Title & Purpose

Blow ye the trumpet in Zion, and sound an alarm in my holy mountain: let all the inhabitants of the land tremble:

for the day of the LORD cometh, for it is nigh at hand, Joel 2:1.


All quotations from the Scriptures will be from the Authorised Version - the best and most accurate English translation of the Scriptures.

Please see sermons down the left hand column of the Blog about why the Authorised Version is the best and most accurate English translation of the Scriptures

and why we reject the many perversions of the Scriptures, including those so beloved of many neo-evangelicals at present such as ESV & NKJV.

Beware of the Errors in The Reformation Heritage KJV Study Bible! 
Featured Sermons:

Sunday, 26 December 2010

Thought for the day

Backsliders begin with dusty Bibles and end with filthy garments. ... C. H. Spurgeon

Monday, 20 December 2010

Tokens for good!

More often than not it seems that the stand for Christian values suffers setbacks. Thankfully here are two cases in which the opposite is true. We thank the Christian Institute for all their labours to defend and maintain our civil and religious liberties.

1. Birmingham street preacher wins wrongful arrest case
An autistic Christian street preacher who was handcuffed and arrested for speaking out against homosexuality and many other sins has been awarded £4,250 in damages following a court case against West Midlands Police. Read more on the Christian Institute website.

2. Cumbria Police payout for arrest of Christian
In a second similar case in recent days, a Christian street preacher has won £7,000 plus costs from Cumbria Police in settlement for a claim of wrongful arrest, unlawful imprisonment and breach of his human rights. Read more on the Christian Institute website.

Wednesday, 8 December 2010

Guesthouse owners sued over double bed policy

The Christian Institute has asked for prayer for owners of a Cornish Guesthouse who are due in court next court on Monday.

The owners of a Cornish guesthouse are due to appear in court on Monday because they restrict double bed accommodation to married couples.

Peter and Hazelmary Bull are being sued by homosexuals, Steven Preddy and Martyn Hall, who claim the policy is discriminatory.

The guesthouse is not just a business, it is also Mr and Mrs Bull's own home.

The case will be heard at Bristol County Court on Monday 13 December and is scheduled to last for two days.

The claim is brought under the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations, the same laws that have caused faith-based adoption agencies to close down or drop their religious ethos.

If the claim against the guesthouse is successful, Mr and Mrs Bull may be ordered to pay up to £5,000 to Mr Preddy and Mr Hall for injury to their feelings.

Mr Preddy and Mr Hall's legal fees are being paid by the Government-funded Equality and Human Rights Commission. The Christian Institute is funding Mr and Mrs Bull's legal defence.

This case could determine whether Christians are permitted to operate B&Bs that restrict double bed accommodation to married couples.

Prayer is requested:
For Peter and Hazelmary Bull, that they will know God's love and support during this difficult time.
For the judge, that he will come to a just decision.
For our legal team, that they will present the case clearly and persuasively.
For the news media, that they will publish balanced and accurate reports.
For the staff of The Christian Institute, as we support and advise Peter and Hazelmary. 

For more information download a fact sheet about the case here.

Thursday, 2 December 2010

The sabbath day under attack again

Social development minister Alex Attwood has said it is time to take a fresh look at the current 1pm to 6pm restrictions for larger shops in Northern Ireland. In doing so he hopes to boost the economy, benefit tourism and encourage regeneration of towns and city centres. Read the whole article here

The idea that extra opening hours will boost the economy, etc. is simply ludicrous. There will be no extra money spent by shoppers. It will just be spread over a longer shopping period. What is spent in larger shops will be taken away from smaller ones. There are also all the additional costs associated with longer opening hours.

Sadly this is simply another attack upon the sanctity of the Lord's day. The sabbath was made for man and not man for the sabbath. We are commanded to: Remember the sabbath day to keep it holy. Man is robbing God when he takes the sabbath day and uses it for himself instead of setting it aside for the worship of the Lord. 

Sabbath desecration comes at a cost. The spiritual, physical and material well being of people will be aversely affected by neglecting the sabbath day. The closing chapter of Nehemiah illustrates the point very effectively:

In those days saw I in Judah some treading wine presses on the sabbath, and bringing in sheaves, and lading asses; as also wine, grapes, and figs, and all manner of burdens, which they brought into Jerusalem on the sabbath day: and I testified against them in the day wherein they sold victuals.
There dwelt men of Tyre also therein, which brought fish, and all manner of ware, and sold on the sabbath unto the children of Judah, and in Jerusalem.
Then I contended with the nobles of Judah, and said unto them, What evil thing is this that ye do, and profane the sabbath day?
Did not your fathers thus, and did not our God bring all this evil upon us, and upon this city? yet ye bring more wrath upon Israel by profaning the sabbath.
And it came to pass, that when the gates of Jerusalem began to be dark before the sabbath, I commanded that the gates should be shut, and charged that they should not be opened till after the sabbath: and some of my servants set I at the gates, that there should no burden be brought in on the sabbath day.
So the merchants and sellers of all kind of ware lodged without Jerusalem once or twice.
Then I testified against them, and said unto them, Why lodge ye about the wall? if ye do so again, I will lay hands on you. From that time forth came they no more on the sabbath.
And I commanded the Levites that they should cleanse themselves, and that they should come and keep the gates, to sanctify the sabbath day. Remember me, O my God, concerning this also, and spare me according to the greatness of thy mercy, Nehemiah 13:15-22
.

