Wed 3rd Sep 2014 | Last updated: Tue 2nd Sep 2014 at 16:41pm

Facebook Logo Twitter Logo RSS Logo
Hot Topics

Comment & Blogs

Our Lady of Quito prophesied that in the 60s there would be spiritual catastrophe in the Church; then, through the faith of the just, a ‘complete restoration’

But first, there would be a total corruption of morals in society; this would affect the Church, too

By on Thursday, 26 July 2012

I was leafing through the current issue of The Flock, the newsletter of Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice, (available here) when I came across an article by the redoubtable Mrs Daphne McLeod about Our Lady of Quito—otherwise known as Our Lady of Good Success—who appeared several times to Mother Mariana, Abbess of the convent of the Immaculate Conception in Quito, Ecuador, at the end of the sixteenth and the beginning of the seventeenth centuries.

On one of these occasions, she made a particularly remarkable prophecy. You will see why—knowing Mrs McLeod’s passionate concern for the religious education of our children, and her repeated warnings over the years about the consequences of the denatured and insubstantial superficiality of what they are now fed as RE—she draws our attention in The Flock to this particular apparition of Our Lady.

My source for what follows is an admirable and extremely useful site, snappily entitled “Apparitions and Shrines of the Blessed Virgin Mary which have been approved by legitimate Church Authority”.

Early in the morning of January 21, 1610, the Archangels St. Michael, St. Gabriel and St. Raphael appeared to Mother Mariana. Then Our Lady appeared to her and predicted many things about our own times: this is part of what Mother Mariana afterwards related that she told her:

“…. I make it known to you that from the end of the 19th century and shortly after the middle of the 20th century…. the passions will erupt and there will be a total corruption of customs (morals)….

“They will focus principally on the children in order to sustain this general corruption. Woe to the children of these times! It will be difficult to receive the Sacrament of Baptism, and also that of Confirmation…

“As for the Sacrament of Matrimony… it will be attacked and deeply profaned… The Catholic spirit will rapidly decay; the precious light of the Faith will gradually be extinguished… Added to this will be the effects of secular education, which will be one reason for the dearth of priestly and religious vocations.

“The Sacrament of Holy Orders will be ridiculed, oppressed, and despised… The Devil will try to persecute the ministers of the Lord in every possible way; he will labor with cruel and subtle astuteness to deviate them from the spirit of their vocation and will corrupt many of them. These depraved priests, who will scandalize the Christian people, will make the hatred of bad Catholics and the enemies of the Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church fall upon all priests…

“Further, in these unhappy times, there will be unbridled luxury, which will ensnare the rest into sin and conquer innumerable frivolous souls, who will be lost. Innocence will almost no longer be found in children, nor modesty in women. In this supreme moment of need of the Church, the one who should speak will fall silent.” In a subsequent apparition, Our Lady told Mother Mariana that these apparitions were not to become generally known until the twentieth century.

Now, it is true that Our Lady’s prophecies here are concerned particularly with what will happen more than three centuries in the future “in what is today the Colony and will then be the Republic of Ecuador”, where, she says, “Satan will reign almost completely by means of the Masonic sects”. All the same (though I can’t quite see the few harmless Masons I have known bringing in the sovereignty of Satan here) the relevance of these prophecies to English Society and the English Church (indeed to the whole modern world) in the twentieth century—and therefore now—is obvious enough. She even homes in on the sixties: she times this “eruption” of the passions to take place “shortly after the middle of the twentieth century”.

Particularly striking, you may think, are Our Lady’s words about how “the Sacrament of Matrimony …will be attacked and deeply profaned”, and that remarkable passage about some “depraved priests, who will scandalise the Christian people, [and who] will make the hatred of bad Catholics and the enemies of the Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church fall upon all priests…”

Mrs McLeod sees particular relevance to her own concerns about the woeful state and dire consequences of what our children are taught in Catholic schools, and draws attention particularly to Our Lady’s prophecy that those who do Satan’s will “would ‘focus particularly on the children in order to achieve this general corruption. Woe to the children of these times!’ “. Mrs McLeod observes that “We can see only too clearly what she meant now that the inadequate, even false, religious teaching given to the children in so many Catholic schools and parishes leaves them highly vulnerable to the explicit classroom lessons on sex, not to mention the television programmes and computer games, which inevitably corrupt and deprave them.”

