The Dope on the Pope
- Thread starter Stu
- Start date
[MENTION=1871]muir[/MENTION]
First of all, I'm sorry that it has taken me so long to get back to you: the past few days have been rather busy for me.
Secondly, before I address anything else you said I need to address a misunderstanding that it seems you have. The Church was not founded by the Roman aristocrats of the Roman Empire for the intentions of preserving the power of the Roman Empire.
Historically speaking, Jesus Christ–whether you believe he is divine or not–was crucified by Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor of the province. This is attested to by the Roman historian Flavius Josephus. Jesus had a group of followers which the Romans thought were causing too much trouble in an already troubled part of the Empire, so they killed the leader (Jesus). After Jesus, the two other founders of the Catholic Church, Peter (the first pope) and Paul (Apostle to the Gentiles), were also both murdered by the Roman Empire, along with many of the popes up until the Edict of Milan in 313. Why would the Roman aristocracy establish a church to carry on their power when the Empire was at its height, and then proceed to murder its founders and persecute said church for the next 300 years?
I'm not meaning to dodge the bullet here on the other points that you've brought up, but before we can productively proceed, we need to have a basic historical understanding of how the Roman Catholic Church was established. If we don’t have that common ground, then nothing else will make sense.
First of all, I'm sorry that it has taken me so long to get back to you: the past few days have been rather busy for me.
Secondly, before I address anything else you said I need to address a misunderstanding that it seems you have. The Church was not founded by the Roman aristocrats of the Roman Empire for the intentions of preserving the power of the Roman Empire.
Historically speaking, Jesus Christ–whether you believe he is divine or not–was crucified by Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor of the province. This is attested to by the Roman historian Flavius Josephus. Jesus had a group of followers which the Romans thought were causing too much trouble in an already troubled part of the Empire, so they killed the leader (Jesus). After Jesus, the two other founders of the Catholic Church, Peter (the first pope) and Paul (Apostle to the Gentiles), were also both murdered by the Roman Empire, along with many of the popes up until the Edict of Milan in 313. Why would the Roman aristocracy establish a church to carry on their power when the Empire was at its height, and then proceed to murder its founders and persecute said church for the next 300 years?
I'm not meaning to dodge the bullet here on the other points that you've brought up, but before we can productively proceed, we need to have a basic historical understanding of how the Roman Catholic Church was established. If we don’t have that common ground, then nothing else will make sense.
The Roman Catholic church is founded on the premise of an apostolic succession from Peter. He is supposedly the rock the church is built on. Ok.....have you been to peter's grave? Can you show me the remains? Can you show me the evidence from leading historians of the day?
The Roman empire was suffering from over stretch. It was struggling from internal and external pressures in the same way the US empire is struggling today. Outside tribes that the Romans liked to label 'barbarians' were on the move because they themselves were being attacked by other tribes. Large groups of people were entering into Roman territories and it was difficult to marshall troops across the empire to keep everything together.
The romans had developed a massive trade in slaves and all that cheap labour meant that the lower classes were struggling for work. This created difficult economic conditions for them. Such economic conditions were fertile ground for radical thinking and christian thought was gaining traction amongst the poor. Apparently it was as hard for a rich man to get into heaven as it was for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle. Christianity offered the poor salvation in the next life and a sense of purpose in the present.
The roman aristocracy initially no doubt ridiculed this upstart religion but as it gained popularity they began to see it as a threat so they began persecuting christians and feeding them to the lions as a deterant, but this failed as a strategy. The only course of action was to commandeer the rising religion and bend it to the needs of the rich. The mystery schools of the mediteranean went underground and the roman hierophants looked to the new religion as a way of maintaining the status quo
Emperor Constantine who was himself a member of the Sol Invictus Cult (the cult of the invinsible sun) converted the empire to christianity to save the empire from being driven apart. However he was determined that the new state sanctioned religion was to be strictly controlled. He called a series of councils for example at Nicea and he sat in the middle of all the religious heads of the christian church in an excellent piece of PR management. Debates raged about the nature of christ with one faction the arians believing that christ was a man but first among god's creatures and another faction arguing that Jesus was of equal divinity with the father; The leader of the arian faction Arius stood up to talk at one point and was struck in the face. Their arguments were thrown out and the state imposed a strict line on the interpretation of the bible. Arius and his supporters were excommunicated and exiled. He was later poisoned.
Anyone who deviated from the official state line was deemed a 'heretic'. The Roman elite with Constantine at their head had taken control of the church and imposed a state sanctioned literal interpretation of the bible on the people. Allegorical readings were not accepted. This set a precedence with the Roman Catholic Church maintaining a stranglehold on the bible for centuries. It wasn't until the Reformation where a newly empowered merchant class rose up and became literate and began to read the bible for themselves that they saw how the RCC had been manipulating them.
The RCC was the biggest landowner in Europe at the time owning a third of the land and it felt threatened by the rising burgher (merchant) class so it sided with the aristocracy of Europe and the Royals of Europe to try and suppress them but they failed and a new synthesis of power was formed between the aristocrats, the church and the merchant class (including bankers)
Nowadays the vatican has been implicated in various financial scandals and the square mile it is situated in houses tax evaders and various financial criminals who cannot be reached by the Italian authorities due to the special status of the Vatican City
Roman aristocratic families are still in bed with the RCC for example the 'Black Nobility': https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Nobility
“The Papacy is not other than the Ghost of the deceased Roman Empire, sitting crowned upon the grave thereof.”- Thomas Hobbes
So to summarise and to answer your question: ''Why would the Roman aristocracy establish a church to carry on their power when the Empire was at its height, and then proceed to murder its founders and persecute said church for the next 300 years''
The answer is to hold onto their power. They could not crush the rising chrsitian religion the best they could do was to take ownership and control of it and to shape and mould its message to suit them and their interests, which is part of the reason Europe was fuedal for so long.
