Hypersensitive ‘Roman’ Robbie Butler, jellyfish Christopher Stalford and hypocrisy of Mervyn Storey – a sorry affair over Pope’s visit

There appears to have been something of a manufactured storm in a teacup this week over comments made to Ulster Unionist MLA and professing Christian, Elim Church deacon ‘Roman’ Robbie Butler, who ran to Dublin to meet the Pope back in August.

The comments alleged to have been made to him are in relation to his visit to see “that Antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition”.

It’s claimed one DUP MLA mock crossed himself in the manner of a Papist while another pointed out to him that he was wrong to meet the Pope because he is “Antichrist”.

Only the usage of the term “Antichrist” directly to ‘Roman’ Robbie has apparently shaken his sensitivities, who is quoted in the Irish republican and Roman Catholic Irish News saying: “It was a throwback to the 1970s, I just couldn’t believe it.”

Given he was born in 1972, according to Wikipedia, he must have had a remarkable awareness of current affairs from when he was in his earliest years.

Regardless of his incredibly socially aware childhood, ‘Roman’ Robbie is badly off track to be making such a lazy, trendy comment, which is essentially the “It’s 2018” (or whichever year it currently is) argument, apparently the silver bullet to win any argument.

The problem ‘Roman’ Robbie Butler has is that God isn’t subject to changes along the lines of fashionable opinion.

Malachi 3:6 says: “For I am the Lord, I change not”.

Hebrews 13:8 says: “Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.”

Apparently the comments were made to ‘Roman’ Robbie Butler in the corridors of Stormont by a DUP MLA, who told him he should not have gone to meet the Pope, who he described as “Antichrist”.

Of course, that is an absolutely correct viewpoint to take, given Rome’s manifold blasphemies.

The “Antichrist” comment is nothing other than a reiteration of what Protestants have believed for hundreds of years.

This term was included in the Westminster Confession of Faith, drawn up in 1646.

“Antichrist” means “in the place of Christ”, therefore the term, when applied to the Pope, means he has set himself up in the place of Christ, which he undoubtedly has.

Let us not forget the blasphemous titles which the Pope takes upon himself.

He calls himself the ‘Holy Father’, despite the Bible telling us in Matthew 23:9: “And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.”

Therefore we can see him blaspheming God the Father.

The Pope also takes upon himself the name of ‘Pontiff’, meaning ‘bridge’. He claims to be the bridge between man and God, despite the Bible clearly teaching that role belongs to Christ alone. 1 Timothy 2:5 says: “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus”.

We are also told in John 14:6: “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”

Therefore we can see him blaspheming God the Son.

The Pope also calls himself the vicar of Christ on earth, despite the fact the Bible teaches that role belongs to the Holy Spirit. This is made clear in John 14:16, 26: “And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; 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.”

Therefore we can see him blaspheming God the Holy Ghost.

So the term “Antichrist” is an entirely appropriate one to use, regardless of whether ‘Roman’ Robbie Butler thinks it is an outdated term. He must think 2 Corinthians 6:17 doesn’t apply any more either. It says: “Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you.”

Separation from the workers of evil is never outdated.

After the hypersensitive ‘Roman’ Robbie Butler cried to the Irish News about these mean, nasty comments, the newspaper published the names of the men guilty of these heinous crimes.

The man who mockingly crossed himself was named as Christopher Stalford, while the man claimed to have pointed out that the Pope is “Antichrist” is Mervyn Storey.

Christopher Stalford’s actions appear little more than a harmless joke, yet he has foolishly apologised for any offence he may have caused.

Doing his best impression of a jellyfish, Christopher Stalford (pictured, above) said: “I would never mock or deride someone because of their religious belief because I am a man of religious belief.

“At the time it was clear to me that the incident with Robbie Butler was between friends enjoying a joke in the context of mounting speculation, including in The Irish News, that I would be attending the event in Dublin – I am surprised that three months later I am being accused of anything other than that.”