Thursday, 11 November 2010

We remember ....

Today is Remembrance day. 

We gladly honour the memory of those who by their death maintained our civil and religious liberties.

The tomb of the unknown soldier in Westminster Abbey


Tuesday, 19 October 2010

Response to Peter Robinson's comments on Education

I have been asked repeatedly over the weekend by a number of media outlets to comment on Peter Robinson's remarks about education.

Here is the full text of the response I gave to the Newsletter yesterday. They have included a little of what I said in a report in today's edition.

1. Peter Robinson is right to highlight the unjustifiable advantages, privileges and special arrangements that Romanism is given in the field of education in Northern Ireland. 100% funding is available to no other religious group that I know of.

2. His language about church schools being a ‘benign form of apartheid’ are however totally unacceptable, if he includes the FPC schools in that description.

i. If the state sector of education doesn’t offer an education in accordance with what the Word of God commands, then every Bible believing Christian has every right, and a duty, to stand apart and run their own system of education. This is not a ‘benign form of apartheid’ but obedience to the Word of God. 

ii. The state sector is presently secular, evolutionary, & man-centred in its ethos and therefore ultimately falls short of true education, For the LORD giveth wisdom: out of his mouth cometh knowledge and understanding, Prov 2:6. True education begins with a knowledge of God as He has revealed Himself in His holy Word. 

iii. The Bible clearly teaches the principles of separation. This is a fundamental starting point for evangelical Christianity. The born again believer is in the world but not of the world. We are to stand apart, ecclesiastically, morally, and educationally. This has been the historic position of our Christian forefathers.

We have been here before. This is not a new idea. Dr Henry Cooke [A Presbyterian minister back in the mid 1800s] had a great controversy over the issue of joint education.

iv. It is disingenuous for Peter Robinson to equate race and faith based views. To segregate on the basis of race is unbiblical, God hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth…, Acts 17:26

To stand apart on the issue of faith is the essence of Bible religion. In fact, God pronounces a blessing upon it: Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful, Ps 1:1.

3. Peter Robinson draws a parallel between the higher level education and primary or secondary schools.

i. He fails to appreciate the importance of education in these early formative years. The older someone grows the more they should be able to discern between what is truth and what is error. In early years there is the additional aspect of a pupils' character forming. 

ii. If there was a Christian University/College holding to evangelical principles then I would certainly encourage Christians to attend there. This is due to the fact that sinful example has a detrimental effect upon the youth. So much behaviour is learned by watching others. God commands us to be wise unto that which is good, and simple concerning evil, Rom 16:19; Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things, Phil 4:8. Sadly many state educational institutions fall far short of this exhortation.

Historically, many of the state schools and universities originally started out being run and funded by Churches. It is the state who are the recent converts to education and not Churches.

iii. It must be remembered that education is not neutral. All education must have an ethos which underpins it. Secular education seeks to send out into the world those who are of a secular outlook. This is unacceptable for a Bible believer. God commands the Christian to raise their children with a Biblical worldview, to fear God and to serve Jesus Christ. The born again believer who wants to obey God has presently no option but to stand apart and place their children in an environment that honours God and has the Bible as its foundational textbook.

iv. State education has in the past been used to further the aims of politicians in solving the ‘troubles’ in Northern Ireland. Education for Mutual Understanding was set up by the Department of Education with the purpose of eliminating differences and points of distinction on the foolish premise that this would solve Ulster’s troubles. It was an attack upon evangelical Christianity.

The state is not neutral, that is impossible for any form of education. The ethos of the state system of education is contrary to the evangelical Christianity. 

4. Christian legislators are required to rule by the Word of God and particularly the Moral Law of God, Rom 13:1-10 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.
Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself

If they fail to do so then it can be legitimately asked: what is the point of electing them in the first place if they acquiesce in or even push a secularist agenda?

Wednesday, 29 September 2010

Further apostasy by the Church of Ireland

A disturbing development at the Ploughing match in Co Kildare was the joint venture by the Roman Catholic Church and the Church of Ireland within the archdiocese of Dublin. 

The further apostasy of the Church of Ireland is obvious from the blatant popish flavour of the presentation. Above the door to the marquee there was a bell with 'Ava Maria' or 'Hail Mary' on it. Inside there was a popish grotto set aside as a place to pray full of candles and a crucifix. In the literature handed out instructions are given for prayer. The first point is to make the sign of the cross. 

The Church of Ireland has given heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils, 1 Tim 4:1. How pathetic to watch them falling over themselves to unite with popery. 