Once they had established a safe state sanctioned version of christianity they murdered anyone who had a different interpretation from the one being imposed eg the Cathars. They also stamped out the remains of older religions of europe which had their roots in shamanism placing their churches on the sacred sites of the older beliefs and carving crosses on wells, rocks and any other 'pagan' sites to sanctify them.
Behind the official literal version of the religion that was being pedalled to and indeed forced upon the common people there were other esoteric streams being used by the Roman elites who were still using the old mystery schools that went back to Babylon and Egypt. These esoteric streams were actually solar phallic cults and the ultimate solar phallic symbol the obelisk of Egypt can be found in the centre of the St peter's square
Patriarchal male orientated, sun and penis worship that is what is at the core of the Roman Catholic order. Once you understand that none of their actions throughout history will seem strange to you anymore
Okay, let’s keep this debate, for now, about the foundation of the Church. To try and tackle 2000 years of history in one post is simply too much and events and dates get mixed up.
First off, while I have been to the Tomb of St. Peter under St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome and seen the boxes where the bones of St. Peter lie, it is not known for sure that they are his bones: there is a lot of archaeological and circumstantial evidence which point to them being St. Peter’s bones, but we can never be 100% sure. HOWEVER, that has no bearing on whether or not Peter was the first pope. Even if the bones are not his, historical writings outside of the New Testament speak of Peter as being the first pope of the Roman Catholic Church.
The earliest writing that we have speaking of Peter as the first pope and showing that the papacy already had authority over the entire Church is the “Letter to the Corinthians,” (not the one in the Bible) written around the year 96, by Pope Clement I, the fourth pope. This letter was written to the Corinthians to solve a dispute that they had. In short, the dispute arose because the younger people in the community were trying to depose the older generation of presbyters (bishops and deacons). The Church in Corinth appealed to Clement I in Rome for a verdict. Clement I wrote back, saying that the community did not have the authority to depose the presbyters because the presbyters had authority through apostolic succession (they could trace their authority, through the laying on of hands, all the way back to the original Twelve Apostles).
The first marker showing the Clement I had authority outside of Rome was the fact that the Corinthians first wrote to Clement asking for a verdict: why would they do that if he did not have the authority to hand down a verdict? Now, an interesting fact is that when Clement wrote back, he did not speak in his own authority: he spoke in the name of the Church of Rome. This shows that, already in the year 96, it was an established tradition that the Church of Rome had authority in Church matters outside of its geographical area. In addition to this, Clement apologizes for not writing sooner, implying that he had a duty to solve the dispute. Finally, in the 59th paragraph of the letter, Clement states that the Corinthians have an obligation to obey him: “If, however, any shall disobey the words spoken by Him [God] through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and serious danger,” (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1010.htm).
The authority of the Pope was firmly established by the year 96. The Church was being actively persecuted by the Roman Empire under the reign of Domitian and, after some tumult over his assassination, Trajan, who became emperor in 98. Constantine would not be born for another 170 years, and would not become emperor for another 200 years. In addition, the barbarian invasions would not begin until around the year 400. Constantine and the barbarian invasions had no role in the founding of the Roman Catholic Church.
So, to summarize, we’re still at an impasse concerning the foundation of the Roman Catholic Church. It was not founded by the aristocracy of the Roman Empire, as I showed above. Again, if we do not have an accurate understanding of the history of the foundations of the Catholic Church, nothing in the subsequent years will make any sense. In your response, please include verifiable historical evidence to support your claims.
First off, while I have been to the Tomb of St. Peter under St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome and seen the boxes where the bones of St. Peter lie, it is not known for sure that they are his bones: there is a lot of archaeological and circumstantial evidence which point to them being St. Peter’s bones, but we can never be 100% sure. HOWEVER, that has no bearing on whether or not Peter was the first pope. Even if the bones are not his, historical writings outside of the New Testament speak of Peter as being the first pope of the Roman Catholic Church.
The earliest writing that we have speaking of Peter as the first pope and showing that the papacy already had authority over the entire Church is the “Letter to the Corinthians,” (not the one in the Bible) written around the year 96, by Pope Clement I, the fourth pope. This letter was written to the Corinthians to solve a dispute that they had. In short, the dispute arose because the younger people in the community were trying to depose the older generation of presbyters (bishops and deacons). The Church in Corinth appealed to Clement I in Rome for a verdict. Clement I wrote back, saying that the community did not have the authority to depose the presbyters because the presbyters had authority through apostolic succession (they could trace their authority, through the laying on of hands, all the way back to the original Twelve Apostles).
The first marker showing the Clement I had authority outside of Rome was the fact that the Corinthians first wrote to Clement asking for a verdict: why would they do that if he did not have the authority to hand down a verdict? Now, an interesting fact is that when Clement wrote back, he did not speak in his own authority: he spoke in the name of the Church of Rome. This shows that, already in the year 96, it was an established tradition that the Church of Rome had authority in Church matters outside of its geographical area. In addition to this, Clement apologizes for not writing sooner, implying that he had a duty to solve the dispute. Finally, in the 59th paragraph of the letter, Clement states that the Corinthians have an obligation to obey him: “If, however, any shall disobey the words spoken by Him [God] through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and serious danger,” (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1010.htm).
The authority of the Pope was firmly established by the year 96. The Church was being actively persecuted by the Roman Empire under the reign of Domitian and, after some tumult over his assassination, Trajan, who became emperor in 98. Constantine would not be born for another 170 years, and would not become emperor for another 200 years. In addition, the barbarian invasions would not begin until around the year 400. Constantine and the barbarian invasions had no role in the founding of the Roman Catholic Church.