Why did Christopher Stalford not just say that the doctrines of Rome are evil and ‘Roman’ Robbie Butler had left himself open to derision as he had in fact made a mockery of true Protestantism by consorting with Popery?

Of course, ‘Roman’ Robbie crying about the matter, regardless of his backtracking once the horse had bolted by saying he didn’t agree with the publication of the Irish News article naming the men allegedly responsible, is beyond pathetic, but Christopher Stalford ought to have taken a firm line rather than caving in to the smallest amount of pressure.

Perhaps Christopher Stalford could attempt to make it up to ‘Roman’ Robbie Butler by bringing him out to a GAA match tomorrow (Sunday). Wouldn’t that be a lovely photo opportunity to prove to the enemies of Christ that you’re prepared to compromise your beliefs for political expedience?

Then you have Mervyn Storey (pictured, below) and the comments attributed to him about the Pope being “Antichrist”.

He is, of course, right, but it is surely rank hypocrisy on his part to criticise ‘Roman’ Robbie Butler for meeting the head of the anti-Christian Roman Catholic system, if he did so.

After all, this is a man who three years ago attended the home of ecumenism in Northern Ireland, the utterly ungodly Corrymeela Community, based in Ballycastle, County Antrim.

In his role as a minister in the Stormont Assembly, he congratulated the God-defying organisation on reaching 50 years of spreading deceit and was pictured smiling beneath a wooden cross with the leader of that wretched grouping, the sodomite Padraig O’Tuama.

Sodomites are a grouping he is rather familiar with, as during his stint as a minister his department awarded funds to various sodomite groupings, including £170,000 to the Strabane / Lifford sodomite ‘Pride’ grouping and contributions to the Belfast ‘Pride’ celebration of that which God has called an “abomination” (Leviticus 18:22).

When contacted by the Irish News, Mervyn Storey said he had better things to worry about than claims made by ‘Roman’ Robbie Butler.

Why did he not state categorically to that Irish republican rag that the Pope is a servant of the devil and is leading untold millions to hell? What a chance was missed. Perhaps he was worried about the criticism he would receive for publicly stating that.

1 Samuel 2:30 reminds us God says that “them that honour me I will honour, and they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed.”

God would have honoured such a principled stand, but Mervyn Storey chose not to do such and God says he will be “lightly esteemed”, or held in low regard.

Dear reader, let us not be afraid to take our stand for Christ in this day of apostasy.

And dear reader, let us not be tied up by loyalty to one particular party, regardless of what that party does contrary to God’s Word.

Our first loyalty must always be to God and His Word, inspired and inerrant, not to any political organisation.

Let our attitude be that of Job, found in Job 23:12: “Neither have I gone back from the commandment of his lips; I have esteemed the words of his mouth more than my necessary food.”

Advertisements

Corrymeela publishes study guide teaching a smutty perversion of the book of Ruth

Romans 8:6-7: “For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.”

The home of ecumenism in Northern Ireland, the wretched Corrymeela retreat near Ballycastle on the north coast, is forever trying to distort the Bible to suit their own anti-Christian, politically liberal and morally outrageous agenda.

Indeed its leader, Padraig O’Tuama (pictured, top), a Romanist, is an open sodomite, something which has very evidently not stopped him from rising to the top of that supposedly ‘Christian’ institution.

As is the case with most liberals, they are horrified by the idea of the United Kingdom leaving the European Union, when professing Christians should be very pleased at this development.

However, we are not interested in arguing the case for exiting the EU, but we are interested in Corrymeela’s recently published study guide which seeks to link the story within the book of Ruth and ‘Brexit’, the rather ugly abbreviated term for the British withdrawal from the EU.

It is a resource they hope to see used in numerous churches over the coming months and indeed they have specified on their own website that the Presbyterian Church in the nearby village of Bushmills will host an event working through this utterly unsuitable study guide. Shame on Bushmills Presbyterian Church. * (See note at bottom of article).

