| We hope you enjoy your visit! You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harasment, and crude or sexually-explicit language. If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Westminster appointment announced; also Bishops Conference posts | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Monday, 16. June 2008, 22:20 (2,950 Views) | |
| KatyA | Saturday, 30. May 2009, 18:55 Post #256 |
|
Administrator
|
Could it be that our new Archbishop is distancing himself from views recently expressed by our former PM? |
  | |
 |
 
|
| Deleted User | Saturday, 30. May 2009, 19:43 Post #257 |
|
Deleted User
|
The Dukes of Norfolk descend from Edward 1 and have played a prominent part in the life of English affairs for hundreds of years and in spite of being Catholic remained the Premier Earls of England and Earl Marshal of the Royal Court. The family have been responsible for patronising three of our current cathedrals, Hallam, Norwich and Arundel and Brighton, as well as providing the land for the church of Our Lady and the English Martyrs in Cambridge. They Still Champion the Catholic Cause in the highest places in Society at both National and International level. The current, 18th Duke is a supporter and contributor to the Oxford University Newman Society and is involved in fundraising for Westminster Cathedral, and the DOUAI ABBEY Library Appeal. Thus, it would have been most impolite not to have invited him were as Mr Blair has thus far contributed only himself, (for which I suspect he expects us to be grateful  .) |
|
|
|
| Rose of York | Saturday, 30. May 2009, 20:42 Post #258 |
Administrator
|
Chicken to ring up and ask him. 
|
 Catholic and proud of it! Talk to God before Mass. Talk to each other afterwards | |
|
|
|
| OsullivanB | Saturday, 30. May 2009, 21:43 Post #259 |
|
I think Penfold underlines my point. So far as I know the Duke of Norfolk is not a Papal Knight. I don't think the Earl Marshall would be invited "ex officio". I think the Blairs weren't invited for similar reasons to those which have caused Cardinal Cormac to change his mind about joining Blair's Faith Foundation.
Edited by OsullivanB, Saturday, 30. May 2009, 21:57.
|
|
|
|
| saundthorp | Sunday, 31. May 2009, 14:18 Post #260 |
|
There is some justice in the world after all 
|
|
Truth is still the truth even if no one believes it. Error is still error even if everyone believes it. (Archbishop Fulton Sheen) | |
|
|
|
| Fortunatus | Sunday, 31. May 2009, 19:29 Post #261 |
|
I think the Earl Marshal might well have been invited ex officio as a representative of the State. Also as England's premier Catholic layman which the Dukes of Norfolk have long been considered to be. The Blairs on the other hand have no more standing than anyone on this forum. |
|
|
|
| Quicunque vult | Sunday, 31. May 2009, 19:44 Post #262 |
|
Fortunatus wrote:
Rather less, I suspect. (At least I got to Vespers.) QV |
|
|
|
| Rose of York | Sunday, 31. May 2009, 23:32 Post #263 |
|
Administrator
|
The Blairs attend Mass, don't they? |
|
Catholic and proud of it! Talk to God before Mass. Talk to each other afterwards | |
|
|
|
| OsullivanB | Monday, 1. June 2009, 13:33 Post #264 |
|
Why would the Earl Marshal (qua Earl Marshall) be chosen for that? The Prince of Wales was represented. That seems sufficient for the State. It seems to me much more likely that he was invited simply because the Archbishop thought he should be, and that the Blairs were not by parity of reasoning. Fortunately it is wholly unimportant whether I am right or wrong. Edited by OsullivanB, Monday, 1. June 2009, 14:22.
|
|
|
|
| KatyA | Thursday, 2. July 2009, 21:45 Post #265 |
|
Administrator
|
 The Catholic Herald report of the Monday's ceremony during which Archbishop Nichols, together with 34 other archbishops, received the pallium from Pope Benedict, includes this picture. I noticed this comment:
I had no idea that was the case. Why will he be buried in the first pallium? What ever the reason, I trust it will not happen until very many years have passed. KatyA |
|
| |
|
|
|
| Derekap | Friday, 3. July 2009, 16:31 Post #266 |
|
Will he be buried in the second Pallium also? If so, I hope he wont be too warm. |
| Derekap | |
|
|
|
| pete | Friday, 3. July 2009, 22:46 Post #267 |
|
The Pallium which was introduced in the 4th century, it represents a yoke worn by the Holy Father it’s also presented to Archbishops by the Pontiff. I wonder if this deep Catholic custom is also now part of the Anglican Church, and if so, is it the Monarch who bestows this great honour? |
|
|
|
| KatyA | Sunday, 2. August 2009, 23:28 Post #268 |
|
Administrator
|
I should have been in Lourdes this weekend,but circumstances conspired against me. I didn't know Archbishop Nichols would be there too, but it seems someone from the Telegraph did and produced a short interview covering a wide range of topics, including football,pubs,suicide and the nuclear familyTelegraph |
|
| |
|
|
|
| KatyA | Saturday, 19. September 2009, 15:18 Post #269 |
|
Administrator
|
Pastoral Letter 19 - 20 September 2009 In his first Pastoral Letter as Archbishop of Westminster, the Right Reverend Vincent Nichols encourages Catholics to strengthen their faith through daily prayer, which he says is “central to the stability and fruitfulness of our lives.” Full text of letter, and audio and video format available on the Westminster website rcdow |
|
| |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · General Catholic Discussion · Next Topic » | |
9:06 AM Nov 23