So, to summarize, we’re still at an impasse concerning the foundation of the Roman Catholic Church. It was not founded by the aristocracy of the Roman Empire, as I showed above. Again, if we do not have an accurate understanding of the history of the foundations of the Catholic Church, nothing in the subsequent years will make any sense. In your response, please include verifiable historical evidence to support your claims.
Last edited:
Wait....what about the Reptoids?
Perhaps it is time for a woman Pope. Is there a strict law against that?
Last edited:
It seems like you haven't read my post at all
I said the Roman elite hijaked the Christian religion
Constantine played a role in the process of the elite taking control of the church
If you want to tie in barbarian tribes they often supported the arian position probably to keep some sort of independence from the Catholic church
So the key points here are that the Roman Catholic church is an instrument of the elites and that it is all about control
Can you please also include verifiable historic evidence in your claims as some old bones under the vatican won't cut it
I said the Roman elite hijaked the Christian religion
Constantine played a role in the process of the elite taking control of the church
If you want to tie in barbarian tribes they often supported the arian position probably to keep some sort of independence from the Catholic church
So the key points here are that the Roman Catholic church is an instrument of the elites and that it is all about control
Can you please also include verifiable historic evidence in your claims as some old bones under the vatican won't cut it
Last edited:
Yes there is
There was a female pope who pretended to be a man. After her gender was identified any pope to be since has had to sit on a seat with a hole in it so that church members can inspect under their robes to see that he has testicles before he is officially ordained as a pope
There will not be a female pope because as I have already explained it is a solar phallic cult; it is about male mysteries NOT female mysteries
Last edited:
I'm sorry, I did read your post, but I was thinking about what you said to me first in regards to how the Roman Catholic Church was founded:
Now you're saying this:
Which stance are you taking? These are mutually exclusive statements.
Constantine called the Council of Nicea in 325, however, that is all he did in terms of Church Councils. He died in 327, two years after the close of the Council (it only lasted for 2 months). The Council of Nicea condemned Arianism, as you pointed out, but after Constantine's death his successor in the East, Constantius II, was an Arian and only allowed Arianism in his part of the Roman Empire. However, his brothers, Constans and Constantine II, were both Catholics. From 327-350, the Empire was divided not only into geographical segments, but also by religion. By 350, when Constans and Constantine II had both died, Constantius II was the only Roman Emperor, and only allowed Arianism. The Catholic Church was, again, being persecuted: it was not under the control of the Roman elite. In fact, many prominent Catholics were rebelling against it, most notably among them Athanatius, the Patriarch of Alexandria in Egypt (296-373). These persecutions lasted until 361, when Constantius II died.
They also often took the Catholic position. They took both sides depending on which one benefitted them most politically. Whichever way the chieftain went, so went the tribe.
How is the Roman Catholic Church an instrument for the elites? If Constantine tried to make the Church his instrument, he failed miserably. The Church never came under control of the Roman aristocracy. Even when Arianism had sway over most of the Church (heck, almost all of the bishops except Athanatius were Arian at one point!), Nicene Orthodoxy won out, and that is still the belief today of almost all the different parts of Christianity. Again, this is despite the Roman aristocracy, which under Constantius II was entirely Arian.
I already talked about how whether the bones under the Vatican are St. Peter’s or not have no bearing on the validity of what I have said, and have included verifiable historical evidence:
Please see my previous post for the verifiable historical evidence.
I'm saying both. The Roman Catholic Churches current format was created, shaped and moulded by the elite. This elite took what was a growing grassroots movement and they co-opted it for their own ends
Interestingly there are other groups also claiming lineage back to christ for example the johannite line, gnostic writings from Mary and also there was Jesus's brother James who was murdered at the temple. Also if jesus was a member of a baptismal cult who brought people back into spiritual life through initiation and baptism then there are other groups claiming to operate usuing such rites
The Roman Catholic Church often ridiculed the much older mystery schools such as the one at Eluesis but the Catholic eucharist involves the ingestion of bread and wine which is a replication of the same symbolic act carried out at the mystery schools. The hierophants (preist caste) simply switched to the new religion.
Jesus is associated on the Kabbalistic tree of life with the sphere of tipherath which corresponds with the heart chakra and also with the sun. The number 666 is in numerology the number of man and of the sun. In the hebrew language the number six is rendered as a nail symbol. So 666 is written in hebrew as three nails. these three nails are the very same nails that symbolically nailed jesus to the cross.
The cross is the macrocosm and jesus represents man the microcosm. The sun emits energy in the form of photons. It has always been understood that the sun provides light, life, warmth and helps the crops to grow. Egyptian carvings show the life energy being emitted from the sun in the form of the ankh. Grapes make wine and grapes are the product of the sun as is wheat which is used to make bread. Bread and wine are the product of the sun.
Bread and sun are the flesh and blood of Christ the risen sun. The sun emits rays of light and men emit sperm which is also seen as the bringer of life in the esoteric systems. Taking the eucharist is the symbolic (and real) process of ingesting the product of the sun and of Jesus.
Tiphareth is the sphere of balance which balances the two pillars of severity and mercy on the tree of life....he is balance, he is the redeemer. But the point is that we are supposed to emulate Jesus...we too are supposed to balance out these two currents within our selves so that we may be the middle pillar of mildness.....to flow....like the tao
The name of god is the tetragrammaton. It is Yod He Vav He (YHVH) or Je-Ho-V-HaH...Jehovah
The hebrew symbol for spirit is the letter 'shin' which is a triple pronged symbol of fire. When a person manages to balance the currents of mercy and severity within their being and open their heart chakra to let in the holy spirit then they draw down the holy dove (shin/spirit) into their being and they become a christed consciousness.
