No we are NOT in a minority in a modern parish! my friend has 14 children & there are many large families & we are most definitely NOT in a modern parish..

  • Weary Convert

    Dear Lady – Bellarmine – life is too short at my age to find time to read the works of a 17th century theologian. Instead, on the basis of “by their fruits etc,” I recall that Bellarmine was involved in both the burning of Giordano Bruno and the persecution of Galileo, remembering that in Galileo’s condemnation, the heliocentric theory was specifically described as heresy. Perhaps therefore you could say whether (a) you agree with the burning of Bruno and (b) if you consider the heliocentric theory is (as you once called evolution in one of your posts) “that lie?” Arising from this, in your periods as a teacher of RE, may I ask what did you tell your students about such matters as burning heretics, your alternative to evolution (e.g. were Adam & Eve real?) and why the Church was so wrong on Galileo? And please don’t shout at me the way you do usually.

  • Helen Westover

    I have and will continue to, judge his ACTIONS, not the state of his soul – “By their fruits ye shall know them.” Did you read the Index of Leading Catholic indicators yet?
    Plus it was Paul VI who said “The smoke of satan had penetrated the Church, even up to the sanctuary.”

  • DBMcGinnity

    THE SMOKE OF SATAN HAS BEEN AROUND SINCE THE CONSTANTINE.

    “The Sermon on the Mount”
    I wonder how my contributors have read: “The Order for the Administration of The Lord’s Supper or Holy Communion” in the Anglican Communion or “The Divine Liturgy” of Saint John Chrysostom or “The Divine Liturgy of our Father” by St Basil the Great, or “The Koran“, or “The Jesus Narrative” In The Talmud, or the meaning of “The Torah“. How many have read “The Bhagavad-Gita” or “The Art of Happiness” by His Holiness the Dalai Lama.

    I was taught to read everything, and anything, at anytime, and to go everywhere, and anywhere in search of the truth. I was also taught the importance of having personal experience at first hand, whenever possible and not to rely on hearsay, conjecture, assumptions and suppositions, I was also taught, that no matter how good or convincing the book is, always check alternative and opposing opinions. After all these are in effect the tenets of any worthwhile research. Armchair conjecture and zealous diatribes by well meaning people are not at all helpful because they display the superficial theological veneer of the Roman Catholic Church that does not withstand objective scrutiny. The prose and syntax of the writing betray this.

    It seem to me that there is very little understanding of Jesus’ message of “The Sermon on the Mount” displayed in some of the blogs, that are without curiosity, respect, love or understanding for the dignity of fellow human beings. Human beings who deeply believe in God and adhere to the principle of love and charity espoused by Jesus Christ are referred to as pagans and in other terms of opprobrium. Jesus said nothing whatsoever about Roman Catholics being the chosen people, because they certainly are not !!

    In 1952 our local parish priest was visiting our house. He noticed a copy of DH Lawrence’s “Sons and Lovers” on the sideboard. He attempted to lift the lid of the kitchen stove and put it in the fire without deference to my mother who was standing beside him. It was her book, and he thought that he had the devolved authority to enter a persons home, and dictate what other people should read. My mother was very assertive, and she stopped him. He issued threats of hell fire, and the children would be taken away to industrial schools etc. Later he was exposed as a child abuser and an alcoholic; living a life of prurience, degradation and vice, and even then he was allowed to continue as a parish priest in another parish.

    There is just cause for me speculate that the love that Jesus Christ expressed for the WHOLE OF MANKIND is far removed from the doctrinal aspirations of the Roman Catholic Church. Blog evidence proves this to be the case.

  • DBMcGinnity

    “The Sermon on the Mount”
    I wonder how my contributors have read: “The Order for the Administration of The Lord’s Supper or Holy Communion” in the Anglican Communion or “The Divine Liturgy” of Saint John Chrysostom or “The Divine Liturgy of our Father” by St Basil the Great, or “The Koran“, or “The Jesus Narrative” In The Talmud, or the meaning of “The Torah“. How many have read “The Bhagavad-Gita” or “The Art of Happiness” by His Holiness the Dalai Lama.

