Friday, May 03, 2013

The Dr. Monteith story -- live and on air, Part II, tomorrow morning

I had a lot of good response to Dr. Monteith's interview on my program last Saturday morning.  He was telling us much that we had not heard before about what motivated him, a brilliant orthopedic surgeon to take up research on the critical topics he has.  He will be back with us tomorrow on the air. He was so very pleased to hear that even Ruth of Exeter was listening -- all the way to England!

Join us at 7 a.m. Pacific time, 10 a.m. Eastern time for the whole 2 hour program.  Dr. Monteith will be with me again the second hour.  That will be 8 a.m. Pacific time, 11 a.m. Eastern (New York) time.

Tune in and stay tuned!



Constance Cumbey said...

To To 2:40 p.m. on the last post before this one:

I believe I know who you are. I NEVER stopped doing serious research on the New Age Movement which is ongoing and continuous. YOU VERY WELL KNOW THIS! Your actions unfortunately sometimes remind me of school bullies who get up gangs against less popular classmates. I was terribly bullied in school as a youngster. It probably toughened me for what was to come, but also let me know when it is ongoing for others. For that reason, if for no others, I dislike passionately the attempts to chase people such as Joyce, Christine, and others off the blog. At least Christine uses her name so the COLLAPSE COMMENTS feature can be used for those so determined to avoid her. No, I certainly do not agree with many of Christine's perspectives. But I don't agree with yours either which appears to get internet gangs and cliques up against those not saying what you feel they should say.

If you are really opposed to the New Age, you should avoid these ugly tactics which frankly are much of what drives others into the seemingly friendly arms of New Agers.


Constance Cumbey said...

Just discovered this looking at my personal library again last night, but EUSTACE MULLINS and "GYEORGOS CERES HATONN (GYEORGOS C. HATONN) were relied upon by Daniel Estulin as information sources for his book on THE SECRET HISTORY OF THE BILDERBERGS. I believe Estulin who is from Spain tried to be honest -- one more example of why we should do our own research and question everything. Mullins had a very evil both New Age and anti-Jewish agenda to the extreme. If he had told me it was raining, I would go to the window and look because I wouldn't have believed him. He contaminated Gary Kah's works even though I had given Kah prior warnings on same.


Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

that name Hatonn is interesting. I didn't know it belonged to anyone claiming to be human. In the channeled from aliens scene, that is the name of one of them. "Commander Hatonn," who I think has rather fascist leanings. for example.

I'm not an expert on this or any other channeled entity, because I don't read their stuff.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

well, here's another attack on Christianity

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

yep the alleged alien and the G. C. Hatonn guy are the same.

a long time ago I concluded that if aliens are messing with us, given the totalitarian and immoral and abusive culture we get glimpses of from the info leaked accidentally to abductees (not all of whom require hypnosis to get anything but details and some no hypnosis at all), then they are going to want to destabilize things.

In the US, the best way to do this would be to promote social collapse and the rise of warlords, by means of patriot militia revolt, or exploitation of a collapse.

sure enough, this guy (without soaking myself in his stuff) seems from a google glance to be promoting mindsets that facilitate this.

Recently on the patriot "de jure" restore common law and have a "real" government scene that incl. having the republic for a given state or for America, elections, governors and president to take over when the time is right type scene, there is some character claiming that everyone must rise up in arms when he gives the signal, and aliens will support the revolt.

Hatonn allegedly gives 99% correct precise predictions. I think his name crops up in connection with channeling "the nine" which Lynn Picknett and someone else exposes as likely a rogue CIA black op fraud, in THE STARGATE CONSPIRACY. Of course these writers are New Age and anti Christian and so forth, but this particular book is valuable for this expose.

