1980 years ago Jesus Christ founded His Holy Catholic Church. He told us that the Gates of Hell will not prevail against Her. Many take this to mean that the Church will go on no matter what and that is true. But they are missing a very important point that the Gates of Hell are trying to prevail and are doing a very good job of it, both outside the Church and inside the Church.
One of the ways the devil has tried to destroy the Church is through the media and feminist. The media has used over and over the sexual abuse by priests to make the Mystical Body of Christ to be seen as a institute that rapes and abuses little boys. Every time an event would happen, let us say the election of Pope Francis or a World Youth Day, again the media would dig up horrible and true stories of sexual abuse by priests.
We, the bishops and priests do deserve this terrible treatment as a result of terrible crimes by some bishops and priests. It would be very appropriate if we bishops and priests would do more apologizing and penance for these terrible sins. But at the same time it is inaccurate because the Church is not a homosexual institute that rapes boys, but the Mystical Body of Christ. The media uses a true scandal to deface God’s True Church.
The Mystical Body of Christ is composed of the pope, bishops, priests, religious and the average Catholic. It is way more than the bishops and priests who (in general) had evil homosexual relations with teenage youth. The Mystical Body of Christ has churches, and monasteries that pray for the whole world. The Church has clinics and homes for those who have AIDS. The Mystical Body of Christ has hospitals, free clinics for the poor, orphanages, soup kitchens, shelters and schools. The devil uses our sins and crimes to cover over all the good the Church does and has done through out history for humanity.
Before the expose of the sex abuse and the hiding of it, the media used an other strategy to paint the Mystical Body of Christ as an evil institution. That was by painting us as a male dominated sexist Church.
A in depth study was done on how the media consistently portrayed the Church in the 80′s and 90′s as anti women church. Over and over again the issue of sexism for not ordaining women was brought up at every event especially on the occasion of the visits to the USA by Pope John Paul II. So many Catholic women still see the Church as sexist because women are not allowed to be ordained priest and are criticizing it and leaving it.
Pope Francis recently re-stated the fact that women can not be ordained, but that he is going to put women more in charge in the church. Everywhere I have been a priest, and I am sure it would be true from your own experience, most parishes are run by women right now. The Church is already a woman’s world even though priests do happened to be men. The over whelming majority of employees in the Catholic Church are women. I am thankful for all that women do for the Church, but to say we need more women in control is absurd. I thought that as a priest I am to be the servant and follower of Jesus. ”The Kings and the Gentiles lord it over them; and they that have power over them are called beneficent. But you not so: but he that is greater among you, let him become as the younger; and he that is the leader, as he that serveth”. Luke 22: 25-26
Most women quote that Jesus did not have women apostles because of the cultural restraints put on women of His time. But, they go on to say, if He were here today He would have women apostles. That is a false assumption because in the Roman and Greek world there were women priestesses.
Catholic feminist would be very angry with Jesus today if He were around with His male only apostles. They will see what Jesus really thought when they die and they will not be happy. I tell them please do not take out on me what Jesus decided about male only priest. I tell them to take it out on Him, I had no say in the decision.
I would agree with Jesus whole heartedly because He created them Male and Female and knows our different strengths and weaknesses. I have learned in my old age that Jesus is smarter than I am. Besides, Jesus is God and is not influenced by cultural restraints. He broke so many of the cultural norms of His time like talking to the Samaritan woman at the well, letting the sinful woman anoint His feet, touching lepers, and not getting married. All Jewish males were to get married.
So the media and the devil has thrown lies all over the Church to make her hated by women and to keep them from reaching salvation and eternal happiness. But also those feminist women in the Church who are fighting for ordination and are actually getting “ordained” are trying to change or evolve the Church into a different church.