    I was taught to read everything, and anything, at anytime, and to go everywhere, and anywhere in search of the truth. I was also taught the importance of having personal experience at first hand, whenever possible and not to rely on hearsay, conjecture, assumptions and suppositions, I was also taught, that no matter how good or convincing the book is, always check alternative and opposing opinions. After all these are in effect the tenets of any worthwhile research. Armchair conjecture and zealous diatribes by well meaning people are not at all helpful because they display the superficial theological veneer of the Roman Catholic Church that does not withstand objective scrutiny. The prose and syntax of the writing betray this.

    It seem to me that there is very little understanding of Jesus’ message of “The Sermon on the Mount” displayed in some of the blogs, that are without curiosity, respect, love or understanding for the dignity of fellow human beings. Human beings who deeply believe in God and adhere to the principle of love and charity espoused by Jesus Christ are referred to as pagans and in other terms of opprobrium. Jesus said nothing whatsoever about Roman Catholics being the chosen people, because they certainly are not !!

    In 1952 our local parish priest was visiting our house. He noticed a copy of DH Lawrence’s “Sons and Lovers” on the sideboard. He attempted to lift the lid of the kitchen stove and put it in the fire without deference to my mother who was standing beside him. It was her book, and he thought that he had the devolved authority to enter a persons home, and dictate what other people should read. My mother was very assertive, and she stopped him. He issued threats of hell fire, and the children would be taken away to industrial schools etc. Later he was exposed as a child abuser and an alcoholic; living a life of prurience, degradation and vice, and even then he was allowed to continue as a parish priest in another parish.

    There is just cause for me speculate that the love that Jesus Christ expressed for the WHOLE OF MANKIND is far removed from the doctrinal aspirations of the Roman Catholic Church. Blog evidence proves this to be the case.

  • padraig

    My frind nowhere did I even imply that the Novus Ordo Mass is invalid as neither did Archbishop Lefebvre,while it may indeed be a valid Mass it is nevertheless heavily impregnated with Protestantism and not recognisable as a Catholic Mass in fact the great heretics Luther and Cranmer would be quite comfortable celebrating such a service.As someone once said about the Novus Ordo ‘a total change… a new creation’I think it was Msgr Bugnini co-author of the new Mass with the help of the six Protestant ministers who collaborated in its creation.

  • DBMcGinnity

    Heavily Impregnated with Protestantism
    I wonder a merciful God and gentle Jesus ever allowed Protestants to walk the earth? Ought not these vile creatures be rounded up and placed in correction concentration camps and tattooed with a capital P for Protestant on their forehead. There could be the same arrangement of capital letter identification for Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses and Buddhists. Only Catholics should be allowed.

    Should there not be compulsory conversion to the Holy Roman Catholic Faith and the absolute obedience to the infallible pope, using any means whatso ever, as was the practice in the past. These vile pagans have been a great inconvenience to the proliferation and propagation of the virtues Our Holy Mother the The True Roman Catholic Church. Many of the blogs including your own seem to suggest that the answer to this probles lies in some radical solution like Hitler‘s “The Final Solution” for Jews. It seems like that to me!!!

  • padraig

    My friend the only other people in this part of the world that have come closest to implementing final solutions was a Government headed by Queen Victoria,a family which you seem peculiarly obsessed with,when they almost starved the Irish nation to death during the misnamed irish famine in the 19th century.In case you didnt know it Protestants are heretics and as such must be converted to the faith founded by Jesus Christ in order to be saved,this is the primary and only function of ecumenism.If you cant accept this I suggest you take to reading the Protestant Telegraph and leave the Catholic Herald to us Catholics.

  • Anonymous

    Your comments are, as always, hilarious, but seriously,you need professional help.

  • DBMcGinnity

    You seem to think that I am not a Catholic; how can you possibly know this? Would you like to test the veracity and integrity of my knowledge on any aspect of The Catholic Church?