The conduct of the Presbyterian moderator in joining with the pope for joint worship leaves Presbyterians with no excuse to remain within Presbyterianism. The conduct of the Church of Ireland leaves those who profess to be saved within this church no alternative but to obey Scripture and come out from among them. 





Tuesday, 28 September 2010

The Orange Order rejects the new parades legislation

Much to the annoyance no doubt of the political classes in Stormont the Orange Order is the latest body to join those rejecting the new proposed parades' legislation. 

It is being reported that the Order has snubbed a request from First Minister Peter Robinson to reconsider its stance on parades. The first minister it is reported wrote to Grand Lodge asking them to back the new proposals which resulted from the Hillsborough talks.

The Order rejected the plea with a spokesman saying members felt they had been taken for granted during the political negotiations at Hillsborough.

As previously highlighted on this blog the new proposed legislation on parades is an attack upon our civil and religious liberties. I trust that the Orange Order's objection is principled and not political maneuvering. 

The well being of the gospel in this province is at stake!

Saturday, 18 September 2010

Protest against the Papal visit - Part 4

The last part of our protest against the Pope was a short service in Greyfriars Churchyard. This was the place where a number of the Covenanters were laid to rest.
The entrance to the churchyard

Assembling at James Renwick's memorial 


Rev Johnstone about to speak

The same old Rome

Rome's boast is that she does not change. The papal visit to Scotland was certainly an illustration of this. 

An open air mass was held at Bellahouston Park in Glasgow. In order to get a good turn out Rome sold an indulgence to all who would attend.

Here is the wording of the pdf document that can be found on the 'Bishops' Conference for Scotland' website. 



GAINING THE 

PLENARY 
INDULGENCE


Bellahouston – A Pilgrimage of Faith and Forgiveness

People will come from near and far to Bellahouston Park, Glasgow, to welcome Pope Benedict XVI to Scotland and to join with the Successor of Peter in the celebration of Holy Mass. This is truly a pilgrimage of faith. As with all genuine pilgrimages undertaken in an authentically religious spirit, Catholics who make the journey to Bellahouston Park for Mass with the Pope with devotion and trust in God may receive a Plenary Indulgence under the usual conditions.

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, “the doctrine and practice of indulgences are closely linked to the effects of the Sacrament of Penance”.

So what are indulgences? The Catechism explains: “An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain prescribed conditions through the action of the Church which, as minister of redemption, dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions of Christ and the saints” (CCC 1471).

Rather loosely and imperfectly but not altogether incorrectly, indulgences have been popularly described as “time off purgatory”.

Indulgences can be partial or plenary, and can be applied to the living or the dead (CCC 1472).

The usual conditions are: prayers for the intentions of the Pope, together with a good Confession and the reception of Holy Communion within a reasonable time.

Rome is once again hawking salvation. It was the sale of indulgences that prompted Martin Luther to nail his 95 thesis to the door of the church at Wittenburg on 31st October 1517. This event is taken as the beginning of the Reformation. 

So much for all those who tell us that Rome has changed and there is no need to continue standing for Reformation principles. 

The Word of God reminds us that salvation is without money and without price, Isa 55:1,2:
Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price.
Wherefore do ye spend money for that which is not bread? and your labour for that which satisfieth not? hearken diligently unto me, and eat ye that which is good, and let your soul delight itself in fatness.

If we needed fresh justification for opposing Romanism and the papal visit this selling of indulgence gives it to us.

Protest against the Pope in London

Rev Richard Monteith has sent me some photos of the protest in London.



The protestors were placed right beside the Media Centre

Friday, 17 September 2010

Protest against the Papal visit - Part 3

The third aspect of our protest was a public gathering at the Grassmarket. This was the spot where many of the Covenanters were put to death during the 'Killing Times'.

We were permitted by the Police to unfurl our banner and walk from Magdalen Chapel to the Grassmarket.  At the Grassmarket Rev Ron Johnstone spoke.

Leaving Magdalen Chapel on our way to the Grassmarket

The Officebearers of Presbytery at the Grassmarket during the singing of 
'I'm not ashamed to own my Lord, Or to defend His cause …'

Rev Johnstone [Moderator of Presbytery] addressing the crowd gathered at the Grassmarket. 

Protest against the Papal visit - Part 2

The second part of the protest was a special service in Magdalen Chapel in Edinburgh. As the Pope was being received the Queen and representatives of the government we were marking the 450th anniversary of the overthrow of Pope in Scotland by John Knox in 1560. The first Reformed Church presbytery' meeting took place in Magdalen Chapel.

Rev Ron Johnstone, Moderator of Presbytery, preached on Psalm 20 v 5 We will rejoice in thy salvation, and in the name of our God we will set up our banners…

Outside the Magdalen Chapel

Ministers, elders, students & the Press outside Magdalen Chapel

Praise being offered to the Lord

Rev Ron Johnstone [Moderator] preaching

Protest against the Papal visit - Part 1

The first part of the protest against the papal visit was a Protestant rally held in out Rutherglen church in Glasgow on Wednesday evening. The meeting was advertised in the Glasgow Herald and there were some visitors at the service.