This is rendered thus: Yod-He-Shin-Vav-He.....Je-Ho-Shin-V-HaH......Yeheshua.....Jesus
Jesus is the christed consciousness. The message was never that there is one person who has acheived union with spirit....the message was always that each person should seek to gain union with spirit
That is the most abomnable thing the Catholic church has done as it has sought to rob people of their spiritual heritage. It has said to people 'god is without' you must worship these icons and you must do what our priests tell you to do.
The Roman catholic church has sought to stand between people and god and to control their spiritual lives and that is why it is full of corruption, murder, rape and all the ills that come from those who operate only in the pillar of severity
It is an imbalanced order. It seeks to invert the truth. A religion symbolically started by a humble craftsman who advises people to give their wealth to the poor is housed in a jewel encrusted palace housing many of the worlds treasures. The church has intrigued across europe acting as king maker and controlling the land, the wealth and the minds of Europe.
As revelations says in metaphorical language the whore of babylon (the Catholic church) has courted all the kings and sure enough in reality the popes have been potographed schmoozing with all the leaders of christendom.
It is no suprise to me that the church has been implicated in widespread child abuse because an order that aligns itself with the current of control will manfest oppression in all its forms
I should think that your argument here should illustrate to you how fluid and flexible the elites are with their outward show of faith. This is because for them it is all a performance....a tool for controlling the masses and they will use it how they think is in their best interests
Sure they had to work with what was there...it was politically expediant to convert to christianity
Yes so as i said the Nicean council which constantine played a key part in has shaped the Catholic church. yes there has always been resistance to this interpretation but the catholic church in its current format is the result of that current winning out
Yes you and i both know that Rome is built on bones and its easy enough to scrape together some bones that might read the right thing if carbon dated
By 'historical evidence' do you mean the letter to corintheans that you mentioned?
The bible has undergone a lot of changes over the centuires and there has been a lot of dispute over things like translation, interpretation but there is also an issue over whether things have been edited or excluded
I'm afraid i wouldn't take your 'evidence' into a court of law
Last edited:
[MENTION=1871]muir[/MENTION]
Thank you very much for your detailed post. From the brief research that I did about the different terms you used to explain yourself, it seems to me like you're approaching this topic from the perspective of modern Gnosticism. I could be wrong, and if so I apologize. I honestly don't know anything about Kabbalah or much of what you spoke about, so I really cannot comment on it. In doing so, I'd probably only make myself look like a fool and offend you for butchering any explanation I could provide so badly.
With that said, I will leave you with this. Throughout all of your posts, you have been adamant about how oppressive the Roman Catholic Church is and has been, especially in regards to people's spirituality. I know that probably nothing I say will convince you otherwise, but in my own personal experience and in what I have been taught and learned on my own about Catholic spirituality, nothing could be farther from the truth. The Church teaches that in order for any authentic relationship with God to exist, it needs to be done freely. It cannot be forced upon someone. God stands at the door to our hearts and knocks, but will not force Himself upon us, for to do so would be to violate our freedom, which is a gift that God has freely given us; the only proper response is for us to give ourselves freely back to God. The Church, the pope, the bishops or priests cannot force people to give themselves to God, either. What they can do is provide the Sacraments to the people, thereby strengthening them in their faith journey, and preach the Gospel message as it has been handed down to us in the present day through the authority of the Apostles.
This Apostolic authority is something which causes a lot of people to cringe, because when we hear the word authority we automatically think of authoritarian regimes. But that is not the authority of the Church. The authority of the Church is like that of the mother hen, the analogy that Christ uses in His lament over Jerusalem: "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to you! How often would I have gathered your children together as hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not! Behold, your house is forsaken and desolate. For I tell you, you will not see me again, until you say, 'Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.'" (Matthew 23:37-39). Christ mourns here over Jerusalem because the city would not listen to Him and gather together with Him. In the same way, the Church mourns for the divisions of humanity and all of the pain that that division causes in people's lives. However, also like Christ, who was not afraid of calling out the evils that Jerusalem committed, so neither is the Church afraid to do today. I am not saying that the Church doesn't have problems, because that would be naive and stupid: the Church definitely has problems that need to be worked on and solved, the abuse scandal being one of them. What I am saying is that the Church is called to be like Christ, and to strive for that every day and in every aspect. Christ was merciful towards people, but He also was not afraid to condemn evil: the Church is called to do the same.
However, while the institutional Church is very important, it is not the entire Church. Another important part of the Church is the people of God here on earth, in some cases known as the Pilgrim Church. We are all on a pilgrimage to heaven; that is what this life is. And just as on a pilgrimage you need to have directions to point the way for you to go, so in this pilgrimage of life do we need directions. That is the role that the Institutional Church plays: it gives us directions. It's not that cut and dry, though, as nothing in this life really is. As I said before, free will is essential. If someone is forced to go on a pilgrimage, they may get something out of it later on, but chances are they will not get as much out of it as they would have if they were open and willing to go on the pilgrimage. So it is with the Church. If a person does not want to be there, they aren't going to get as much out of it as they would if they truly had the desire to be part of the Church. We are a pilgrim people who believe that the Institutional Church has the one true way of guiding us to God. Does this mean that we don't see value in other religious traditions? Absolutely not. The stance of the Catholic Church is that each religious tradition has some aspect of the Truth within it, but only the Catholic Church has the fullness of Truth. That may sound harsh, but it is what we believe, and frankly I don't understand how anyone could be a member of a religion and not think that their religious tradition is the one that is true. Relativism makes no sense to me, but that is another topic entirely. Back to the point, religion needs to be freely chosen. If something is not freely chosen, then it has no merit.
