Aug 132010

The pope’s visit to Great Britain [a.k.a. UK and to some, albeit erroneously, as just ‘England’] in September 2010, 16-19 September to be precise, now looks like a FIRM ‘GO’ — and you can find the latest itinerary <<here>>.

I am glad. I think it will be good for both ‘sides.’ Six months ago I had my doubts whether this trip would go ahead, but it does appear that concessions have been made on both sides of the English Channel. But, as a Brit, I suspect that there will still be a few fireworks — outside of any displays in the night skies.

Pope Benedict XVI (#266) will be but the second reigning pope to visit this historically dominant nation with 8.5 million Catholics — 14% of the population and the 29th most populous.

The intrepid world traveler, John Paul II (#265), in May 1982 [28 May to 2 June to be exact] was the first reigning pope (that we are aware of) to visit Great Britain. That, however, was not classed as an ‘official’ visit. Instead, it was a pastoral visit. That this visit went ahead, even though Britain had just entered into an armed conflict with the very Catholic Argentina, over the Falkland Islands, must say much about John Paul II’s pragmatism.

So, this upcoming visit is significant from an historical perspective. Hence, this post given our emphasis on papal history.

  5 Responses to “Benedict XVI Will Be But The 2nd Pope To Visit Britain; The First ‘Official’ Visit No Less”

  1. John Paul II was the 264th Pope (#264)

  2. Thanks,
    Actually #265 per MY counting … and the numbering I use in my books and blogs.
    This is because I, like the Vatican did till as ‘recently’ as 1961, recognize the ORIGINAL Stephen II. He was a bona fide pope. Was not an antipope and lists up to 1961, including those by the Vatican, included him. In my book, you can’t just drop him … after that.
    Thanks again.

  3. If you build a good house you have a foundation,The Catholic Church should stick to its sound teachings and stop saying sorry to her enemies.

  4. I see you espouse a Very Catholic philosophy. BRAVO to YOU. Isn’t your idea but a variation of what the Spanish Inquisition so ardently believed in: explain nothing, justify nothing, never apologize, never admit even the possibility of an error … let the burning do the talking.
    I am CURIOUS as to what YOU think, specifically, when THE POPE says ‘sorry’ for stuff like the clerical abuse — though to be fair, and probably to your relief, he hasn’t said ‘sorry’ that many times.
    Do you think he is saying ‘sorry’ on a personal basis, OR in his capacity as pope? As far as I know nobody has asked him that. YOU SHOULD? Here is ‘his’ e-mail (though as you know he is on vacation):
    [You should also forward him this whole comment … because it is HE that can do something about it. I am but a poor, very poor, scribe with no connections at the Vatican.]
    IF the Pope says SORRY as Pope … what does that IMPLY?
    He is Christ’s Vicar on Earth!
    So on WHOSE behalf is he saying SORRY?
    That is one heck of a profound theological and sociological question. Again, WAY, WAY beyond my pay grade — especially since I get paid nothing for this.
    So PLEASE address this to the pope, BUT please, share the Pope’s answer with us.
    Thank YOU. I am so glad you brought up this very germane issue.
    What was that movie from the early 70s? I saw it with three different girls on consecutive nights. ‘Love Song?’ ‘Love is not having to say SORRY.’

  5. I really don’t see how Daire’s comment warrants that diatribe. I wouldn’t respond to an old post, but I’m quite frankly appalled at what you’ve written.
    First of all, because you use a different numbering system for the Popes than does the Vatican, you must take some issue with the legitimacy of the Vatican’s own scholars on the matter.

    I think its ironic though that you clearly dislike that particular reform in 1961, but I’ve been reading this blog long enough to have serious doubts as to whether, even though you focus on papal politics, you are a progessive or liberal Catholic who has broken away from the Catechism.

    I think its right for the Pope to apologize about certain things. Especially the sex abuse scandal… in which Benedict XVI has been instrumental in bringing about better management and punishment on the issue. No, the thing in your comments that was APPALLING (if I can randomly intersperse all caps as well), is that you criticized the Inquisition. As close as your study is of “papabile”, I ASSUME that you are aware that while the Pope has apologized for Galileo’s sentencing for instance, or for the Crusade’s taking of Constantinople from the Orthodox Patriarch and Byzantines… There has been no apology for the inquisition as a whole. There has been no apology for the Crusades as a whole. Those 2 individual actions were against Christians. Those were two examples where the policies had stepped over the line.

    But you can’t honestly believe the Church needs to apologize about the Inquisition or Crusades as a whole?

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Rss Feed Tweeter button Facebook button Technorati button Reddit button Myspace button Linkedin button Webonews button Delicious button Digg button Stumbleupon button Newsvine button