No doubt someone will throw doubt on that analysis, and say that the prophecy really isn’t about RE in rainy old England but about what’s supposed to be going on now in Ecuador (incidentally does anyone out there know anything about what IS going on in Ecuador?); but if anyone does say that, I think they will be quite wrong. Our Lady’s prophecies are usually universal in their application: and we live in what is sometimes ludicrously called a “globalised world”. These prophecies are just as much about about Europe and North America: there is surely no doubt that these extraordinary words are meant for us, too. A few translations to modern idioms and modern forms of collaboration with Satan may be necessary: I have just mentioned the mild and unthreatening nature of English masonry. But it hasn’t been like that everywhere. In 1952, for instance, the Grand Lodge of France passed a series of resolutions against the Catholic Church, including one “to unmask by every means the subtle scheming of the Vatican State Secretariat, which aims at imposing the shameful guardianship of religious and political-economic dictatorship on the whole of mankind . . . and to accept, in the relentless struggle against clericalism, every alliance compatible with the Masonic ideal.”

Well, there are plenty of anti-clerical cults today, consumed by a fanatical anti-clericalism of exactly the same sort, who wage a constant struggle to get God out of modern culture in any way they can think of, large and small; How about this example, reported approvingly by one of these anti-God cults, The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science, in which an outfit called New York City Atheists is joining one Dr. Michael Newdow, a California-based Atheist “physician/lawyer”, in a suit to get the words “In God We Trust” removed from American coins and currency. That would be a small but significant victory in the unending culture wars of our times.

You can all think of a hundred other examples, emanating not just from hard-line cultists like Dawkins, but from soft-core and mostly low-key almost subconsciously anti-Christian organisations like the BBC. It all adds up to a cultural explosion, the effects of which have indeed erupted, as Our Lady prophesied, in “a total corruption” of our mores and many of our institutions, both within the Church and in the wider secular society of which we are part.

The most important thing to understand is that it would be just wrong to despair at all this. The fightback is underway. For, in the end, Our Lady of Quito’s prophecies do not end with spiritual catastrophe. In a later apparition she foretold that “In order to free men from bondage to these heresies, those whom the merciful love of My Most Holy Son will destine for that restoration will need great strength of will, constancy, valor and much confidence in God. To test this faith and confidence of the just, there will be occasions when everything will seem to be lost and paralyzed. This, then, will be the happy beginning of the complete restoration.”

I believe we have seen that faith and valour over the last half century, above all in the present Holy Father and his heroic predecessor; and that that complete restoration has indeed happily begun.

  • Honeybadger

    Would you regard a little, frail-looking woman who cleaned, washed, fed, clothed and comforted the dying and destitute in poverty-stricken India a ‘fundementalist fraud’?

    Would you call the work that the sisters and brothers (yes, there are brothers) do in the order that she founded, the Missionaries of Charity, observe living and working with the poorest of the poor all over the world ‘fanaticism’?

    I bet you, Judithj’bleak’midwinter has NEVER, EVER, EVER spent time with Mother Theresa or her sisters and brothers in their work! Or else, why would you write such slurry and crap about her?

    Or, put it this way – would you roll up the sleeves of your nice, neat shirt to talk to, pray for, comfort, console, feed, embrace and watch people die in your arms for hours and hours?

    You’d regard it as fanaticism, fraud, self-seeking, wouldn’t you?

    For example, would YOU base yourself in a block of flats, in an appartment no bigger than your garage, with mould and damp on your walls because it was near more poverty and you were best placed to help?

    I have seen their work for myself. It’s an eye-opening, humbling experience. It takes great faith, courage and cast-iron guts to do what they do. I have sat in the very room where Princess Diana and Mother Theresa met when things got tough for the princess. It has also been a place for families and friends and benefactors to meet and talk.