The anger, the power struggle goes on against anyone, and I will say especially a priest, who does not go along with women becoming priest. This can never happen. It is impossible because the matter for priesthood is a male, period. Just like the matter to be consecrated into the Holy Body and Blood of Jesus Christ can only be wheat mixed with water and wine. If the host are made with anything added to them besides wheat and water, or you use grape juice, no matter how many times you repeat the consecration formulae they just remain what ever they were before the words (form) of consecration.
I am sure there have been abuses of women religious before by men. And that is lamentable. But it does not change the reality that only men can be priests.
None of us men can become the Blessed Mother Mary. Mary is way more important than any pope, even St. Peter the first pope. She is a woman. But she is a humble pure woman who called herself “a slave of the Lord”. She did not look for power over the apostles, but in her unique vocation she prayed for them and encouraged them to live their vocations. The apostles had a very high regard for Mary in her role as the Mother of God. Most of the apostles did not have much time for power struggles since they were out preaching in a very hostile environment where they were constantly being threatened and eventually were tortured to death. They did not look for glory in this life, but in the life to come.
Men are sons of God. Women are daughters of God. We need to live our differences and unique vocations. We compliment each other we are not the same. We have the same christian dignity, but not the same nature. Let us take time to discover our uniqueness in Jesus Christ and become fulfilled traditional Catholics. It is so great to be a traditional Catholic.
In what ways does the Devil actually manipulate the media to affect outcomes?
Well Adrian the manipulation of Satan is in the Lord’s Prayer Temptation. That’s the same as in the Garden Of Eden. Possession including swine note. Then there are those who sell their souls to the Devil for gain sic the Temptations of our Lord. In other words the Bible is replete with examples of the devil and manipulation.
Finally St John’s Gospel as Judas is leaving the Last supper.
John 13 (note the chapter number!)
 And after the morsel, Satan entered into him
And Judas and the Night!
 He therefore having received the morsel, went out immediately. And it was night.
Then ask is the Media Christian? Our Lord said For or Against (there is no middle ground).
The glory of woman? Well like Our Lady they can concieve vocations in their wombs. The sight of a priest and his mother is a miniature of Jesus and Mary. Blessed are the wombs that carry saints and priests!! This is the blessing and Glory that God gives to woman.
Don’t ask awkward questions, Adrian.
Toad was once part of “The Media” (may The Good Lord forgive him!) and he knows from personal experience that all journalists are indoctrinated from childhood to “hate” the Catholic Church, and their only aim and function is to persecute and destroy it with devilish lies, which they mutually agree on over pints of gin and tonic in smoke-filled bars in foul taverns and stews in the squalid backstreets of Canary Wharf.
And they willingly, cheerfully even, sign an oath, provided by Satan, in their own blood to that very effect.
One of the countless lies the swine disseminate is that priests are perverts.
None of them are.
Well, hardly any.
Well, a lot fewer than you might think, considering.
Anyway, that’s all fixed now.
And only a dirty rat would have bothered mentioning it in the first place.
And, as for feminine, female-type “women” – well, don’t get the aged buffoon started on that!
(Old Toad’s always good for a laugh, isn’t he?)
By use of bias, constantly slamming the church – and by acting as a propaganda campaign for destructive secularism.
“It is way more than the bishops and priests who (in general) had evil homosexual relations with teenage youth.”
Why do we think the writer (a priest himself) felt it necessary to insert the word “evil” there?
Are “good” homosexual relations (wicked old Uncle Ernie again!) with teenage youth acceptable?
What on earth does he mean by “in general”?
“Every time an event would happen, let us say the election of Pope Francis or a World Youth Day, again the media would dig up horrible and true stories of sexual abuse by priests.
We, the bishops and priests do deserve this terrible treatment as a result of terrible crimes by some bishops and priests. “
Assuming the above statement is true (which Toad rather doubts) – if the bishops and priests do, in fact, deserve it – why is Father Carota complaining about it at such boring length?
Should he not, in fact, be complimenting “The Media’ on doing its job effectively?
Michael, if that is your answer to my question, in what way is that the Devil’s work rather than the individual people who are responsible for writing such things?