Entitled ‘Crossing Borders: Exploring Brexit Through The Lens Of Ruth’, there are numerous issues with the document.

As with all ecumenists and apostates, they scrupulously avoid using the King James Version of the Bible, choosing instead a watered-down version. If the King James Version was good enough for our forefathers, who we are told were so much less educated than we are, then surely it is good enough for us today.

It uses faulty sources to make its arguments, including the writings of rabbis. Let us not forget that Judaism is still waiting for the first coming of Christ, having denied that Jesus was God the Son, thus denying salvation by faith alone in Christ alone.

One of the two key issues with the document is that it utterly fails to recognise the key premise of the book.

Ruth, a Moabitess, a people historically at enmity with God and born from the most vile of circumstances – incest (Genesis 19:30-38) – renounces her nationality and the heathenism of the land of Moab to become a Jew.

The most famous verses of the entire book are the confession of Ruth, as it were, when she says in Ruth 1:16-17: “And Ruth said, Intreat me not to leave thee, or to return from following after thee: for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God: Where thou diest, will I die, and there will I be buried: the Lord do so to me, and more also, if ought but death part thee and me.”

Ruth is a convert to Christ but Corrymeela’s tinpot theologians, ignorant of salvation, see this as simply a case of immigration.

This is clearly an evidence of Ruth’s saving faith in Christ. She says “thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God”. She was owning the one true God as her God, not any of the false gods worshipped in Moab.

She then says “the Lord do so to me”. Ruth doesn’t say “thy Lord do so to me”, she instead recognises God as THE Lord.

Corrymeela seek to use this as a pretext for immigration, with the clear implication that accepting high levels of immigration is the Christian thing to do. Ruth is repeatedly referred to as a “migrant worker”. They ignore the fact that Ruth is a proselyte, rather than a migrant. We are not interested in arguing the case for or against immigration, rather we seek to point out that they fail to rightly divide the word of God.

This is done in two primary ways.

The first is to use this as a way to say the law as laid out in God’s Word is little more than a loose set of rules made to be broken and then by using it to attack the infallibility of God’s Word.

Here are just a couple of examples of what we are referring to:

“The book also introduces some ambiguity into the notion of racial purity by the inclusion of a foreigner in the kingly line. Some say it was written in the post-exilic period, when leaders like Ezra and Nehemiah were trying to reconstruct national identity. If this were so, then the book of Ruth is again a strong counter-narrative to the idea of racial purity and the imposition of forced divorce of foreign women in the post-exile era.”

“The book of Ruth can be read as a form of counter-narrative to Ezra and Nehemiah, telling a story where ethnic and religious purity is perhaps not as critical as they might have claimed.”

What they are creating here is a blasphemous argument that Scripture argues against Scripture. They are saying that Ruth is contradicting Ezra and Nehemiah.

However we are told in the Bible that “God is not the author of confusion” (1 Corinthians 14:33).

This is utter Biblical illiteracy.

In addition, they are misunderstanding, perhaps wilfully, the point of Ezra and Nehemiah’s purge of relationships with those of other races.

It was not specifically to prevent Jews from marrying those of other nations, but it was to prevent them from marrying those of other religions.

Let’s look at the Bible passages referring to their purges.

Ezra 9:1-2: “Now when these things were done, the princes came to me, saying, The people of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites, have not separated themselves from the people of the lands, doing according to their abominations, even of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites. For they have taken of their daughters for themselves, and for their sons: so that the holy seed have mingled themselves with the people of those lands: yea, the hand of the princes and rulers hath been chief in this trespass.”

Ezra 10:10-11: “And Ezra the priest stood up, and said unto them, Ye have transgressed, and have taken strange wives, to increase the trespass of Israel. Now therefore make confession unto the Lord God of your fathers, and do his pleasure: and separate yourselves from the people of the land, and from the strange wives.”