    THERE WAS NO IRISH FAMINE
    It is a matter of public record that there was potato blight in Ireland and all over Europe
    It was worse in Ireland because the Irish practice of growing potatoes in the same field year after years exacerbated the problem in terms of resistance to disease. Even though there was scientific knowledge about leaving some ground fallow in order to allow rejuvenation of nitrogen and other nutrients, the Irish people ignored this, so the potato crop failed.

    A famine means that there is no food available. In Ireland this was not true because at no time in Ireland is a person more than five miles away from fresh water rivers and lakes with abundant supplies of fish, not to mention the sea in the west of Ireland. There was also abundant game rabbits and birds ducks etc. So there was no famine in Ireland.

    In America President Knox Polk as aware that the question of slavery was becoming a burning issue with the threat of cessation by North Carolina and other adjacent states from the Republic. It was also clear that there was a pending civil war on the horizon, and there were too few men to fight it. The south were pro British and it was feared that Britain might support the Confederates and get another foothold in the United States.

    So it was Irish Cardinal Paul Cullen and Pius IX who fabricated the famine so that millions of Irishmen would go to America in preparation for the American Civil War. The statistical facts of Irish Regiments and Irish deaths speak for themselves. It was Cardinal Cullen who forbade Catholics to accept Protestant help, just in case they were attracted to becoming Protestant. He had a bigoted, destructive and uncharitable attitude to Protestants, just like you. There was no Irish famine. It never happened, and the potato blight had nothing to do with Queen Victoria.

    I will read and write for any paper I wish, and I will not be directed or influenced by you.

  • Helen Westover

    ‘m so glad you brought this up. I embarked on a 20 year journey through Eastern and Western religions. I studied the Gita, the Vedas, and the Upanishads. I followed Ramakrishna, Aurobindo,Zen, Buddhism and for comic relief, Yogananda. Through study, I realized that Pantheism was a dead end. So I went to Martin Buber as a corrective, studied Heschel and Victor Frankle. Then I went through Third Force psychology, from there to Plato and Aristotle. In the Western area, I studied Islam, Judaism, and they detoured into the cults – JW’s, Mormons – I ended up in Baha’i for a while but left it when I found out that they lie to get you to join (I’can fill that in later). Long story short, to my distress and chagrin, I saw the uniqueness of Jesus Christ – no avatar ever said or did what He did. Detour through Protestant thought, but they had so many interpretations of the Bible, they cancelled each other out. The only thing left was the Catholic Church – it’s history, theology, apologetics. At first grudgingly, then joyfully, I embraced the Catholic Faith.
    Been there, done that, my friend.

    — On Sun, 4/17/11, Disqus wrote:

    From: Disqus <.

    — On Sun, 4/17/11, Disqus wrote:

    From: Disqus <

  • Anonymous

    Attention either Francis Phillips or Catholic Herald Official in charge of banning bloggers…

    I’ve had an email from blogger Petrus, who is puzzled at being banned from this blog.

    He cannot post comments because he gets a message saying he is banned; his IP address is blocked which means he cannot blog under another name.

    There has been no explanation given to him for this and he has emailed the blogs editor but received no reply.

    I have assured him that, in my experience, the Catholic Herald is very good at permitting free speech and I genuinely think this is probably a Disquis malfunction.

    Can someone assure him of this – or at least supply a reason why he has been blocked.

    I’ve read most, if not all of his posts, and there is nothing in any of them that is contrary to Catholic faith or morals – which is why I’m convinced it’s a blip.

  • AJ

    So in other words when the chief of police says to the crowd of protesters don’t throw eggs then it follows nobody threw eggs.

    If the pope says, no one should commit sin, then it follows that everybody didn’t sin.

    Is this the logic you profess?

  • AJ

    So what if he is humble, even some heretics are humble. He is not obeying his superiors and obstinately published articles undermining the Church’s Authority about Fatima……a scandal by itself. Typical Lefebvrist sect.

    Even Our Lady in Fatima honors the Holy Father but you guys are doing the opposite. Shame on you!