“By use of bias, constantly slamming the church..”
Shouldn’t the Church have any bias, then, Michael?
A bias towards, for example, decency, morality and truth?
It already does?
We all have biases. Can’t not.
Here we are then, Toad, the cogitations of David Warren, former editor of The Idler
Hilaire Belloc, nearly a century ago, wrote a short book entitled The Free Press, which provided a remarkably astute analysis of the industry, and of the anaesthetising similarity of its products – both in what they covered and what they excluded. At root, advertisers not readers were paying the bills, and the publisher’s task was not to inform, but to deliver eyeballs.
Big media, then as now, was owned by the “plutocrats” of big business and government, whose interests converge. They are invested in the meta-narrative of “Progress,” and the docile, consumerist society it requires. Belloc wanted an alternative press, to disturb this consensus from many different angles. He wanted “news” to return to its primordial condition, of conflicting personal accounts, to be synthesized by reader or listener and not editor or producer.
And Mr Warren’s own blog, Essays in Idleness. That title may have a certain appeal, Toad, as being suggestive of a “kindred spirit”.
Toad finds the analysis by Belloc and Warren perfectly reasonable, and almost certainly accurate.
And is not a bit surprised that Belloc was unable to put out the alternative press that he wanted.
“The Media” is often utterly vapid and stupid and venal in regard to big business and entertainment and other things and too often publishes imbecile drivel.
But there is no media conspiracy to bring down Christianity. (Though, to be sure, it might well be some journalists’ personal ambitions to do so.)
Most media people simply don’t care about religion, any more than most other people.
They might be wrong in this, but they are not evil in that respect.
And I’ll say it again, as I’m on a rant here: A paedophile bishop is far more “newsworthy” than a paedophile bus conductor. For obvious reasons. That’s why they get ‘special’ attention.
I’d like to refer to another angle of this article by Fr. Carota, the feminist one.
Where does Father get the idea that there are a whole lot of Catholic feminist women out there “leaving the Church” because they cannot be ordained women priests? This is baffling for me, as among my many Catholic friends and acquaintances, or even via friends of friends etc., I don’t know any! Not one.
OK, I’m talking as an European and things might be different in the States, but the only ones we hear about here through the media, who think the Church should change its unchangeable teachings in this respect, are plainly just a few frustrated “bad apples” in our midst, militant liberals too, that the vast majority do not take seriously. In fact most Catholic women abhor the idea, and even sympathise with the poor Anglicans who now have so many problems, plus a stampede out of their church, since they decided (eh, by what authority?) to “ordain” women.
There was a well-known Catholic ultra-feminist prominent in the media a few years ago – though I don’t remember her name – who was an outspoken advocate for the ordination of women, and who made some nasty accusations about the supposed “bullying” by the Church because of her radical views. She got a lot of sympathy from those who have no love for the Catholic Church! However, it transpired that she was a lesbian who lived with her “partner” in a homosexual relationship in flagrant dissension with the Church’s moral teachings anyway; she was therefore totally discredited.
“Michael, if that is your answer to my question, in what way is that the Devil’s work rather than the individual people who are responsible for writing such things?”
Adrian, your question doesn’t make sense. It is not the “Devil’s work”; he cannot force us to do anything we do not want to do, so the responsibility for bad thoughts, words or deeds is always ours. All he is “allowed” to do is to tempt us towards sin.
“Where does Father get the idea that there are a whole lot of Catholic feminist women out there “leaving the Church” because they cannot be ordained women priests? This is baffling for me, as among my many Catholic friends and acquaintances, or even via friends of friends etc., I don’t know any! Not one.”
…That is another good point, Kathleen, Neither has Toad ever met – or even heard – of such a fabulous creature.
The whole piece, littered and festooned with straw men and red herrings,* and with its absurd, hysterical headline, reeks of paranoia – a sad condition that is fast reaching epidemic proportions among Catholics – or so it seems to me.