    ‘Mother’ is what you call the founder and head of your order. She was a Mother to those people whom society rejected and did not lift a finger to help them.

    She did not style herself as ‘Mother’. It was broadcasting legends like Malcolm Muggeridge and Gay Byrne who explored her work, interviewed her and opened many doors wide to her work that earned her worldwide status.

    Judithjmidwinter, just go away and do your homework and get your facts STRAIGHT.

  • Honeybadger

    Aw, who said I was point-scoring and being provocative?

    Dawkins is a -!

  • Honeybadger

    Who, pray, are the ‘Jusuits’?

  • Honeybadger

    What a cheek!

  • Oconnord

    I don’t know what you’re trying to achieve by questioning the methodology of two of my points, while ignoring the substance of those points and the other eight characteristics of a cult. 

    You are in no way showing that the RDFRS is an “anti-God cult”. In fact you seem far more interested in “playing the player than the ball”. I do of course apologise for a sport analogy, but it is apt.

  • Oconnord

    That would have read better if I said provocative BUT point scoring. The provocative part I like, it keeps things interesting. But by the point scoring, I mean it was a low blow that could land on almost any person with a large ego.

    You’ll notice I didn’t disagree, merely pointed out it didn’t make him the leader of a cult. Otherwise we have to call Man Utd. a cult, with Ferguson it’s “charismatic leader” and the team the “revered inner circle”.  

  • Oconnord

    “Your command of vocabulary is limited.”
    Is that a truism meant as an insult? It’s not very effective. If I reply in kind, how about… “Mine is, but what is yours?”

  • Oconnord

    And you just ignore the fact that judith mentions sex exactly once in this this thread. Again you argue against nothing but your own imagination. Unless of course you think a single reference to a subject means that someone is “obsessively ranting on”.

  • Oconnord

    Have you ever seen Father Ted?

    My joking riposte may not have tickled your ribs, but I did not intend any malice.  I took a silly scenario, that of a CH blogger on drugs, and upped the ante by defining which type of drug it was. I even prefaced it with a common “comedy catchphrase”.  

    Please don’t use that in any sort of “analysis”, you’ll make a mockery of your own study.

  • JabbaPapa

    Thank you for yet another example of your bigotry, indoctrination, and want of intelligence.

    Bloody troll.

  • JabbaPapa

    Any outside and unbigoted person could easily see its factual content.

    Well, that rules you out, then.

  • JabbaPapa

    Don’t you just love it when those who lack the most elementary basics of reading comprehension accuse others of “stupidity” ?

  • JabbaPapa

    And you just ignore the fact that judith mentions sex exactly once in this this thread.

    This is not a “fact”. What’s the opposite of “fact” ? hmmmmm

  • JabbaPapa

    Accusing me of your own failures to meaningfully engage with the objections against your position is a clear non-starter.

    You falsely described one of my arguments as a “strawman” — how *exactly* were you furthering continued discussion by making that unwarranted claim ?

    I *do* OTOH appreciate the probably unintended irony of your accusing me of “playing the player than the ball” in a post which is doing precisely that.

  • karlf

    Dawkins is not my friend, but I’d be fascinated to hear how you can define him as a hardline cultist?
    If Doctor Oddie makes ridiculous comments he should expect fair criticicism.

  • karlf

     But you believe in plenty of other supernatural, or magical happenings that you did not witness. You must have to make some very tricky decisions.

  • karlf

     I find it very interesting how the religious wrongly accuse the non-religious of their own follies i.e. being cultish, dogmatic, and having “faith”

  • JabbaPapa

    You have zero knowledge of what I have and what I have not witnessed.

  • karlf

    Wrong. I have knowledge that you have not witnessed nearly every historical supernatural happening acknowleged as real events by the Catholic Church

  • awkwardcustomer

    He would say that, wouldn’t he.  