The word “strange” can also be rendered “pagan”, meaning these were heathen women and not followers of God. Those who had married these pagan women were “doing according to their abominations”, therefore they were polluting religion in the land. This was the reason for the purge.

Nehemiah 13:23-27: “In those days also saw I Jews that had married wives of Ashdod, of Ammon, and of Moab: And their children spake half in the speech of Ashdod, and could not speak in the Jews’ language, but according to the language of each people. And I contended with them, and cursed them, and smote certain of them, and plucked off their hair, and made them swear by God, saying, Ye shall not give your daughters unto their sons, nor take their daughters unto your sons, or for yourselves. Did not Solomon king of Israel sin by these things? yet among many nations was there no king like him, who was beloved of his God, and God made him king over all Israel: nevertheless even him did outlandish women cause to sin. Shall we then hearken unto you to do all this great evil, to transgress against our God in marrying strange wives?”

Again that word “strange”, or “pagan” is used. That is the point. This is about religious purity, rather than ethnic.

Look at the children of such relationships. Verse 23 says they “spake half in the speech of Ashdod, and could not speak in the Jews’ language”. These children could not speak the language of their fathers and they could not take instruction from a rabbi, meaning they could not read the Scriptures as they were at that time and were cut off from the religion of their fathers.

What a dreadful situation that was, and yet Corrymeela’s tinpot theologians seek to portray Ezra and Nehemiah as narrow-minded Jewish nationalists, when they were in fact earnestly contending for the faith.

With regards the rejection of God’s Law which runs throughout their study, they write:

“A principle is established, that the law should ensure compassion, and if it doesn’t it must be changed.”

“The cross-over is made into a world less predictable and more in need of being read and deciphered and interpreted.”

They are saying that God’s Law is errant in places and that feelings should trump faithfulness to God’s Word.

This is the very essence of the perversion of God’s Word behind the sodomite agenda which has made its way into a sizeable portion of the professing church – that “love is love” and nobody’s feelings ought to be hurt by the rules set out for our benefit in the Bible.

It is no surprise this argument is being made by a group like Corrymeela with a sodomite leader.

However, this leads us on to perhaps the most offensive of the serious flaws within this document, and that is of the lewd, vulgar insinuations within it in relation to Ruth and Boaz.

As is no surprise when one considers it is carnal minds, rather than spiritual, writing this, there is an obsession with obscene and utterly false insinuations surrounding the two main characters and their relationship.

In their introduction, this is what they say: “Of course there is some questionable activity as the heroine seduces her soon-to-be husband, but by and large this can be glossed over, and at least it is tasteful, but only barely.”

They add, when referring to chapter 3 when Ruth approaches Boaz on the threshing floor: “Will he respond to her like any other foreign widow, coming to the threshing floor selling sex?”

Then there is this: “It is unclear whether or not there is anything sexual implied here, though there does seem to be a suggestion of it.”

Then, in the questions they pose for the reader, they ask: “Does it matter to the story whether or not sex is involved in the encounter on the threshing floor? If yes, how? If not, why not?”

Then in their summary, there is this: “Ruth makes her extraordinary appeal after the harvest is ended (creeping up on Boaz at night and possibly engaging in sex)”.

There is repeated innuendo in this document, and it comes with absolutely no Scriptural warrant.

This is what the passage says in Ruth 3:8-14: “And it came to pass at midnight, that the man was afraid, and turned himself: and, behold, a woman lay at his feet. And he said, Who art thou? And she answered, I am Ruth thine handmaid: spread therefore thy skirt over thine handmaid; for thou art a near kinsman. And he said, Blessed be thou of the Lord , my daughter: for thou hast shewed more kindness in the latter end than at the beginning, inasmuch as thou followedst not young men, whether poor or rich. And now, my daughter, fear not; I will do to thee all that thou requirest: for all the city of my people doth know that thou art a virtuous woman. And now it is true that I am thy near kinsman: howbeit there is a kinsman nearer than I. Tarry this night, and it shall be in the morning, that if he will perform unto thee the part of a kinsman, well; let him do the kinsman’s part: but if he will not do the part of a kinsman to thee, then will I do the part of a kinsman to thee, as the Lord liveth: lie down until the morning. And she lay at his feet until the morning: and she rose up before one could know another. And he said, Let it not be known that a woman came into the floor.”