Rev John Greer preached on Christ the Mediator.

Outside of Rutherglen Free Presbyterian Church, Glasgow

Ministers, elders & students among the congregation

Preacher: Rev John Greer

Tuesday, 14 September 2010

No Pope here!

Reasons for opposing the papal visit to Scotland & England of Pope Benedict XVI

Primary grounds for objection

5. Spiritual. History is replete with the statements made by different Popes or else made by others about the Papacy. They were never shy in stating their claims. Rome might be a little embarrassed in modern times but these claims have never been denied or disowned. 

Cardinal Manning in a sermon in the Pro Cathedral, Kensington, and reported in the Tablet [weekly Catholic newspaper] Oct 9, 1864 said: [speaking the name of the Pope which was a rhetorical device]
I acknowledge no civil superior, I am the subject of no prince, and I claim more than this, I claim to be the supreme judge on earth and director of the consciences of men, I am the last supreme judge of what is right and wrong. 

The R.C. New York catechism stated: 
The Pope takes the place of Jesus Christ on earth…by divine right the Pope has supreme and full power in faith, in morals over each and every pastor and his flock. He is the true vicar, the head of the entire church, the father and teacher of all Christians. He is the infallible ruler, the founder of dogmas, the author of and the judge of councils; the universal ruler of truth, the arbiter of the world, the supreme judge of heaven and earth, the judge of all, being judged by no one, God himself on earth

The Pope claims specific titles which belong alone to the persons of the Godhead. 

The Pope takes titles belonging to God the Father. 
[1] In past times the pope has styled himself as ‘our Lord God the Pope’. These words appear in Roman Canon Law: 
To believe that our Lord God the Pope has not the power to decree as he is decreed, is to be deemed heretical. This feeds into the ancient idea that the Pope is God on earth

Pope Pius V [who excommunicated Elizabeth I] said: 
The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in heaven and earth. 

Pope Nicholas I declared that:
the appellation of God had been confirmed by Constantine on the Pope, who, being God, cannot be judged by man. 

Pope Leo XIII in his encyclical ‘The reunion of Christendom’ declared that the Pope holds: 
upon this earth the place of God Almighty

[2] The Pope styles himself as ‘Holy Father. The title ‘Pope’ comes from the Greek and Latin word for 'father'. On the website detailing the itinerary of the visit this title is used for the pope: 
The Holy Father will then be based in London for the remainder of the visit

The Pope therefore usurps titles belonging to God the Father in the Scriptures, John 17:11:
And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

The Pope takes titles belonging to God the Son
[1] He styles himself the ‘supreme pontiff of the universal church. The Catechism of the Catholic Church No 882 states: 
For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire church has full, supreme and universal power over the whole church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered.

On a gate to the Vatican there is inscribed in Latin: Benedict XVI, Supreme Pontiff, in the year of Our Lord 2005, in the first year of his pontificate. The words ‘Supreme Pontiff’ in Latin are 'Pontifex Maximus'

This title means the Pope claims to rule over every church and over every Christian within every church without exception. He is not coming to Britain as head of the Roman Catholics. He comes claiming to the head of every professing Christian. 

Let me give you one example of the reach of this claim The Catholic Encyclopedia states the Pope: 
… has the right to interpret authentically the natural law. Thus, it is his to say what is lawful or unlawful in regard to social and family life. 

The Pope goes as far as to claim that he is the directer of men’s consciences. 

This title 'Pontifex Maximius' is a form of an old title that comes from pagan Rome. This title: Pontifex Maximus was the high priest of the College of Pontiffs in ancient Rome. It was the most important position in the ancient Pagan Roman religion. 

[2] He styles himself as the way to God. An address made by the archbishops and bishops of Ireland to the pope in 1949 makes interesting reading: 
We the Archbishops and Bishops of Ireland, prostrate at the feet of your Holiness, humbly offer you our warmest congratulations on the occasion of the Golden Jubilee of your ordination to the priesthood… our thoughts go back to that great event fifty years ago by which your Holiness was taken from amongst men and appointed for men in the things that pertain to God, was made a minister of Christ and a dispenser of His mysteries, received power over the real and mystical body of our Saviour and became a mediator between God and man - another Christ. It is worth noting that these words are addressed to him as a Priest and not just as the pope. This is how Rome views every priest. Pope Pius IX said: I alone despite my unworthiness, am the successor of the Apostles, the Vicar of Jesus Christ; I alone have the mission to guide and direct the barque of Peter; I am the way, the Truth and the life

Pope Boniface VIII said: 
We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff

These titles are not Biblical. We reject the pope’s blasphemous claims. He is usurping titles of the second person of the Trinity. We proclaim Jesus Christ as the sole King and only Head of the Church, Eph 5:22,23; 5:23; Col 1:18. Jesus Christ alone is the way to God, John 14:6

The Pope takes titles belonging to God the Holy Spirit. 
He styles himself the ‘vicar of Christ’. The word ‘vicar’ means ‘instead of’. The Catechism of the Catholic Church No 882 & 937 state respectively: 
For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, … ; 
The pope enjoys by divine institution supreme, full, immediate and universal power in the care of souls.