* (Mixed metaphor, surely?)
This “slave of the Lord” thing has been popping up in several places recently, causing all sorts of Fuss …
Jerome translates Ἰδοὺ ἡ δούλη κυρίου as Ecce ancilla Domini, which suggests that in the 4th/5th centuries, when Koine was still a living language, this was understood as Behold the handmaid of the Lord — though the literal meaning of δούλη is I think “female servant”, whether bonded or free. The Latin translation ancilla suggests the latter ; “slave of the Lord” is IMO a mistranslation.
Kathleen, Mary Eberstadt, of Stanford, has recently hinted at least that feminism, to the extent that it contributes to the obsolescence of family life in the West, also undermines religion.
Jesus was operating in a strictly patriarchal society. Today he would act accordingly with the way we have progressed. Quite simple really.
Toad is about to be a bit serious here, for which he apologises in advance.
Do my countless friends on CP&S think it is at all possible, no more – that the undoubted decline in interest in Christianity in Europe generally can have anything to do with the fact that God is regularly portrayed as King of All Creation and Mary as His Queen – with crowns, and sceptres and all the hierarchical trappings of royalty?
Because the idea of temporal royalty is nowadays – rightly I think – now nothing more than an outdated and stale joke in the U.K. and in Spain, at least, probably in France and Italy and several other countries as well.
(This may derive , in part, from having Elton John “sing” at Diana’s funeral.)
Nobody seriously believes monarchs are appointed by God any more. Not since Queen Victoria.
(Or do they? Some folk seem to think He doesn’t pay much attention to appointing popes either, these days.)
How interesting! I quite agree with that statement of Mary Eberstandt’s.
Militant feminists are a dangerous crowd……. and the ‘Catholic’ feminists are particularly embittered, making out that they are ‘victims’ of a male hierarchy!! Why don’t they concentrate instead on the exalted place only the Catholic and Orthodox Churches give to the Mother of God, Queen of Heaven? No other human being (other than Jesus Christ Himself) has been so honoured and blessed down through the centuries.
Don’t you agree that it is a wonderful, fulfilling and beautiful thing to be a Catholic woman? Feminists are just so terribly un-feminine!
Anyway, thank you dear Golden; I shall try to find time to listen to this lecture later tonight.
No, I don’t think so Toad. After all, Kings and queens have been part and parcel of human history since almost its very beginnings. The fact that we no longer have so many “kings and queens” only means that we have substituted them for Presidents, Prime Ministers, Dictators, or whatever, but there will always be leaders of the masses, whatever we might call them (even in republics and democracies), or there would be total chaos!
It is precisely because we Catholics have the Pope as Christ’s Vicar on Earth to guide and protect His Church, that the billion plus Catholics all over the globe profess the One Same Faith. It is the Pope’s duty to make sure this continues till the end of time. (Look what has happened now to the thousands of Protestant churches who have no proper leaders!)
I think you make a very important point. Leadership of communities, as a mirror of the leadership of parents has been degraded both in fact and in appearance. Where once we had Kings and Queens as parents of the state, we now have “democracy”, whatever that means.
I like democracy as the collective judgement of the wise common bloke, but I dislike it as the tool of lobbyists and other sharp practitioners of power.
Quite right as to your perception but this assumes that what we are seeing isn’t just actually a smoke screen.
Globalisation is a private Empire that exists today and its power and influence has been more than demonstrated with the Financial and Banking collapse an this is dictating government economic and foreign policy. Forget democracy, the vote or the puppets that sit in public view. Or do you not think that mne makes the world go round?
With the Church what is rotten will perish and Fall because this is what happens within the Church why should this age be different?
As for Kings and Queens well again I cannot think of a better means of describing Our Lord and Our Lady that rises above the transitory of this world.
For myself I believe without any shadow of doubt in the Queen of Heaven and that in the End her Immaculate Heart will triumph.