This has always been the belief of the Church. Whether or not it has always been put into practice correctly is another matter, but again, the Church as a people is not perfect. The popes have not been perfect, but they have been able to keep the teachings of the Church intact for 2000 years, and when you consider how many of the Medieval popes lived their lives, it is a wonder, and in some cases a miracle. As a Catholic, I see that as evidence of the Holy Spirit.
Despite her faults, I believe whole heartedly in the Catholic Church and in the Catholic faith. I am not perfect, and though I strive for perfection I readily admit that I will never reach perfection in this life: God-willing I will do so in the next. More than anything else, my hope in starting this conversation was to help show that the increasingly common view of the Church as the ‘whore of Babylon,’ as you put it, is not the True Church. There is so much beauty inherent within her. I am sorry that I was not able to show you that beauty, but I sincerely hope that, someday, you may become more open to seeing the Church as she really is. In order to do that, though, you need to let go of your view of the Church as a power hungry whore and realize the rich spiritual traditions that she holds. And I do encourage you to look at her fruits: the health care facilities she has founded and runs throughout the world, the educational institutions, the feeding of the hungry, the help for the poor, the clothing of the naked. The list goes on and on. But, more than anything else, the Church is concerned for the salvation of souls; of helping people come into communion with God, Who is the source of all life and is Life itself.
You may be very frustrated or angry with me for ending this conversation like this, and if so I am truly sorry. But based on the phrases and words that you have used, it seems to me like nothing I can say at this point will help you see that the Church is not as bad as you make her out to be, and so for me to continue would only frustrate us both more and so cause even more division. I also know that I have not always been as charitable as I could have been, and so for that I am sorry. Thank you for the time that you have spent talking with me, and for giving me some of the perspective of why some people hate the Catholic Church. While I do not agree with you, especially your interpretation of history, I realize that if I want to engage with others who are approaching the Church from the perspective of gnosticism and Kabbalah I need to do more research into it. So again, I am sorry if I have frustrated, angered, or offended you in any way; it was not my intent, and thank you for being honest with me. I wish you all the best.
Sincerely,
Joe
Thank you very much for your detailed post. From the brief research that I did about the different terms you used to explain yourself, it seems to me like you're approaching this topic from the perspective of modern Gnosticism. I could be wrong, and if so I apologize. I honestly don't know anything about Kabbalah or much of what you spoke about, so I really cannot comment on it. In doing so, I'd probably only make myself look like a fool and offend you for butchering any explanation I could provide so badly.
With that said, I will leave you with this. Throughout all of your posts, you have been adamant about how oppressive the Roman Catholic Church is and has been, especially in regards to people's spirituality. I know that probably nothing I say will convince you otherwise, but in my own personal experience and in what I have been taught and learned on my own about Catholic spirituality, nothing could be farther from the truth. The Church teaches that in order for any authentic relationship with God to exist, it needs to be done freely. It cannot be forced upon someone. God stands at the door to our hearts and knocks, but will not force Himself upon us, for to do so would be to violate our freedom, which is a gift that God has freely given us; the only proper response is for us to give ourselves freely back to God. The Church, the pope, the bishops or priests cannot force people to give themselves to God, either. What they can do is provide the Sacraments to the people, thereby strengthening them in their faith journey, and preach the Gospel message as it has been handed down to us in the present day through the authority of the Apostles.
This Apostolic authority is something which causes a lot of people to cringe, because when we hear the word authority we automatically think of authoritarian regimes. But that is not the authority of the Church. The authority of the Church is like that of the mother hen, the analogy that Christ uses in His lament over Jerusalem: "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to you! How often would I have gathered your children together as hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not! Behold, your house is forsaken and desolate. For I tell you, you will not see me again, until you say, 'Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.'" (Matthew 23:37-39). Christ mourns here over Jerusalem because the city would not listen to Him and gather together with Him. In the same way, the Church mourns for the divisions of humanity and all of the pain that that division causes in people's lives. However, also like Christ, who was not afraid of calling out the evils that Jerusalem committed, so neither is the Church afraid to do today. I am not saying that the Church doesn't have problems, because that would be naive and stupid: the Church definitely has problems that need to be worked on and solved, the abuse scandal being one of them. What I am saying is that the Church is called to be like Christ, and to strive for that every day and in every aspect. Christ was merciful towards people, but He also was not afraid to condemn evil: the Church is called to do the same.
However, while the institutional Church is very important, it is not the entire Church. Another important part of the Church is the people of God here on earth, in some cases known as the Pilgrim Church. We are all on a pilgrimage to heaven; that is what this life is. And just as on a pilgrimage you need to have directions to point the way for you to go, so in this pilgrimage of life do we need directions. That is the role that the Institutional Church plays: it gives us directions. It's not that cut and dry, though, as nothing in this life really is. As I said before, free will is essential. If someone is forced to go on a pilgrimage, they may get something out of it later on, but chances are they will not get as much out of it as they would have if they were open and willing to go on the pilgrimage. So it is with the Church. If a person does not want to be there, they aren't going to get as much out of it as they would if they truly had the desire to be part of the Church. We are a pilgrim people who believe that the Institutional Church has the one true way of guiding us to God. Does this mean that we don't see value in other religious traditions? Absolutely not. The stance of the Catholic Church is that each religious tradition has some aspect of the Truth within it, but only the Catholic Church has the fullness of Truth. That may sound harsh, but it is what we believe, and frankly I don't understand how anyone could be a member of a religion and not think that their religious tradition is the one that is true. Relativism makes no sense to me, but that is another topic entirely. Back to the point, religion needs to be freely chosen. If something is not freely chosen, then it has no merit.
This has always been the belief of the Church. Whether or not it has always been put into practice correctly is another matter, but again, the Church as a people is not perfect. The popes have not been perfect, but they have been able to keep the teachings of the Church intact for 2000 years, and when you consider how many of the Medieval popes lived their lives, it is a wonder, and in some cases a miracle. As a Catholic, I see that as evidence of the Holy Spirit.