The Catholic Encyclopedia states regarding this title: 
A title of the pope implying his supreme and universal primacy, both of honour and of jurisdiction, over the Church of Christ.… the title Vicar of Christ is more expressive of his supreme headship of the Church on earth, which he bears in virtue of the commission of Christ and with vicarial power derived from Him. 

The Catholic church elevates the Pope to the position of ‘supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful’. The Pope claims to be the representative of Christ on earth, to act in His place and with His authority. 

The Popes first claimed to be ‘the vicar of C├Žsar’. Imperial Rome moved the Emperor’s seat of government from Rome to Constantinople. The Pope claimed to take his place. In the 5th century they claimed to be ‘the vicar of prince of the apostles’. In the 8th century they went still further and styled themselves the ‘vicar of Christ’; and that on the basis of a document that was a forgery. 

This title was one of the three which formed what was known as the ‘The triple tiara’. It consisted of three crowns symbolising the triple power of the Pope: father of kings [temporal power], governor of the world [universal jurisdiction] and Vicar of Christ [universal pastor]. 

It is interesting that the last three popes have not been crowned in this fashion. At the end of the second session of the Second Vatican Council in 1963, Pope Paul VI descended the steps of the papal throne in St. Peter's Basilica and laid the tiara on the altar. He was supposedly renouncing his claims. Since then, none of his successors has worn a tiara. However Rome still claims that the Pope is the vicar of Christ. 

This is a title usurped from the Holy Spirit. He alone is the true vicar of Christ. To Him the care of souls has been entrusted by the second person of the Trinity. He has been sent in Christ’s name not the Pope, John 14:26; 15:26:
But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me.

A fitting conclusion is the quotation for the Westminster Confession of Faith: 
There is no other head of the Church, but the Lord Jesus Christ; nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalteth himself, in the Church, against Christ and all that is called God. Chapter 25, section 6.

These blasphemous claims of the Pope must be resisted. They cannot be allowed to go by unchallenged. Let others remain silent if they must, it is the duty of Bible believers to speak out and say this is a denial of the Word of God. 

We therefore primarily protest against the Pope’s visit in fidelity to our God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost. Faithfulness to God requires that we speak out against this ‘blasphemous bachelor on the Tiber’ as W P Nicholson called many years ago. 

God has commissioned His people to earnestly contend for the faith once delivered to the saints. We are not to stand by and let an idolator like Benedict XVI steal titles, and offices from God and apply them to himself. 

No Pope here!




Reasons for opposing the papal visit to Scotland & England by Pope Benedict XVI





4. Procedural. One of the reasons for the papal visit is the beautification of John Henry Newman.



Newman was originally an evangelical minister in the Church of England. In 1816 at the age of fifteen, during his last year at school, he professed to be have been converted. He later wrote that it was ‘more certain than that I have hands or feet’. He went on to be ordained into the Anglican Church in 1824 and professed to be a Calvinist, and held that the Pope was Antichrist. 

Over the next 8 years or so his views began to change and assume a High Church tone. He fervently opposed Non-conformity. 

Newman became a major figure in the Oxford Movement. Over these number of years he drifted towards High Church Anglicanism and on towards Romanism in his views. 'Tracts for the Times' became the publishing arm of the Oxford movement, which wished to return the Church of England to many High Church beliefs and forms of worship. Sometimes it was known as ‘Tractarianism’. 

He continued his work as a High Anglican controversialist until he had published, in 1841, Tract 90, the last of the series, which was a detailed examination of the Thirty-Nine Articles, suggesting that their oppositions were not directed against the authorised creed of Roman Catholics, but only against popular errors and exaggerations. 

Newman eventually converted to Roman Catholicism in 1840s. In February 1843, he published, as an advertisement in the Oxford Conservative Journal, an anonymous but otherwise formal retractation of all the hard things he had said against Rome In 1845 he opening converted to Romanism

He subsequently was made a Cardinal - 'a son of the Church'.

In 1991, Newman was proclaimed venerable by the Roman Church. This was after a thorough examination of his life and work by the Sacred Congregation for the Causes of Saints. One miracle was investigated and confirmed by the Vatican, so he will be able to be beatified on 19th September 2010. A second miracle would then be necessary for his canonisation.

We repudiate this popish nonsense of making saints in this way. God alone is to be venerated. Peter would have no veneration when in Acts 10:25,26 he told Cornelius to stand up: 
And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him. But Peter took him up, saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man.

It is Christ that a sinner needs to help them and no one. Newman or any other saint or Mary or any pope are useless. The New Testament message is forgiveness through Jesus Christ alone, Acts 13:38,39:
Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.

Jesus Christ justifies from all things. If that is so, and it is, then there is no need for the help of any worthless saint like Newman. 

Saints are not made this way. In fact every believer is a saint of equal standing for there is no respecting of persons with God.

Monday, 13 September 2010

No Pope Here!