By the way Jacinta that little child who saw Hell and the Queen Of Heaven at Fatima , her body is incorrupt.
Lets not forget that foundation of the Church is Our Lord and that stone cannot be moved.
Peter well the line comes and goes does it not. Although whether the Conclave would elect a unschooled fisherman is doubtful.
The Faith has two pillars
1/ The Bible
2/ Sacred Tradition.
The Truth is that the Institution could be destroyed and probably deserves a really good shake up! But the foundation is Our Lord and he can rebuild it. Whether this would be in Rome or not is another question remember the Jews considered Jerusalem inviolate. The falling away from the Faith called the Great Apostacy are we seeing this or signs of this?
“I like democracy as the collective judgement of the wise common bloke…”
I’m inclined to think that democracy is an utter and total shambles, Burro.
…And that every other form of government is worse.
And that the collective judgement of the wise common bloke has landed us with the motor car, Coca Cola, Big Macs, racism, Sylvester Stallone movies, Facebook, Sir Elton John, pornography and the novels of Dan Brown.
As well as a lot of other really awful things I can’t even bring myself to mention
Plato knew where democracy would get us. But his alternative was useless.
They all are.
I believe the world should be run by a team of specially-selected, disinterested, super intellectuals.
With me in charge, naturally.
What I was trying to get at, Kathleen, was that in a few hours I will go to Mass where Jesus will be called “Lord.”
Whereas a good many people regard earthly “Lords” and “Kings” and “Queens,” and the like, as silly and old-fashioned.
And I believe they are right to think that. Fodder for “Hello” magazine, nothing else.
What I’m asking is does such monarchic imagery put Christianity in an unfavourable light today?
Or don’t people care about that aspect? Is Catholicism’s perceived “anti-feminism,’ seen as more of a challenge?
What could the Church do about it, anyway?
Here in Spain the Church is still seen by many (not all) as an integral element of Fascism and oppression, hand in glove with “The Lords” and landowners.
Which is one of the reasons it will go through a tough time here for the forseeable future.
But that is Spain, and Spain is different.
I entirely disagree: Our Lord showed Himself more than ready to cast aside societal norms during His life on Earth.
I think that you make a good point and it is true that part of the appeal of the fast growing Protestant denominations is their emphasis upon a direct, unstuffy personal relationship with Our Lord.
If we are allowing the monarchical language that use in our worship to distance ourselves from God, then that is a bad thing, but I am not sure that it is the language itself that is the problem (those Protestant sects use much the same language).
In fact, I’d go so far as to suggest that the decline of the monarchical families throughout Europe is a helpful phenomena: their assumption of the glamour of God was something of an invention of the late middle-ages. With them safely relegated to the gossip columns we can use the words of royalty for the person deserving of it, God.
Whereas a good many people regard earthly “Lords” and “Kings” and “Queens,” and the like, as silly and old-fashioned, according to Toad.
They then often regard themselves as rather royal and lordly instead, and have the matching iPhone.
Raven: those Protestant sects use much the same (monarchical) language.
Probably a bit after Toad was still a tadpole, the Evangelical Union students at our illustrious halls of learning had a song that went, “Jesus is the Lord of the university!”, to which we in our Catholic students’ society would respond, “and the teachers college too!”.
Now at last.
Look Father Malachy Martin was saying in the 90’s that the Institution was far from perfect and he couldn’t see it surviving.
The Institution is identified with the Church just as the jews identified with the Temple Institution. So called Protestants were a rebellion against an Imperial Institution by an autonomous nobility. If you seriously look at the two Saints Dominic and Francis they were the reformers set by God to clean up an Institution that had lost its way.
St Thomas More was a Reformer but gave His Life for the Faith. I other words he distinguished between the Institution and the Church.
The highest Authority created by Our Lord was the Priesthood and then these Fathers were given their Sees but notice the sweet use of Chastity the Sees do not pass by birth succession. The Church as Created was intended to avoid Earth ambitions. However we all know that families and influence secured the sees and even the Papacy.