  • formerly_Henrick_Maundey-__666

    How Dawkins and people like that arrogantly hijack the word ‘rational’ to solidify their own belief in what they believe, and deceive others that they are right in their ‘science is a God’ opinions. The fact is everything can be known to flesh as science, but what good if you don’t have the means to use it? You may know the type of Frankincense that grew around the Dead Sea made brilliant perfume, but if that type of tree is extinct for the last millenia, you’re not going to make the exact same perfume again, and science goes on exacts, faith doesn’t. I’m sorry I couldn’t write a better example but it’s the typical Greek tragedy or the movie clincher that ends unexpectedly where help is only minutes away, and the hero doesn’t make it. Obviously we a live in a world with Hollywood where the good guy generally always makes it, but in Ancient Greece the tragedy was the psychological outlook on life, and you lived to die heroically. Now the Greek is nearer to reality in my opinion because fallen Creation since the hour Adam and Eve spent in the garden and fell has been a tragedy! Dawkins himself isn’t going to gain immortality by scientific means. I know he may find comfort that people will read and admire his science papers and books after his death, but what of it, if the price of death is truly as the Bible admonishes us to understand, then no solace now will make that worth it. There is nothing rational about believing in God in fact it is so rational people miss the point. Everything on Earth is in a hierarchy, families, food chains, size of the planets, so how can there not be one supreme overseer over all of it? As he says in his Good Book the Bible ‘All Flesh Shall be Saved’, we don’t know how , not even by the rest of the Bible or expounding on it, but this is I assume why Catholic Church means Universal, and it may be the big demon in many peoples eyes currently but I think will turn out to be the real hero. And yes Mr Dawkins Christians do contradict ourselves but we have to to be honest, as our God is both in and out, behind and in front, we are him but he is us, controlling us yet we have free will. To put it very crudely Mr Dawkins and in no disrespect, what of Siamese twins who share a part of the brain between them, yet you don’t see them doing everything in unison.

  • JabbaPapa

    That’s not “knowledge” — it’s “opinion”.

    Whether the opinion is correct or not is irrelevant to the fact that you have zero knowledge of what I have and what I have not witnessed.

    OTOH, you’re obviously just trolling in here, as usual. Haven’t you anything better to do with your life ? No ?

  • JabbaPapa

    In which case, you should have no difficulty demonstrating that each of them is objectively true, right, as based on evidence and incontrovertible reason ?

  • formerly_Henrick_Maundey-__666

     And above I write ‘we are him’ at the bottom it should read ‘we are in him’. Words are currently coming and going on this computer at the moment and I could swear the keyboard is a bilingual one.

  • JabbaPapa

    I find it very interesting how the religious wrongly accuse the
    non-religious of their own follies i.e. being cultish, dogmatic, and
    having “faith”

    Reading comprehension difficulties again, sir ?

    NOT “the non-religious” — but the militant atheists

    NOT “being cultish” — but belonging to a cult

    NOT “dogmatic” — but indoctrinated

    NOT “having faith” — but maintaining a quasi-religious belief system, based on that indoctrination

    Do keep up !!!

  • Judithjmidwinter

    In addition to being a fraud, this woman was at best an agnostic.

    Now we have learned that the world-changing sincerity felt fake from the inside, too: even as she was receiving the Nobel prize, she asked her confessor to pray for her because she could feel nothing when she prayed herself and no longer had any experience of God. In a letter, written to Jesus at her confessor’s request, she sounds like an adolescent Dawkins: 

     “I call, I cling, I want … and there is no One to answer … no One on Whom I can cling … no, No One. Alone … Where is my Faith … even deep down right in there is nothing, but emptiness & darkness … My God … how painful is this unknown pain … I have no Faith … I dare not utter the words & thoughts that crowd in my heart … & make me suffer untold agony.
    So many unanswered questions live within me afraid to uncover them … because of the blasphemy … If there be God … please forgive me … When I try to raise my thoughts to Heaven there is such convicting emptiness that those very thoughts return like sharp knives & hurt my very soul. I am told God loves me … and yet the reality of darkness & coldness & emptiness is so great that nothing touches my soul.”
    SEE: 
    http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1655720,00.html 

  • Judithjmidwinter

    I would also be only too pleased to change my mind on any (or even all) of these statements if a reason emerged that I should do so.
    There is no doctrine or dogma here. I have a totally open mind about them all.