Reasons for opposing the papal visit to Scotland & England of Pope Benedict XVI:

3. Constitutional - The Act of Settlement safeguards the British throne from being Catholic again. This Act was passed in 1701 at the end of the reign of King William III when his successor to the throne Anne had lost her only surviving child. 

It was then felt expedient to bring in a law that only Protestants in communion with the Church of England should be allowed to sit on the throne. One of the consequences of the Act was to bring the house of Hanover into the line of accession in front of fifty-seven other people under the normal rules of inheritance. This eventually led to George I coming to the throne in 1714. In effect it brought to Stuart dynasty to an end. 

Clause 9 of the Acts of Settlement reads: 
Whereas it has been found by experience that is inconsistent with the safety and welfare of this Protestant Kingdom to be governed by a Popish Prince or by any King or Queen marrying a Papist

Our forefathers learned by bitter experience that freedom and liberty are in danger when Romanism is in the ascendency. It is essential that we understand the underlying motivation in this Constitutional settlement. The title is it gives us the key. It is an Act: 
… declaring the Rights and Liberties of the Subject and settling the Succession of the Crown

The Act of Settlement is there to protect the liberties of the citizens. 

Rome has a long history of terror in our nation. There were hundreds of Protestant martyrs who lost their lives at the hand of popish rulers in this United Kingdom. There are scores of martyrs sites all over England marking this sad legacy. 

The most barbaric period was the during the reign of bloody Queen Mary 1553 -1558. During her reign, she repaired the severed relationship with Rome and returned England to Catholicism. Many Protestants who opposed Mary’s actions were exiled, and nearly 300 dissenters were burned at the stake, earning her the nickname ‘Bloody Mary’. 

The memory of the Reformers and the martyrs would compel us to resist the papal visit. This is the institution that put those martyrs to death. Rome hasn’t changed one iota, therefore we resist the pope’s claims and say no Pope here.

No Pope Here!

Reasons for opposing the papal visit to Scotland & England of Pope Benedict XVI:

2. Moral - There is a stain and a stench in recent years on the character of Romanism over child abuse and it reaches right up the chain of authority to the Vatican.

Rome is a hierarchal system. The local priest is under the bishop, who is under the archbishop, who in turn is under the Pope. It is the Pope who appoints bishops. It is the Pope who sacks a bishop and no one else. 

The present Pope has shown a complete unwillingness to deal with these issues. That is not the view of biased Protestants. That is view even of Roman Catholics. Many are ashamed of what has been taking place in their institutions for many years. 

There was a recent example of the present Pope’s unwillingness to deal with these matters. This unwillingness was widely reported. One such report is found in the Catholic Herald on 12th August this year: 

Pope Benedict XVI has decided not to accept the resignation of two Dublin auxiliary bishops who resigned in the wake of the Murphy Report investigation into clerical child abuse in the archdiocese [of Dublin. The Ryan report was into religious orders] 

Auxiliary Bishops Raymond Field and Eamonn Walsh resigned on December 24 after coming under intense pressure because they served as bishops during the period investigated by the Murphy Commission. In a letter to priests of the Dublin archdiocese, Archbishop Diarmuid Martin confirmed the development. 

Following the presentation of their resignations to Pope Benedict, it has been decided that Bishop Eamonn Walsh and Bishop Raymond Field will remain as auxiliary bishops,” he said. Archbishop Martin said the two men are “to be assigned revised responsibilities within the diocese.” Both bishops initially resisted calls for their resignation. However, both sent resignation letters to Rome after Archbishop Martin apparently failed to give them his total support

Even the Archbishop of Dublin couldn’t fully support these two bishops when the Murphy report came out, yet the Pope refused their resignations. 

There are allegations coming out of Munich were Joseph Ratzinger was Archbishop from 1977 of personal involvement in covering up abuse. 

In 1981, Ratzinger settled in Rome where he became the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, one of the most important offices within the Vatican. 

Prior to 2001, the primary responsibility for investigating allegations of sexual abuse and disciplining perpetrators rested with the individual dioceses. In 2001, Ratzinger convinced Pope John Paul II to put the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in charge of all investigations and policies surrounding sexual abuse in order to combat such abuse more efficiently. 

In other words Ratzinger ‘was in the know’ about what was going on in recent years. It is said that he was a notorious micro-manger. He wanted to know everything that was going on in the Catholic Church worldwide. Is it logical to conclude he was unaware of these things? I think not!

Thursday, 9 September 2010

The two faced nature of Rome

This is becoming a bit of a habit. I find myself in agreement again with Eamonn McCann. [He also raised the issue about the parades' legislation that thankfully is going to be changed]

In the Belfast Telegraph he writes about the two faced nature of Rome:

Why the Vatican's diplomatic immunity days are numbered

Now you Holy See him, now you don't. One minute, Benedict XVI is a head of state, like Elizabeth II, Omar al-Bashir or Emperor Akihito.

Then, in an instant, shazam!, he's the leader of a religious organisation, on a par with the Dalai Lama, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Rev Ron Johnstone.