I have no doubt but that the rough times rocking the Church will sort out the dross from the nuggets. This painful purgation is what I think we are starting to see and it comes down in the End to placing the Spiritual above the Material.
Its not a question of Kings Lord etc.. Its where the ruling Authority is de facto. The Dutch model 16th century is private Capitolism and using the wealth of the Nation as collateral. That is the model ported to England 1688. Constitutional monarchy. Today there is a Global private Empire that runs the markets and the trade and woe to the governments that buck this system.
The Church State separation places the Spiritual under the Material so there is the battle ground fought now for 500 years? In this you find rights springing up like weeds in a garden and surprise surprise these are promulgated globally (Abortion, Divorce, Marriage) . This is modern Babel.
The Church cannot be destroyed from the outside so you try to destroy it from the inside. But really the Church is about Man and Grace. Man the living Temple of God. This Church cannot be destroyed. Placing Self last is placing the Spiritual over the Material its the Path of the Saints.
Toad @ 6:36
I know what you were asking Toad, and it’s a great question. OK, so my reply was rather insufficient, so I hope to rectify that.
Golden‘s reply at 8:01 to Toad (regarding “earthly “Lords” and “Kings” and “Queens,” and the like, as silly and old-fashioned) is the answer in a nutshell: man has put himself into the role of Lord and King etc. instead! The old sin of Adam and Eve!
I am just about to post a separate article on this whole debate.
Toad, it’s clear things like kingship and lordship are in the DNA of Christian faith. I’ve just counted 6781 times the word “lord” is used in the King James Bible, 2504 times for “king”, “kingdom” or “kingship”, “reign” 275 times and “royal” 25 times. It really is all about the one who rules (247 times), isn’t it, both the world and in our hearts and minds.
Jesus himself says You say that I am a king. In fact, the reason I was born and came into the world is to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.”. Peter says we are all a royal priesthood and both Paul and Revelation call Jesus <King of Kings and Lord of Lords.
There’s no getting away from it, Toad, I would say. I don’t think changing “lord” to “important honoured person” and “king” to “old-fashioned head of state type person” will really do, would it, Toad?
(need to turn the volume down first here)
Raven, do you really think that if Jesus had come to live among us today he would form a men only group? He would work with the way the world is now, as he did back then.
The Church has never been a “men only group”. We’re Our Lord to start His ministry in the present day, He would call men and women, as He did in the first century, but He did not call them to fulfil the same roles then and I have no reason to believe that He would call them to fulfil the same roles now.
Raven, your reason to believe, as I have pointed out, is that our societies have changed great deal in the past 2000 years.
“Toad, it’s clear things like kingship and lordship are in the DNA of Christian faith. “
That is exactly the point I’m trying – clearly unsuccessfully, as usual – to make Golden – and failing, as usual.
It is indisputable.
What I’m trying to get sorted here, is whether or not this is a “good” or “bad” thing, as seen from ‘outside, i.e.,from a non-believing perspective.
And, if so, so what? Take it or leave it.
God is King and that’s that. Surely?
But I personally suspect “Kingship” means exactly what each of us wants it to mean, no more, no less.
Back to “Alice,” the fount of all wisdom, as usual.
I suppose, if I were a actually a believer, the idea of an autocratic God would disturb me.
And make me doubt.
But who knows?
(I counted myself saying the word “Senor,” at least seven times this morning. No big deal.)
That’s my reason to disbelieve: why would someone as demonstrably transgressive as Our Lord be influenced by the mores of our society?
Raven, do you really think that Jesus did not need to comply with the ways of the culture in which he lived then? In our current culture his disciples would not have to consist solely of men, but would be an appropriate mix.
We are losing sight of something very important here which is the Our Father ” ..Thy Kingdom come Thy Will be done On Earth as it is in Heaven..”