  • karlf

    Opinion??!! How could you possibly have experienced events that happened before your lifetime?

  • James H

    Private revelation – going by the results I’ve seen even (especially!) for approved apparitions, not a good thing overall.

    Very interesting, but everything we need is ever in the Bible, and the Catechism. I’ll move along, now.

  • karlf

    You are simply reinforcing my claim Jabba.
    What quasi-religious belief system are you referring to? What cult? What is a ‘militant atheist’ exactly?

  • karlf

    Well, he was an unusually intelligent and insightful man, so I suppose he would say something like that, yes.

  • pat21

    DECREE
    of the Canonical Coronation
    of the Statue of the Most Holy Virgin of Good Success,
    venerated in the church of the Convent
    of the Immaculate Conception of the city of Quito.
    CONSIDERING:
    1.. That since 380 years the Catholic devotees of Quito
    and of Ecuador have rendered public and continuous
    cult to the Statue of Mary of Good Success, in the
    church of the Convent of the Immaculate Conception,
    specially on the occasion of the Novena and the Feast
    of Candlemas, on February 2 of each year;
    2.. That, according to historical data located in the Convent,
    the sacred Statue of Mary of Good Success had
    been sculptured by the Spanish artist Francisco de la
    Cruz Castillo upon request of the Servant of God, Mariana
    de Jesus Torres y Berriochoa, who, in a mysterious
    apparition of February 2, 1610, received the order from
    the Mother of God to execute it;
    3.. That the Mother of God, under the invocation of Mary
    of Good Success, has often shown Her maternal protection
    to the religious Community of the Convent as to its
    devotees of the city of Quito and of the whole Ecuador;
    4.. That the devotion to Mary of Good Success has always
    been growing, especially starting from 1986, with the
    opening of the Cause of Beatification of Mother Mariana,
    co-founder and second Abbess of the Convent of
    the Immaculate Conception; and
    5.. That the Community of the Convent, the auxiliary
    Committee for the Cause of Beatification of the Servant

    of God, and the Metropolitan Chapter, the Curia’s officers

    and several devotees have addressed the ecclesiastical

    Authorities with a respectful petition;

    According to the functions conferred by the “Ordo Coronandi
    imaginem Beatae Mariae Virginis”, published by
    the Holy See on March 25, 1981,
    DECREES
    1.. The Canonical Coronation of the Sacred Statue of

    Mary of Good Success, as filial homage to the fervent
    devotion and rendering of thanks to the Mother of God
    on behalf of the religious Community of the Convent
    and of the devotees of the city of Quito and of the
    whole Archdiocese; and
    2.. That the ceremony of the solemn Canonical Coronation
    to be held on Saturday February 2, 1991, at
    19:30, in the Archdiocese’s Marian Sanctuary of the
    Convent of the Immaculate Conception of Quito.
    Archbishop’s Palace of Quito, January 7, 1991.
    Mons. Antonio J. Gonzalez Z.,
    Archbishop of Quito  DECREE

    In which the Church

    of the Convent of the Immaculate

    Conception of Quito

    is declared an

    Archdiocesan Marian Sanctuary

    CONSIDERING:

    1.. That the church of the Convent of the Immaculate Conception
    of the city of Quito accomplishes 414 years of

    existence and service to the divine cult;

    2.. That in this church the sacred Statue of Mary of Good
    Success is venerated since 380 years;

    3.. That the Religious of the Convent and many devotees
    of the city of Quito, of the Archdiocese and of Ecuador

    have cultivated, with great enthusiasm, the devotion to

    the Mother of God in this church;

    4.. That many devotees of the city and of this Country continue
    to take care of this church in a monumental way,

    most especially on occasion of the Novena and the

    Feast of Candlemas, on February 2 of each year, rendering

    to Mary of Good Success a fervent homage of

    love and gratitude and placing their trust in Her maternal

    protection, all this with approval of the ecclesiastical

    Authority;

    5.. That the Religious Community of the Convent, the auxiliary
    Committee for the Cause of Beatification of the

    Servant of God, Mariana Francisca de Jesus Torres y

    Berriochoa, the Metropolitan Chapter and the Curia’s

    officers, interpreting the will of the Catholic people,

    have addressed the Prelate of the Archdiocese a respectful

    petition.