Maybe he cannot be in two places at the one time, but he can be two personages in the one place.

His sojourn to Britain, beginning on Thursday week, will have the status both of a state visit and a pastoral journey.

On some stopovers he will be the representative of a state recognised at the UN and enjoying diplomatic relations with, at the last count, 156 countries.

His role at other engagements will be as leader of a religion with 1.2 billion followers scattered across the planet.

The potential political advantages of this double status are fairly obvious. But it does raise the question: how come?

Why is it that, uniquely among religious leaderships, the Holy See can also bestride the world of diplomacy and politics?

Lying comes naturally to McGuinness

It transpires after all that Martin McGuinness did know of the IRA priest James Chesney. 

McGuinness has denied for many years ever knowing him. In 2002, he issued a statement to BBC Northern Ireland current affairs programme Spotlight, saying: 
I have never met Father Chesney, nor do I have any knowledge of him other than from media reports.

Yesterday McGuinness acknowledged that he did know Chesney after all and had met him before he died in 1980. Therefore his statement to the spotlight programme was a blatant lie to cover up what he knew.

Anything that this IRA godfather says purporting to be the truth is worthless. It is like Adams' denial of being in the IRA. Their trade has been murder and lying comes naturally!

McGuinness would have us to believe that they never discussed the Claudy bombing. Maybe they had so many other IRA matters to discuss there wasn't time. McGuinness was high up in the IRA, Chesney was believed to a quartermaster and was dying. I suppose there was a fair bit of information to pass on before Chesney went out into eternity to answer for his wickedness. 

Thankfully there is a day coming when every wicked act will be brought to light. The Judge of all the earth shall do right. There will be no hiding place for McGuinness on that day. 

Monday, 6 September 2010

Built on lies!





Tony Blair's memoirs make the claim that he 'stretched the truth past breaking point' in order to get unionists into an agreement with the political representatives of the IRA.

In one way this is not startling. Anyone who has lived in this Province and observed the political process over these past years will readily recognise the point he makes.

In another way it is very serious. The Word of God makes a very telling observation about the type of conduct that Tony Blair openly acknowledges he has engaged in:
I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth, 1 John 2:21.

That which is built upon lies does not have the favour of God. Rather it will have the displeasure of God. The present political arrangements in this Province will only bring down upon us even more chastisement from God.

Tony Blair's comments are just further proof, if it was needed, that those who oppose the representatives of the IRA being in government are right.

Saturday, 4 September 2010

C S Lewis - A Bridge to Rome

In studying to preach on why we oppose the papal visit I came across a very interesting article on C S Lewis and his influencing of a number of individuals towards Romanism written by Mrs Jill Saunders wife of Dr Larry Saunders, minister of Toronto Free Presbyterian Church.

To think that professing evangelicals quote this man is staggering!

Click here to read the article C S Lewis - A Bridge to Rome.

No Pope Here!


Reasons for opposing the papal visit to Scotland & England of Pope Benedict XVI:

1. Financial. The argument is well put by the report in the Belfast Telegraph of an online survey done by the public theology think tank Theos:

More than 75 per cent of Britons think the taxpayer should not contribute to the cost of Pope Benedict XVI's forthcoming visit to Scotland and England, according to a survey published today. An online poll of 2,005 adults has shown 77% do not agree that the taxpayer should help shoulder the bill for the four-day trip even though it is a state visit. A similar proportion - 76% - rejected taxpayer funding for the visit on the grounds that he is a religious figure.

The findings were issued by Theos, the public theology think tank, as the Pope is due to arrive in Edinburgh on September 16, the first Papal visit to Britain since Pope John Paul II's 1982 trip. The survey, conducted in August, shows widespread apathy in Britain towards 83-year-old Pope Benedict's arrival with 79% saying they have "no personal interest" in his visit.

Nearly one in four - 24% - agreed with the statement "I don't approve of the Pope's visit to Britain" with just under a half, or 49%, disagreeing.

Read the rest of the article here.


The cost for the pope's visit to Britain is ever increasing. Hard pressed taxpayers will have to contribute as much as £12m towards the four-day event. This is an increase of £4m on previous estimates.

No other religious/political leader would get treatment like this!

Thursday, 2 September 2010

Stephen Hawking, God & Creation

In a new book Stephen Hawking has said that God is not needed to create the universe. He believes the laws of physics were behind the Big Bang instead. Read more here


According to Hawking: 'because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing… Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist… It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going.

His reasoning begs the simple question: where did the laws of physics come from that brought about the big bang? Or did these laws spontaneously appear as well?

It is simply ludicrous to believe in spontaneous creation. It is contrary to logic and good sense and was disproved a long time ago through the work of the Creationist Louis Pasteur.

There is no evidence for it. This is just the wild speculation of scientists who seek to eliminate God from the origin of the universe. We are always being told that the evidence supports evolution. So where is the evidence of spontaneous creation? 

Something cannot come into existence out of nothing. A living organism cannot come into existence out non living matter. Matter cannot come into existence out of non matter. 