Despite her faults, I believe whole heartedly in the Catholic Church and in the Catholic faith. I am not perfect, and though I strive for perfection I readily admit that I will never reach perfection in this life: God-willing I will do so in the next. More than anything else, my hope in starting this conversation was to help show that the increasingly common view of the Church as the ‘whore of Babylon,’ as you put it, is not the True Church. There is so much beauty inherent within her. I am sorry that I was not able to show you that beauty, but I sincerely hope that, someday, you may become more open to seeing the Church as she really is. In order to do that, though, you need to let go of your view of the Church as a power hungry whore and realize the rich spiritual traditions that she holds. And I do encourage you to look at her fruits: the health care facilities she has founded and runs throughout the world, the educational institutions, the feeding of the hungry, the help for the poor, the clothing of the naked. The list goes on and on. But, more than anything else, the Church is concerned for the salvation of souls; of helping people come into communion with God, Who is the source of all life and is Life itself.
You may be very frustrated or angry with me for ending this conversation like this, and if so I am truly sorry. But based on the phrases and words that you have used, it seems to me like nothing I can say at this point will help you see that the Church is not as bad as you make her out to be, and so for me to continue would only frustrate us both more and so cause even more division. I also know that I have not always been as charitable as I could have been, and so for that I am sorry. Thank you for the time that you have spent talking with me, and for giving me some of the perspective of why some people hate the Catholic Church. While I do not agree with you, especially your interpretation of history, I realize that if I want to engage with others who are approaching the Church from the perspective of gnosticism and Kabbalah I need to do more research into it. So again, I am sorry if I have frustrated, angered, or offended you in any way; it was not my intent, and thank you for being honest with me. I wish you all the best.
Sincerely,
Joe
Hi Joe
You've not frustrated or angered me your post is very measured and reasonable.
I also am not going to insult or attack your relationship with the ineffable. If your path is working for you then that's great
The only thing i have an issue with is the church as an institution. I understand that as you say it has carried out some humanitarian work but i'm afraid i see that as a cover
The robber barons of the 19th century sometimes turned to philanthropy as a PR exercise to try and improve their public image. Also in the UK at the moment a huge scandal has blown up in the news surrounding a celebrity who has died recently called Jimmy saville. Now that he has died it is becoming public knowledge that he was involved in widespread child abuse and traffiking
There are about 450 cases agaianst him and over 30 confirmed rapes. He acted as a procurer of children for the rich and powerful. Nothing was done against him when he was alive because he was protected by the authorities but now he is dead he is being scapegoated (he was only a small part of a wider network) along with a whole load of other dead politicians and business people who are also being publically named and shamed (no doubt to distract the public from the rapists who are still alive). Anyway Saville was well known for his charitable causes having raised millions for different causes including childrens charities
The freemasons also present themselves as philanthropists but i don't believe it
So i have no doubt there are good people in the church but the problem is that it is a pyramidal, coercive hierarchy and the problem with that kind of structure is that it is controlled by a handful of people at the top. It doesn't matter if there are good people lower down in the structure the will of the people at the top will steer the church
I believe that the people at the top of the church are not what many christians believe they are
I think a study in gnosticism and kabbalism as you suggest can only help in terms of engaging with people outside the church and with understanding the church itself better; i think the inner order of the church are kabbalists. When constantinople fell many people fled the greek speaking part of the roman empire and took many manuscripts with them. many of these manuscripts were about the hermetic sciences and this influx of new knowledge into Europe sparked off the renaissance. The church was not existing in a bubble and would have been influenced by hermeticism and kabbalah
Nice talking to you and all the best to you to Joe
muir
You've not frustrated or angered me your post is very measured and reasonable.
I also am not going to insult or attack your relationship with the ineffable. If your path is working for you then that's great
The only thing i have an issue with is the church as an institution. I understand that as you say it has carried out some humanitarian work but i'm afraid i see that as a cover
The robber barons of the 19th century sometimes turned to philanthropy as a PR exercise to try and improve their public image. Also in the UK at the moment a huge scandal has blown up in the news surrounding a celebrity who has died recently called Jimmy saville. Now that he has died it is becoming public knowledge that he was involved in widespread child abuse and traffiking
There are about 450 cases agaianst him and over 30 confirmed rapes. He acted as a procurer of children for the rich and powerful. Nothing was done against him when he was alive because he was protected by the authorities but now he is dead he is being scapegoated (he was only a small part of a wider network) along with a whole load of other dead politicians and business people who are also being publically named and shamed (no doubt to distract the public from the rapists who are still alive). Anyway Saville was well known for his charitable causes having raised millions for different causes including childrens charities
The freemasons also present themselves as philanthropists but i don't believe it
So i have no doubt there are good people in the church but the problem is that it is a pyramidal, coercive hierarchy and the problem with that kind of structure is that it is controlled by a handful of people at the top. It doesn't matter if there are good people lower down in the structure the will of the people at the top will steer the church
I believe that the people at the top of the church are not what many christians believe they are
I think a study in gnosticism and kabbalism as you suggest can only help in terms of engaging with people outside the church and with understanding the church itself better; i think the inner order of the church are kabbalists. When constantinople fell many people fled the greek speaking part of the roman empire and took many manuscripts with them. many of these manuscripts were about the hermetic sciences and this influx of new knowledge into Europe sparked off the renaissance. The church was not existing in a bubble and would have been influenced by hermeticism and kabbalah
Nice talking to you and all the best to you to Joe
muir
Last edited:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...3m-investment-includes-gay-sauna-8529670.html
[h=1]As cardinals gather to elect Pope, Catholic officials break into a sweat over news that €23m investment includes gay sauna[/h]
A day ahead of the papal conclave, faces at the scandal-struck Vatican were even redder than usual after it emerged that the Holy See had purchased a €23 million (£21 million) share of a Rome apartment block that houses Europe’s biggest gay sauna.