Where anyone can draw such a vulgar conclusion from in that is a mystery. Boaz calls her “a virtuous woman”, which would hardly be consistent with the insinuations of the tinpot theologians at Corrymeela.

Not only that, the passage tells us that such carnal activity did not take place.

It says that Ruth “lay at his feet until the morning”. She did not lie beside Boaz, but rather she lay at his feet.

For the tinpot theologians at Corrymeela to say that God’s inspired Word is “barely tasteful” is a grievous insult.

John 1:10: “He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.”

This is the case here; a worldly organisation like Corrymeela “knows him not” and cannot testify of Christ.

Let us be steadfast in rejecting those workers of iniquity, regardless of whether or not they have a cloak of religiosity surrounding them.

1 John 4:1: “Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.”

* We have since been contacted by the ‘minister’ of Bushmills Presbyterian Church, ‘Rev’ Nancy Cubitt, saying the event was hosted by the Causeway Coast Peace Group, who had paid for the use of their facilities. You can view the comments section of this article to see the discourse between us and Nancy Cubitt. Bushmills Presbyterian Church allowed its facilities to be used to host an ecumenical grouping which worked through a study guide offering a smutty perversion of the book of Ruth. Shame on Bushmills Presbyterian Church.

Ballintoy Church of Ireland’s Rev Patrick Barton making peace with Rome

Colossians 1:18-20: “And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell; And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.”

Peace and reconciliation are two of the key buzzwords for ecumenists and apostates in our land.

After all, how could anyone be opposed to peace and reconciliation?

Of course, everyone wants to live in harmony with those around them.

However, these ecumenists who preach of peace and reconciliation do not preach of peace through Jesus Christ’s precious atoning blood, but rather a ‘peace’ of mean compromise with the pagan Church of Rome.

And such misappropriation of the term peace was prevalent in Ballintoy Parish Church last weekend.

That church, based on the north coast of Northern Ireland, played host to a meeting of the ‘Causeway Coast Peace Group’, and the preacher was the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Armagh, Eamon Martin.

Rome refuses to teach the simple, precious gospel message of “peace through the blood of his cross”, but rather theirs is a message of works.

With Rome, salvation is all doing, but with Jesus, salvation is all done.

And this is the central, principal tenet of the Bible, that Christ died on the cross a perfect atoning death that “whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life”.

Ephesians 2:8-9 tells us that salvation is not achieved by any good in us.

It says: “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.”

However, despite the fact that Rome steadfastly refuses to preach the way to salvation, instead condemning its followers to the damnation of hell – and as Paul, under the inspiration of God, says in Galatians 1:9: “If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed” – so many so-called Protestant ministers cuddle up with the deceit of Rome, thereby giving credence to its lies.

And this was very evidently the case last weekend in Ballintoy Church of Ireland, whose minister is Rev Patrick Barton (pictured, below), who also holds the charge in Dunseverick and Rathlin Parish Churches (allowing him to do triple the damage!).

This individual is no stranger to ecumenical compromise, as a ‘Coleraine Times’ report online refers to him, along with a Romanist priest, a ‘Father’ Brian Daly, leading prayers at the ‘Blessing of the Boats’ service in nearby Ballycastle.

Given that Rome blasphemously teaches of prayer to Mary and saints, it is once more appropriate for us to ask to whom these prayers were addressed?

1 Timothy 2:5 says: “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus”.

The Causeway Coast Peace Group, according to its entry on the Charity Commission website, is “largely church based”, and among its stated goals is the “promotion of religious harmony”, making it an overtly ecumenical grouping.