    According to the faculties conferred to the Ordinary of the

    city, along with the Canons 1230 and 1232 of the in force

    Canon Law Code, for the present Decree,

    WE DECLARE

    THE CHURCH OF THE CONVENT

    OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION OF QUITO

    AN ARCHDIOCESAN MARIAN SANCTUARY,

    DEDICATED IN HONOUR

    TO MARY OF GOOD SUCCESS.

    Archbishop’s Palace of Quito, January 7, 1991.

    Mons. Antonio J. Gonzalez Z.,

    Archbishop of Quito   Beatification Cause of Mother MarianaOn August 8, 1986, after examining extensive
    data on her life, Archbishop of Quito, Antonio
    J. Gonzalez issued an Episcopal decree to

    initiate the Cause of Beatification of the Venerable

    Mother Mariana de Jesus Torres.

    This decree affirmed that Mother Mariana
    had practiced all the virtues to a heroic degree,
    and was distinguished for her devotions
    to the Passion of Christ, the Holy Eucharist
    and the Mother of God. It also acknowledged
    her supernatural gifts and favors, during her

    lifetime.

    The Archbishop named Mons. doct. Luis E.
    Cadena y Almeida as Postulator for her Cause
    of Beatification and established an ecclesiastical

    Tribunal to begin the first phase of the

    process. From that time until his death, Mons.
    Cadena y Almeida had compiled an impressive
    collection of documentation, testimonies,

    and works – many of which he published with

    ecclesiastical approval – that demonstrate the
    sanctity of life of Mother Mariana and the
    truth of the prophecies she received in the 40
    visits of Our Lady of Good Success to Mother
    Mariana – of which many have been proven to
    be fulfilled. http://www.chiesaviva.com/413%20en.pdf page 35 

  • awkwardcustomer

    Here’s an excerpt from a Wikipedia article on Militant Atheism plus the link to the full entry.

    ‘British philosopher Julian Baggini postulates an atheistic active hostility to religion as militant and says hostility “requires more than just strong disagreement with religion – it requires something verging on hatred and is characterized by a desire to wipe out all forms of religious belief.” Militant atheists, Baggini continues, “tend to make one or both of two claims that moderate atheists do not. The first is that religion is demonstrably false or nonsense, and the second is that it is usually or always harmful.” According to Baggini, the “too-zealous” militant atheism found in the Soviet Union was characterized by thinking the best way to counter religion was “by oppression and making atheism the official state credo.”
    As such, philosopher Kerry S. Walters contends that militant atheism differs from moderate atheism because it sees belief in God as pernicious. In the same vein, militant atheism, according to theologian Karl Rahner, regards itself as a doctrine to be propagated for the happiness of mankind and combats every religion as a harmful aberration; “militant” atheism differs from the philosophy of “theoretical” atheism, which he states, may be tolerant and deeply concerned.’

    http://www.conservapedia.com/Militant_atheism 

  • awkwardcustomer

    Here’s an excerpt from a Wikipedia article on Militant Atheism plus the link to the full entry.
    ‘British philosopher Julian Baggini postulates an atheistic active hostility to religion as militant and says hostility “requires more than just strong disagreement with religion – it requires something verging on hatred and is characterized by a desire to wipe out all forms of religious belief.” Militant atheists, Baggini continues, “tend to make one or both of two claims that moderate atheists do not. The first is that religion is demonstrably false or nonsense, and the second is that it is usually or always harmful.” According to Baggini, the “too-zealous” militant atheism found in the Soviet Union was characterized by thinking the best way to counter religion was “by oppression and making atheism the official state credo.”As such, philosopher Kerry S. Walters contends that militant atheism differs from moderate atheism because it sees belief in God as pernicious. In the same vein, militant atheism, according to theologian Karl Rahner, regards itself as a doctrine to be propagated for the happiness of mankind and combats every religion as a harmful aberration; “militant” atheism differs from the philosophy of “theoretical” atheism, which he states, may be tolerant and deeply concerned.’
    http://www.conservapedia.com/M

  • awkwardcustomer

    This is a mistake.  But once the reply button is pressed it won’t go away.  Sorry.