At Fatima the Angel Of Portugal appeared to the Children. The importance of this is overlook because the Nations (recognised by Heaven have their own Angels) Europe isn’t a Nation and frankly is man made.
Now the Church recognised Spiritual Authority and Temporal Authority and these have there appropriate Bishops and Kings/Princes etc.. Our Lord is King Of Kings and also Eternal High Priest. Where did this come form? well Sacred Tradition. The nations as recognised by Heaven have their own Angels. The Angelic hierachy might cause arguments but includes Thrones/ Principalities / Dominions so logically the temporal mirrored Heaven.
The Prophet anointed David as King.
Earth mirroring Heaven that is the reason for Kings, Queens, Princes Lords etc.. (in the temporal) .
Kyle, you don’t seem to be reading what I’ve written: Our Lord is portrayed in the Gospels as having seriously transgressed against the ways of His culture on a number of occasions; on what basis do you want to argue that His choice of the Twelve was culturally conditioned?
Portugal is just as “man-made” as Europe, Roger.
All countries are.
And I pity the angel who was lumbered with The Peoples’ Republic Of The Congo
Our Lord didn’t transgress His culture. That culture had transgressed God’s culture. Herod was a Roman appointed king of the Jews. Both Annas and late Caiaphus where appointed by Rome. In other words a ruler and high priests appointed by pagan Rome.
Heaven replaced these imposters with Heavens choice.
The topic talks of feminists and the media but really we are seeing the same pressure to accept alien policies and a social structure that is against God.
The apparent decline in Christianity in the West is because the intent is to incorporate a secular version of Christianity other than God’s choice. I keep refering to Fatima but we should see from 1960’s onwards this tension between Man’s Church or God’s Church. A Constitutional Monarch is a politically correct appointment not a Monarchy.
Europe (Old Christendom) today is a man made country. The European Nations have lost their soveriegnty and control over their economies under Masstricht and the Euro. Might have a different name but its litttle different from the Social Enginnering previously seen in Russia.
“on what basis do you want to argue that His choice of the Twelve was culturally conditioned?”
The culture of the times, Raven! Why else would it be so?
Kyle, your argument is that it was culturally conditioned because it was culturally conditioned.
Can you see why I’m not buying in to your argument?
I can understand why you are not buying in to my argument
Thank you for your reply.
The point I am making is with Fatima (just because it is so well known and researched and approved etc..)
The Angel appeard three times in 1916.
The second Apparation “.. In this way you will bring peace to our country, for I am its guardian angel, the Angel of Portugal..”
St Michael is Associated with the Church, Gabriel with Our Lady.
The point is Heavens perspective not Man’s. At La Salette four countries were expressly mentioned Itlay, Spain, France and England (very surprising!) . England curiously in Church Councils had precedence over the others!
I am not advocating nationalism I am pointing out that Heavens perspective and view is different from the worlds. The idea that everything has changed, it doesn’t follow that this is what Heaven wants.
Just as Rome put Herod in place and Annas and Caiphas in Judae it didn’t follow that these were God’s choice. Our Lord simply replaced these of Man with a new structure of His choice that cae to conquer pagan Rome.
Saul was replaced by David , a curious choice being the youngest. The Old Testament is replete with examples of governance of Israel. The Church simply continued with the governance of Christendom granting and allocating Nations and Dependances. This seems alien to current fashions but the keys given to Peter bind Heaven and Earth.
St Augustine has the two Cities Bablyon and Jerusalem , better considered as two completely contrary Kingdoms. So modern Babel with it fashions isn’t new.
The Angel Of Portugal appeared in 1916. Actually it started in 1915 with visions of ” a kind of cloud..” this was seen by Lucia and three other children.
The question is Bablyon or Jerusalem? rather than feminism, democracy, monarchy , republic etc.. etc..
I think we should be very conscious of the Guns Of August at this time with not just Syria but Egypt, Lebanon, Lybia, Iran, Africa. It is the nature of military to have plans but warships in the Med and chemical weapons being used has created a high degree of shall I say tension.