Something or someone has to be eternal. Everything else has come from the eternal source. The Bible believer acknowledges that God is eternal. He created the world out of nothing:
Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear, Heb 11:3.

The following challenge to the BBC appeared on the Peter Hitchens feature page of the International Express 5/1/00:
The BBC teased religious leaders by asking them if they believed in the literal truth of the great bible stories. I would like to ask BBC chiefs and the rest of our secular establishment if they believe in the literal truth of evolution. Evolution is an unproven theory. If what its fundamental supporters say is true, fishes decided to grow lungs and legs and walk up the beach. The idea is so comically daft that only one thing explains its survival - that lonely, frightened people wanted to expel God from the universe because they found the idea that He exists profoundly uncomfortable.

Northern Ireland society suffering 'breakdown'

The Belfast Telegraph is reporting the findings of a study carried out by the Centre for Social Justice. The report has concluded that: 
Society in Northern Ireland is breaking down, with soaring levels of unemployment, family splits, mental illness and addiction.
This influential centre-right organisation also acknowledges that the conflict had contributed to the current problems, but said many of the issues were also evident in other parts of the UK.
Sadly there is one cause that is overlooked and never mentioned in these types of study. It is namely the forsaking of God and His truth that had taken place in society. 

The Word of God reminds us that:
Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people, Proverbs 14:34.
How much of the breakdown in society is attributable to following after sin. Sin is a hard taskmaster. It ruins lives and homes. 
The report assures everyone that the situation is reversible. It is however only reversible with a return to Bible religion. Man does not have the answer to his greatest problem and need. No government policy or initiative will ever cure the problem for they are only dealing with the symptoms and not the root cause. 
The remedy is outlined for us in the Word of God. Jeremiah the prophet told the people of his day what they needed to do to arrest a similar decline: 
Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls…, Jeremiah 6:16.

Wednesday, 25 August 2010

How many more are dead thanks to Chesney & this cover up?

The summary of the report on the Claudy bombing makes damning reading:


6.5 Extensive police Intelligence received after the bombings details allegations that Father Chesney was involved in acts of terrorism, including the bombing of Claudy. It also connects him to terrorist activities with Man A, who left the jurisdiction after being arrested and interviewed by police. The Intelligence further identifies Father Chesney as the IRA’s Director of Operations for the South Derry Area.

6.6 This compelling Intelligence picture should have led police to pursue further investigative opportunities in respect of Father Chesney, which might have either implicated him in or eliminated him from the enquiry. Certainly police officers involved in the investigation wished to pursue these enquiries but such decisions were deferred to a senior RUC Officer.

6.7 The Police Ombudsman’s investigation has found that a senior RUC Officer corresponded with the NIO, requesting that the Government raise with the Catholic Church their grave concerns in relation to Father Chesney.

6.8 This documentary evidence and historical records supplied by the Catholic Church reveal that the Secretary of State, Rt. Hon. William Whitelaw, and Cardinal William Conway, met on 5 December 1972. The evidence indicates that at the end of the meeting a private discussion, initiated by the Secretary of State, took place between both men, during which the Father Chesney issue was discussed.

6.9 The following day the NIO wrote to police stating that the Cardinal would ‘see what could be done’ and had ‘mentioned the possibility of transferring him to Donegal’.

6.10 This correspondence was shared with and accepted by the then Chief Constable of the RUC, Sir Graham Shillington, who on 11 December 1972, recorded the note; ‘Seen. I would prefer transfer to Tipperary’. Other senior RUC officers also had sight of the correspondence.

6.11 From information made available to the Police Ombudsman’s investigation by the Catholic Church it is evident that Cardinal Conway again met with the Secretary of State on 4 February 1973. During this meeting the Cardinal informed the Secretary of State, Rt. Hon. William Whitelaw, that the allegations relating to Father Chesney’s activities had been raised with the priest by his ‘Superior’ and ‘a colleague’ but that he had denied any involvement. Cardinal Conway records that the ‘Superior’ had told Father Chesney to remain where he was convalescing following an illness. The Police Ombudsman’s investigation believes that Father Chesney was in County Donegal at this time.

6.12 Father Chesney was eventually appointed to a parish in Donegal in late 1973. He was never again appointed to a parish in Northern Ireland. He is known to have regularly travelled across the border but was never arrested, questioned nor further investigated by the RUC in connection with the Claudy bombings or other terrorist activity. Father Chesney died in 1980.

The unanswered and unanswerable question is: how many other innocent people lost their lives so that a priest might be protected? Thankfully there is a higher court where none will escape answering for their crimes.  

Another question is this: Is it not simply impossible for Martin McGuinness who was in the higher ranks of the IRA not to have known about the activities of Chesney? I think not!

Maybe McGuinness' new found political associates and partners in government could ask him that question! 

The words of condemnation ring a little hollow when they come from people who now prop up this wicked government with the IRA at its heart. You can't really condemn the atrocities committed over the years of the troubles while sitting in government with the perpetrators of those same wicked acts.

A house divided against itself can not stand, Matt 12:25