It has regularly held meetings in the Roman Catholic chapel in Ballycastle, St Patrick’s and St Brigid’s, with the 2015 edition of its thanksgiving service having a retiring collection in aid of the Corrymeela Community, based in Ballycastle and the home of ecumenism in Ulster.

The 2017 thanksgiving service was also held in that Romish domain and Rev Patrick Barton was, of course, front and centre in this disgraceful sell-out to Rome.

He jointly held the service with his ecumenical chum, ‘Father’ Brian Daly, while the former Presbyterian Church moderator, Dr Frank Sellar (more like Sell-out) was also in attendance.

Attendees, following the conclusion of the service, were then shamefully invited to light a candle and place it on the pagan altar of Rome, all in the name of peace.

However, there can be no peace with Rome until Rome makes peace with God.

Anyone who says or acts contrary to this is as guilty as the prophets condemned by God in the days of Jeremiah.

It says in Jeremiah 6:13-15: “…and from the prophet even unto the priest every one dealeth falsely. They have healed also the hurt of the daughter of my people slightly, saying, Peace, peace; when there is no peace. Were they ashamed when they had committed abomination? nay, they were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush: therefore they shall fall among them that fall: at the time that I visit them they shall be cast down, saith the LORD.”

As we so often see in the Bible, when God pronounces his judgment, he also shows his mercy, but there is a fearful consequence for those who shun this offer of mercy.

That chapter goes on to say in verses 16-20: “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. But they said, We will not walk therein. Also I set watchmen over you, saying, Hearken to the sound of the trumpet. But they said, We will not hearken. Therefore hear, ye nations, and know, O congregation, what is among them. Hear, O earth: behold, I will bring evil upon this people, even the fruit of their thoughts, because they have not hearkened unto my words, nor to my law, but rejected it. To what purpose cometh there to me incense from Sheba, and the sweet cane from a far country? your burnt offerings are not acceptable, nor your sacrifices sweet unto me.”

The old paths were called the good way, yet today new ecumenical paths are being forged on a regular basis and they are dishonouring to God and the offerings being sent up by such as are involved in this departure from God’s Word “are not acceptable” unto God.

These old paths they refuse to tread or even countenance, instead, they go down crooked paths, which cannot bring peace.

Isaiah 59:8 says: “The way of peace they know not; and there is no judgment in their goings: they have made them crooked paths: whosoever goeth therein shall not know peace.”

Isaiah 48:22 says: “There is no peace, saith the Lord, unto the wicked.”

Dear reader, do not seek after the “peace” of this world, but rather the peace that comes through the blood of the cross. Christ offered Himself as a sacrifice for sin that we might be forgiven.

If you are as yet unsaved, would you ask yourself this question: How will you escape if you neglect so great salvation?

God’s offer of salvation is there for all to enjoy, but first you must confess your sins. If you do that, God is faithful and just to forgive you your sins (1 John 1:9).

That is the route to true peace.

Philippians 4:7: “And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.”

St Anne’s Cathedral continues efforts to undo Reformation with Jesuit celebration

“And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.” Ephesians 5:11.

The hub of ecumenical folly that is Belfast’s St Anne’s Cathedral is getting set to invite a Jesuit priest into its midst next week.

That’s correct, a Jesuit priest, that unholy order which led the charge of the Counter Reformation, the efforts to snuff out the glorious light of the gospel so wonderfully unveiled through Martin Luther and others 500 years ago.

The Counter Reformation was led by the notorious Ignatius of Loyola and guess what – the prayer service this Jesuit priest will lead will be focused on the “Ignatian Tradition”, so says the Belfast Telegraph.

The Ignatian Tradition is a most dreadful and unbiblical tradition and it is a shame and disgrace that St Anne’s would welcome a propagator of its lies and deceit into its arms. Those in charge there have emphatically and decidedly ignored the call to reprove the “unfruitful works of darkness” that Jesuitry undoubtedly is.