     

  • daclamat

    Did she have anyrhing  to say about El Salvador. Wrong kind of martyrs.

  • JabbaPapa

    I didn’t (though some mystics have reported witnessing such things) — but you continue in your sheer failure to understand the original objection to your supercilious opinions — which is that you have zero knowledge of the contents of my personal experiences.

  • JabbaPapa

    The contents of your personal misinterpretations and misunderstandings of Christian mysticism do not constitute the truth.

    What she was discussing was the loss of a certain state of Grace or Joy that is experienced by SOME Christians, certainly not all, in the presence of the Divine. She describes a state of spiritual suffering in the absence of God.

    This is quite obviously NOT the same as “at best an agnostic”.

  • JabbaPapa

    Statements of atheist doctrine do not justify the truth of other atheist doctrines.

    You’ll have to do better than that.

    Except of course, I don’t think you’re capable, these are just doctrines that you irrationally accept as being truthful on the basis of no evidence but what people have taught you.

  • JabbaPapa

    NuAtheism ; the cult of NuAtheism ; a militant atheist is someone like this judith person for example, who engages in atheist evangelisation and attempts to indoctrinate others into the above-mentioned quasi-religious belief system.

  • karlf

    “I didn’t” – exactly!
    “some mystics have reported witnessing such things” and alien abductions too perhaps?

  • karlf

    Richard Dawkins doesn’t even call himself an atheist, let alone has a cult called ‘NuAtheism’
    How can the non belief in gods be ‘quasi-religious’? Perhaps Judith just enjoys a good argument, and maybe has personal reasons to be anti religion,but to say she is evangelising is adding weight to my original point yet again.

  • karlf

     You could reply to me here if you like

  • Patrick_Hadley

     OK, so the local bishop approved back in 1991. But how much progress has the cause for beatification made since then?

  • JabbaPapa

    Carry on understanding nothing that you read, then.

  • JabbaPapa

    How can the non belief in gods be ‘quasi-religious’?

    So, you’ve finally circled back to the start of the whole discussion. From here onwards, you can just carry on round in circles, and completely ignore and misunderstand other people’s points in your self-sustaining circular manner.

    adding weight to my original point yet again

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

  • Scyptical Chymist

     – and here follows a mutual love-in for the critics —

  • pat21

    Patrick,
    I’m afraid I can’t answer your question at present – I will endeavour to find out the address of the Archbishop and contact him and see what progress has been made with Mother Mariana’s Cause – although it might be difficult contacting his office, as there’s no guarantee that correspondence in other languages will be understood . . . but I’ll do what I can, and let’s hope for some further information – but what I copied and pasted above from the diocesan decrees shows that the cult of Our Lady of Good Success has full ecclesiastical approval, so no-one should be concerned about this devotion.  I don’t know how long these threads stay open, but I’ll do what I can to answer your question a.s.a.p!  God bless,

  • karlf

    You are simply avoiding answering my questions. I wonder why???

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Andrew-Patton/592034163 Andrew Patton

    Despair is a terrible sin indeed, and more terrible still is it to hate God outright.  This is not to say I’m angered by Dawkins or any of the other anti-theists; rather, I find them pathetic.  How terrible is it that there are people who freely choose to spend eternity in Hell because as terrible as Hell is, they still prefer it to Heaven.  For them, it is not that they have been deceived, nor that they find the snare of sin too alluring to overcome, but that the presence of God is so intolerable to them that they find it less painful to burn in Hell than to enter Heaven.  Now God alone knows whether Dawkins or anyone else is such a person, but it seems pretty clear that such people do exist.  Even so, as long as they have breath, there is hope that their hardness of heart could be quelled and they should come to love the God they once hated.  After all, St. Paul spent a long time utterly hating Christ before coming to know Him as the God he claimed to love all along.