The senior Vatican figure sweating the most due to the unlikely proximity of the gay Europa Multiclub is probably Cardinal Ivan Dias, the head of the Congregation for Evangelisation of Peoples, who is due to participate in tomorrow’s election at the Sistine Chapel.
This 76-year-old “prince of the church” enjoys a 12-room apartment on the first-floor of the imposing palazzo, at 2 Via Carducci, just yards from the ground floor entrance to the steamy flesh pot. There are 18 other Vatican apartments in the block, many of which house priests.
The Holy See is still reeling from allegations that the previous pontiff, Benedict XVI, had quit in reaction to the presence of a gay cabal in the curia.
And with disgraced Scottish cardinal Keith O’Brien lending new weight to charges of hypocrisy against the Church’s stance on homosexuality, La Repubblica newspaper noted that the presence of “Italy’s best known gay sauna in the premises is an embarrassment”.
Cardinal Dias, who is seen as a social conservative even by the current standards of the church hierarchy, is no doubt horrified to learn of the activities taking place a floor below.
It is not known, however, if the former archbishop of Bombay has popped downstairs to give spitiual guidances to the clients of the Europa Multiclub, given his belief that gays and lesbians can be cured of their “unnatural tendencies” through the “sacrement of penance”.
The sauna’s website promotes one of its special “bear nights”, with a video in which a rotund, hairy man strips down before changing into a priest’s outfit. It says Bruno, “a hairy, overweight pastor of souls, is free to the music of his clergyman, remaining in a thong, because he wants to expose body and soul”.
There was further embarrassment for the Holy See when the press observed that thanks to generous tax breaks it received from the last Berlusconi government, the church will have avoided hefty payments to the Italian state. The properties are recognised as part of the Holy City.
Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, Pope Emeritus Benedict’s widely disliked right-hand man, who held the Vatican’s purse strings during the last pontificate, was said to have been the brains behind the purchase of 2 Via Carduccio in 2008.
Readers on Italian gay websites were quick to make jokes at the cardinals’ expense. One on the Gay.it site quipped: “’Oops, I took the wrong door, I thought it was the chapel.'…If you can’t go to the gay sauna for fear of being seen what do you do if you have millions of Euros stolen from Italians? You buy the apartment block with the sauna inside.”
[h=1]As cardinals gather to elect Pope, Catholic officials break into a sweat over news that €23m investment includes gay sauna[/h]
A day ahead of the papal conclave, faces at the scandal-struck Vatican were even redder than usual after it emerged that the Holy See had purchased a €23 million (£21 million) share of a Rome apartment block that houses Europe’s biggest gay sauna.
The senior Vatican figure sweating the most due to the unlikely proximity of the gay Europa Multiclub is probably Cardinal Ivan Dias, the head of the Congregation for Evangelisation of Peoples, who is due to participate in tomorrow’s election at the Sistine Chapel.
This 76-year-old “prince of the church” enjoys a 12-room apartment on the first-floor of the imposing palazzo, at 2 Via Carducci, just yards from the ground floor entrance to the steamy flesh pot. There are 18 other Vatican apartments in the block, many of which house priests.
The Holy See is still reeling from allegations that the previous pontiff, Benedict XVI, had quit in reaction to the presence of a gay cabal in the curia.
And with disgraced Scottish cardinal Keith O’Brien lending new weight to charges of hypocrisy against the Church’s stance on homosexuality, La Repubblica newspaper noted that the presence of “Italy’s best known gay sauna in the premises is an embarrassment”.
Cardinal Dias, who is seen as a social conservative even by the current standards of the church hierarchy, is no doubt horrified to learn of the activities taking place a floor below.
It is not known, however, if the former archbishop of Bombay has popped downstairs to give spitiual guidances to the clients of the Europa Multiclub, given his belief that gays and lesbians can be cured of their “unnatural tendencies” through the “sacrement of penance”.
The sauna’s website promotes one of its special “bear nights”, with a video in which a rotund, hairy man strips down before changing into a priest’s outfit. It says Bruno, “a hairy, overweight pastor of souls, is free to the music of his clergyman, remaining in a thong, because he wants to expose body and soul”.
There was further embarrassment for the Holy See when the press observed that thanks to generous tax breaks it received from the last Berlusconi government, the church will have avoided hefty payments to the Italian state. The properties are recognised as part of the Holy City.
Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, Pope Emeritus Benedict’s widely disliked right-hand man, who held the Vatican’s purse strings during the last pontificate, was said to have been the brains behind the purchase of 2 Via Carduccio in 2008.
Readers on Italian gay websites were quick to make jokes at the cardinals’ expense. One on the Gay.it site quipped: “’Oops, I took the wrong door, I thought it was the chapel.'…If you can’t go to the gay sauna for fear of being seen what do you do if you have millions of Euros stolen from Italians? You buy the apartment block with the sauna inside.”
Man....this just gets better and better.
I wonder if any one else in the world is watching this lunacy unfold? Last week I saw a headline on Google news where one pope wannabe was claiming he'd stay till he died..... Hahahahahahaha
I wonder if any one else in the world is watching this lunacy unfold? Last week I saw a headline on Google news where one pope wannabe was claiming he'd stay till he died..... Hahahahahahaha
A group of legal experts called the International Tribunal into Crimes of Church and State are seeking to arrest the pope and the queen of england for crimes against humanity
They have issued an arrest warrant for the pope:
[video=youtube;eyk4n2lXhpE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyk4n2lXhpE[/video]
Here's a link to their website: http://itccs.org/what-to-do/
Here's their 'what to do page':
a) Formally endorse the Tribunal and its Aims, and add your name and that of your organization to our List of Sponsors.
b) Write to your government and ask that they support the ITCCS and its investigation into crimes by churches and governments.
c) Organize a local forum in your community where survivors of church torture and other crimes can document their evidence, which will then be recorded into the Proceedings of the ITCCS.
