Hear Ye, Hear Ye: Royal Heirs May Wed Catholics

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic_Press
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Maybe England is shaping up to be the one protestant country that converts to the true faith, and leads Europe back to the faith during the time of crisis.
I remember my old pastor saying that he thought Europe would go Moslem. It wouldn’t be very sincere, but mainly a response to a crisis eg. an oil embargo. The way things are shaping up over there, I wouldn’t be surprised. He thought the Vatican might have to move to South America, which is about as far from radical Islam as it can get. Maybe God had a hand in the Spanish and Portuguese settlement of the New World despite all their failings.

The pastor died in January 1992 by the way, so he was well ahead of most media “prophets” in this sort of development.

However he felt Britain would hold out and would probably revert to Catholicism, with Russia another hold-out which would remain staunchly orthodox.

We’ll see what happens. What is becoming clear, nearly 20 years after his death, is that there is a groundswell in the Anglican church towards the Catholic Church.
 
Howay guys its party time. I mean, yay! The royals are now permitted to marry Catholics! This is a good thing, woo! Also happy about the eldest child being next in line for the throne regaurdless of the sex. Thank goodness Queen Elizabeth didnt have an older brother because I think she’s awesome. Good times, good times. 🙂
 
The royals are now permitted to marry Catholics!
That’s not quite what the news is. Royals were already permitted to marry Catholics. What has changed is that they won’t lose their right to succeed to the throne.

Perversely, if a royal married a non-Catholic and their spouse later converted to Catholicism their place in the line of succession is not affected. Take as an example the Duke of Kent: when the Duchess of Kent became a Catholic he didn’t lose his place in the line of succession.
 
The Father Jack of Craggy Island school of prediction?
My own personal experience of my old pastor was that he was extremely accurate. It takes time for predictions to occur, so some of his predictions have happened, and some haven’t … as yet.

Those that have happened (since he died in 1992) -
  1. There’d be a bit of a conspiracy against me and I’d lose my then job (1995).
  2. My sister wouldn’t live long and would die of leukemia (2005).
  3. His own eldest son would have a major health issue, which turned out to be a stroke (1996 or 1997).
  4. I’d be doing a cleaning job for a while, wouldn’t like it much, but the “Lord would just want me to hear about a ghost” (that’s the one that gets me - happened in 2006 - a suicide in a store I happened to be cleaning).
  5. There’d be a Second Gulf War - “The Americans will have had enough of him (Saddam Hussein) and they’ll get rid of him. But I think they’ll lose a few men the next time.”… with an emphasis on “few” which implied it would be more than a “few”, compared to the negligible coalition forces death toll in the first Gulf War. (2003).
  6. There’d be a firearm massacre at Port Arthur (2006).
Bear in mind he died in 1992, and I don’t think he was ‘looking through a lens’. I think God was telling him.

As I said, we’ll wait and see.

Or to give a personal prediction my father made the night he died in January 1979 and appeared in my room - “You’ll meet a pastor. You’ll think he’s great, but all he’ll do is discourage you even more.” He was of course talking about the pastor above, whom I met around October 1882, and who told me in his office around 1991 that he “owed me an apology. You needed encouragement, but all I’ve done is to discourage you even more.”

Taking my father’s prediction as an analogy, it took nearly 4 years before I even met the pastor, and the better part of 13 years before it became clear the pastor, whom “I thought was great” (and still do in many respects) would “discourage me”.

These things take time. You can rubbish them now, but if he said something, it nearly always happened.

I think Europe will go Moslem. Full stop. Let’s wait and see.
 
Another prediction of his - “I think you’ll become Catholic…” I wasn’t even thinking about it at the time, but I joined the Catholic Church in 1996 or 97. And it wasn’t because of his prediction, but a sort of spiritual push, which I actually resisted for a while.

So he was right again.

And “I think Bugalug (a particular pastor whom I have no time for) will get hold of this church after I’m gone and wreck it! But he can’t touch the people!”

I found out later that the pastor died around 3am (I remember a very strong sense of peace around 3am that morning which lasted a good half an hour or so - I’ve had this sense of peace when other Christians die from time to time, but never as strong or persistent as this one), and Bugalug called an Assembly meeting at 6am, he was so determined to “get hold of this church”.