I have to say, yet again, Roger – that I blame The Middle East for virtually all this poor old planet’s woes.
And what is, and has been – since the very get-go – the number one problem in that benighted sink hole?
Do I believe, then, that if we could somehow abolish religion, the world would be a less worse place?
But we might as well somehow expect to abolish sin.
Or motor cars.
Religion to blame Toad? Man, following a Divine Law, loving God first, and neighbour as himself (as nearly all “religions” profess) being to blame for the world’s woes? That is not true.
However, man has often used Religion as an excuse to take part in an unjust war. (There is such a thing as a “just war” too, which is a defensive war to avoid an even greater evil.) Unlawful killing is not the fault of the Religion he practices, but his own sinful nature! But you – as the many who repeat the parrot-like phrase that “religion is to blame” – don’t see how it cannot be RELIGION itself, but man, (if he is a Christian or a Jew anyway, or even a Muslim*) who does not live up to what his Religion preaches, and who creates the world’s problems and conflicts.
And what about those with no religion? Did you not know that the greatest genocides and wars in the last century (and probably in the whole of history) have been created by atheists?
Edit: Islam supposedly justifies Jihad (“holy” wars), but I have heard educated moderate Muslims deny this assertion.
I, along with many others more conversant with these things, am convinced that religion has been the cause of very few wars.
The knowledge of Good and Evil and the Fall there is the reason for conflicts.
Man has a conflict within himself between the demands of his appetites and that of his spirit.
The selfish demands of one conflict with those of others. This is why rationalism can’t resolve mans problems. There is Natural Law of course and this is the common to all men. Through the sacraments we put on Christ and this opens the door to Heaven. No other religion can repair for orginal sin because they leave man still in Adams condition.
However greater knowledge means greater responsibilities and sadly the worst kind of man is he who like Judas has enjoyed the highest Graces.
The knowledge of Good and Evil there is the choice we make using our Free Will and the source of conflicts and Wars.
“There is such a thing as a “just war” too, which is a defensive war to avoid an even greater evil.”
I agree Kathleen, but how does a Catholic reconcile that with Christ’s injunction to, “…turn the other cheek?”
And anyway, Golden and Kathleen, I didn’t mention wars, I mentioned woes.
What I had more in mind was the interminable bickering, prejudice, racism, injustice, intolerance and general snivelling and whining over difference of opinion – topped off by virtually daily riots and massacres – that seems to be the Plat du Jour in that loathsome and detestable part of this dismal planet, generally centred on the amusingly-named “Holy Land.”
Though, yes, every so often – very frequently in fact – things do turn almost as nasty in other places.
Yes, best of Toads, but we know you meant wars and suchlike. You always do. We’re clever that way.
Its what comes out of man that is the problem “..the interminable bickering, prejudice, racism, injustice, intolerance and general snivelling and whining over difference of opinion ..”
If we are to be of any use to Our Lord we have to root out Self from Our Lives so that He can live.
We must see through Our Lord’s eyes and see him in all men and treat them with love and kindness. Especially the poor sinners since these are so beloved of Our Lord.
St Francis and yes his spiritual son St Pio show the way. We have to let Our Lord live in Us so that He can reach His lost lambs.
Yes – and also in response to the toad – we know that there is no conspiracy from the press to present religion negatively. The journalists are simply ignorant folk – reared on feminism/Marxism/ postmodernism and other over – emphasised -isms – who think they know better. It’s the enlightenment idea that progress means moving away from such primitive and superstitious worldviews – religion is rejected because it began long ago – and modern people (esp. the media ones) are far too clever for it!!
“…religion is rejected because it began long ago..”
Well, Michael, sex also “began long ago.” How come the ignorant media aren’t rejecting that?
Indeed, they seem oddly fond of it.
Adrian, you are telling that the individuals who do such things should be held responsible not devil! But you are blind to see that the devil is behind those individuals