2. Help us to research and document the evidence of crimes by church and state:
a) Interview survivors of these crimes in your community, record their stories, and help create local video libraries containing this evidence.
b) Research local archives and government and church records for the evidence of crimes in their facilities.
c) Organize academic and public conferences on the theme of crimes against humanity by churches and governments.
3. Educate Yourself and Others:
a) Order and distribute our book Hidden No Longer: Genocide in Canada, Past and Present, which can be downloaded free of charge and our film UNREPENTANT . Offer these resources to libraries, colleges and the media in your community.
b) Hold a public screening of UNREPENTANT in your community and invite Kevin Annett to come and speak at the event.
c) Order educational material and leaflets from our Tribunal (Education Kit No. 1) and distribute them outside Catholic and Protestant churches responsible for crimes.
4.Take Direct Action:
a) Hold protests, memorial vigils and civil disobedience actions at churches and government facilities where children and others were harmed or died, demanding to know where the deceased children are buried, and calling for their return to their families for a proper burial, and for a surrender of those persons responsible for their deaths.
b) Publicly identify and perform citizens’ arrests on those persons responsible for these crimes .
c) Create common law courts of justice where the perpetrators of murder and other crimes can be tried and sentenced.
5. Refuse to Cooperate with Murderous Institutions:
a) Boycott the churches that harmed or killed children – Refuse to attend their services or rent their facilities, or if you do attend, withhold from them all donations, tithing and bequests. (See the sample Declaration of Conscience form below)
b) Withhold all tax payments to those governments that colluded and continue to help conceal these crimes..
c) Write to your government and demand that the charitable tax-exempt status of the churches that harmed or killed children and others be revoked.
6. Send us a donation, which will be used to produce our books and film and fund our research and travel costs:
To send donations, contact the ITCCS at: genocidetribunal at yahoo.ca for information.
Sample Pledge of Conscience Form to deposit at a Catholic, Protestant or other church that harmed or killed children:
Pledge of Conscience
I, the undersigned, cannot in good conscience contribute money to this church until it returns the remains of the children who died under its care and fully discloses their fate and cause of death.
Until this occurs, I am refraining from financially supporting this church. I will not make any form of donation or pledge to this church, nor will I rent your facilities. I will urge others to conduct a similar boycott of your institution.
____________ _________ _________
Name
____________ _________ _________
Date
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
They have issued an arrest warrant for the pope:
[video=youtube;eyk4n2lXhpE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyk4n2lXhpE[/video]
Here's a link to their website: http://itccs.org/what-to-do/
Here's their 'what to do page':
Taking Action - What You Can Do:
1. Support our International Tribunal into Crimes of Church and State (ITCCS):a) Formally endorse the Tribunal and its Aims, and add your name and that of your organization to our List of Sponsors.
b) Write to your government and ask that they support the ITCCS and its investigation into crimes by churches and governments.
c) Organize a local forum in your community where survivors of church torture and other crimes can document their evidence, which will then be recorded into the Proceedings of the ITCCS.
2. Help us to research and document the evidence of crimes by church and state:
a) Interview survivors of these crimes in your community, record their stories, and help create local video libraries containing this evidence.
b) Research local archives and government and church records for the evidence of crimes in their facilities.
c) Organize academic and public conferences on the theme of crimes against humanity by churches and governments.
3. Educate Yourself and Others:
a) Order and distribute our book Hidden No Longer: Genocide in Canada, Past and Present, which can be downloaded free of charge and our film UNREPENTANT . Offer these resources to libraries, colleges and the media in your community.
b) Hold a public screening of UNREPENTANT in your community and invite Kevin Annett to come and speak at the event.
c) Order educational material and leaflets from our Tribunal (Education Kit No. 1) and distribute them outside Catholic and Protestant churches responsible for crimes.
4.Take Direct Action:
a) Hold protests, memorial vigils and civil disobedience actions at churches and government facilities where children and others were harmed or died, demanding to know where the deceased children are buried, and calling for their return to their families for a proper burial, and for a surrender of those persons responsible for their deaths.
b) Publicly identify and perform citizens’ arrests on those persons responsible for these crimes .
c) Create common law courts of justice where the perpetrators of murder and other crimes can be tried and sentenced.
5. Refuse to Cooperate with Murderous Institutions:
a) Boycott the churches that harmed or killed children – Refuse to attend their services or rent their facilities, or if you do attend, withhold from them all donations, tithing and bequests. (See the sample Declaration of Conscience form below)
b) Withhold all tax payments to those governments that colluded and continue to help conceal these crimes..
c) Write to your government and demand that the charitable tax-exempt status of the churches that harmed or killed children and others be revoked.
6. Send us a donation, which will be used to produce our books and film and fund our research and travel costs:
To send donations, contact the ITCCS at: genocidetribunal at yahoo.ca for information.
Sample Pledge of Conscience Form to deposit at a Catholic, Protestant or other church that harmed or killed children:
Pledge of Conscience
I, the undersigned, cannot in good conscience contribute money to this church until it returns the remains of the children who died under its care and fully discloses their fate and cause of death.
Until this occurs, I am refraining from financially supporting this church. I will not make any form of donation or pledge to this church, nor will I rent your facilities. I will urge others to conduct a similar boycott of your institution.
____________ _________ _________
Name
____________ _________ _________
Date
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..