Of course, it should be no surprise to Christians that St Anne’s would welcome such a character’s doctrine into its building.

In September 2016, St Anne’s appointed a Roman Catholic priest as an ‘ecumenical canon’ and just last autumn the cathedral played host to a ‘pet blessing’ service, showing St Anne’s doesn’t actually know what it believes.

The cathedral also is inextricably linked with the Corrymeela Community, which is a sort of ecumenical nirvana, full of airy fairy quasi Christianity which pats itself on the back for being so accepting of all faiths.

The Corrymeela Community is in fact jointly hosting the event with St Anne’s Cathedral, which is taking place as part of a series of prayer services during Lent.

First up is this Papist propaganda on Friday, 23 February, led by the province coordinator of ecumenism, ‘Father’ Tom Leyden.

After that follows a female Presbyterian ‘minister’, the ‘Rev’ Cheryl Meban (1 Timothy 2:12), who is in turn followed by Padraig O Tuama, the leader of the Corrymeela Community.

Two misguided Church of Ireland clerics, the Dean’s Vicar at St Anne’s, Canon Mark Niblock and the Dean of Armagh, Very Rev Gregory Dunstan, will bring this whole exercise in religious futility and compromise to a close.

So there are utterly inappropriate speakers galore on offer, but surely the worst has to be this exhibition of Jesuitry, the very antithesis and definition of opposition to and hatred of Bible believing Protestantism.

Ignatius of Loyola was “the principal founder and first Superior General of the Society of Jesus (Jesuits), a religious Order of the Catholic Church professing direct service to the Pope in terms of mission”.

So this service in St Anne’s Church of Ireland Cathedral, a supposedly God honouring church wedded to Protestant Christian principles, is going to boast a message straight from the Pope himself, “that man of sin, and son of perdition”.

Galatians 1:6-9 takes a very dim view of lies in the name of God, which is all the Roman Catholic Church can deliver. Rome has successfully carried many in so-called Protestant churches away from the truth of the gospel.

Those verses read: “I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.”

God has pronounced his curse on the propagators of error and those involved with St Anne’s Cathedral, sold out to ecumenism, need to take very careful note.

The phrase “let him be accursed” is interesting, as it is a term appropriated by the Roman Catholic Church on its own pronouncements within the Council of Trent. Anyone who dares challenge the lie that the bread and wine doled out during the blasphemous Mass actually turns into the body and blood of Christ has this said of them: “Let him be anathema (or cursed)”.

They say the same for those who rightly state that we are saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone (Ephesians 2:8-9).

The Jesuits were key figures in the persecution and murder of untold millions of Protestants (along with Muslims and Jews) during the centuries long ‘Inquisition’ it led throughout Europe.

Famous for its use of torture to elicit confessions from accused ‘heretics’, the Inquisition was an evil process led by an evil organisation.

Why would the Church of Ireland invite anyone representing the ‘Ignatian Tradition’ into its arms?

Bertrand Russell, a Noble Prize winning author and historian, in his ‘A History of Western Philosophy’, noted that “Protestant success, at first amazingly rapid, was checked mainly as a result of Loyola’s creation of the Jesuit order.”

So the group that put the brakes on precious, never-dying souls being saved is welcomed with open arms into a church supposed to stand up for the Protestant faith, which is true Biblical Christianity.

It is utter madness.

For anyone still involved with these ecumenical churches, we implore you to “come out from among them and be ye separate” (2 Corinthians 6:17).

A question asked by Elijah on Mount Carmel remains completely relevant today.

1 Kings 18:21: “And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye between two opinions? if the Lord be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him.”

The implication was clear; deep down the children of Israel knew the Lord was God, but they were following a false religion. Now is the time to break with these ecumenical false prophets and ecclesiastical deceivers.

Dear reader, please abandon these false teachers and if you are not saved, “believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved” (Acts 16:31).

1 John 1:9: “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”