Sure enough he "wrecked it’, and an inner city church that took about 11 years to build up (and inner city church building is deadly - if you want to build up a church, go to the outer suburbs where the young families are), virtually disintegrated. But “he couldn’t touch the people” and most of them had left within six months, and quite a few of them abandoned the Presbyterian Church altogether.

So he was accurate again.

I’ll stick with my (his) prediction about Europe becoming Moslem.
 
I’ll stick with my (his) prediction about Europe becoming Moslem.
There seems to be a warped perception of the place of Islam in Europe. I wouldn’t bet on that prediction coming true. Call it an insider tip if you like.
 
I don’t think getting the spelling right would improve their chances.
Perhaps we could have an Pretenders Have Got Talent/Strictly Come Royaling or something to decide? It would have to be screened in the US, of course, for them to make our minds up for us and make it legitimate.
 
Perhaps we could have an Pretenders Have Got Talent/Strictly Come Royaling or something to decide? It would have to be screened in the US, of course, for them to make our minds up for us and make it legitimate.
:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
 
There seems to be a warped perception of the place of Islam in Europe. I wouldn’t bet on that prediction coming true. Call it an insider tip if you like.
No doubt. However my old pastor suspected there might at some stage be something like a Middle Eastern oil embargo. My understanding is that apart from Russia, Norway and Britain, there’s not much oil in Europe. The price of oil supply might just be acceptance of Islam. That’s why he said he thought it wouldn’t be very sincere.

Combine an oil embarge with the current European debt crisis, and a European winter, and what would you have? He did make a comment, “Suppose you get a Arab statesman, who does a bit of fence building with his mates (at the time he used Yassir Arafat as a sort of model, but obviously it won’t be him). Then they deliver an ultimatum to the West. ‘Right boys, either you get Israel out of there, or we turn off the taps (oil).’ We’d all be broke in a week.”

I’ve seen nothing in the recent “Arab Spring” to see that they’re going to modulate Islam. If anything it was the Western supported dictators who kept the lid on the pot to some extent. In fact, they seem even more intent than ever that Islam will remain the dominant religion. There have been several church massacres since then, with new regimes promising Islam will have a dominant role.

In such a scenario, one might say the Europeans could then try to invade the Middle East and forcibly take some oil wells. But they might find they have new found enemies in Russia, China, Japan, India and the USA in that case. The rest of the industrialised world wouldn’t just sit on its hands.

As I said, I found the old pastor was very accurate. Whether he will prove to be right in this case or not remains to be seen.

That’s something along the lines of what I think may happen. If I didn’t have personal experience of the old pastor’s prophetic accuracy, I wouldn’t say it.

We’ll see.
 
Predicting my sister wouldn’t live long and that she would die of leukemia is pretty accurate. She developed leukemia several years after the prediction, and she died at the age of 45, leaving behind two teenage daughters and a three year old son. And the pastor hardly knew her.

In fact, when she got leukemia, I wasn’t surprised, since the pastor had predicted it.

Telling me that I’d be doing a cleaning job, wouldn’t do it for long and wouldn’t like it much, but the “Lord would just want me to hear about a ghost” is a very odd prediction. But in 2006 it came precisely true. And it even required a connection with another poster on this very forum to bring the intent to its full purpose. At the time he made the prediction I was not Catholic (it required a mass to be said to be of any value), I did not even have a computer, and did not have any internet experience whatsoever. I was not, and did not intend to, do any cleaning.

He warned a young bloke in his congregation that if he “didn’t start riding his motorbike more carefully, he wouldn’t last two weeks!” He told me he felt guilty about being so blunt. He buried him precisely two weeks later.

You can rubbish him if you like, but he was deadly accurate.
 
I don’t think getting the spelling right would improve their chances.
The “right” spelling is Stewart, as is the original name of their dynasty. The Stuart spelling was created in 16th century as a device to make life easier for the French and ensure proper pronunciation when Mary Stuart was marrying Francis I (try to make a French person pronounce a “w” the way you want to hear it :p). It was also the Stuart spelling used officially on the English throne due to how Lord Darnley (father of James I and V) wrote it. Other than the immediate royals from Mary and Lord Darnley onward, the rest of the clan remained Stewart. I used this spelling for an additional reactionist punch, as Jacobites are in a habit of doing. 😛
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top