Sounds like some element in the shadow government with its deep underground military bases and other stuff, wants a major war with the militia crew. Since the better armed better organized nazoid Continuity of Government crew would win, this would be the situation that would permanently suspend the Constitution and put the maniacs in charge with control of the nukes.

the likely resulting WW 3 would be of advantage to the globalists who hitherto have used the US for their purposes, but eventually must reign in our comparative chaos and free in theory media and elections to accomplish world wide totalitarianism.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

granted the warlord scene and the central govt. takeover scene are inconsistent, but the former would give way to the latter.

Anonymous said...

Constance, It makes no difference who any of us are(or it shouldn't have anyway...)The same old-same old tactic of the loudest squeeeeeeling wheel gets the grease & is enabled to continue another day-the "complex personality" who showboats just like a kid on the schoolyard, who has marginalized your work by broadening the base for every stripe and type of bogus conspiracy and unproven science on the planet, has managed well to obscure a huge share of serious research of your intended topics by not letting them shine through. Collapse comments and there is little Christine's sheer volume of "smoke screens"(her posts and ensuing monotonous pointless arguments i guess some feel need to engage in). But if you are fine with it, be fine with it or not, this place has fast become a waste of time..........I am not part of a gang and all on my own I have grown tired of what has happened here. Was good for a time during the almost 3 years I have come here-but now-not so much.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

"Collapse comments and there is little left"

that being the case, there would be little left anyway even if I weren't here. But I notice you go after anything I post even stuff that is the latest thing in globalist games, which is the purely physical side of the issues Constance addresses.

I think you have an ulterior motive. not brave enough to target Constance directly, unless you were the one who used to post all that spam after spam after spam that used to clutter up this forum years ago, you go after things even when I specify take the wheat and leave the chaff or words to that effect, which Constance also has done.

not being willing to specify what you think is the truth, I can only assume your real reason is to disrupt and clutter and increase noise to signal ratio.

John Rupp said...

Thank you for that link on the Pentagon may start imprisoning and/or court martialing soldiers who share their Christian faith. We should all keep a very watchful eye on this. This is very sobering.

Anonymous said...

The truth is what Constance has been finding (evidently for years) and I pay attention to her posts and research (and the so few that have remained here). No struggle to follow Constance to know what deceptions are playing out in real time for the new age message to continue to force and manufacture to re-create every facet of human thinking & living on the earth. You have made yourself a divider not a uniter to that set purpose in condescending manner and links to the absurd. So I am done. I'll continue to find the latest info about one world politics/religions true agenda from other sources. Not worried that our paths will cross since you are determined to chase your own tail in such a public way here on this blog. If the owner of this blog is content to give you her pity vote you better take it.

John Rupp said...

To be fair to the Department of Defense and the Pentagon on the issue of sharing faith in the military, here is the official response from the DOD on their own website. They are saying that the supposed news on the military court martialing and or imprisoning soldiers for sharing their faith is absolutely not true.
Here is the link.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

"“The Department of Defense places a high value on the rights of members of the military services to observe the tenets of their respective religions and respects, [and supports by its policy] the rights of others to their own religious beliefs, including the right to hold no beliefs,” Navy Lt. Cmdr. Nate Christensen said in a written statement on the issue.
“The department does not endorse any one religion or religious organization, and provides free access of religion for all members of the military services,” he added."

note that the right to share same beliefs is not included in this list.

"The right to practice religious beliefs does not excuse airmen from complying with directives, instructions and lawful orders, the instruction says."

incl. when being told to shut up and not offer info or talk to the curious?

This sounds like an "oops, we were caught out, time to CYA."

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

so much for the GOP as the Christian hope for American

Susanna said...

Dear Constance,

I thought you might find this interesting.

Daniel Estulin may or may not be living in Spain now, but he is reportedly a Russian expatriot who claims to have been kicked out of the Soviet Union in 1980.

Among his most ardent admirers is none other than Fidel Castro who thought Estulin's book Los secretos del club Bilderberg " a fantastic story."

On August 19, 2010, the Cuban state news agency Prensa Latina published the full text of a "reflection" by former President Fidel Castro which was devoted to quoting Estulin from Los secretos del club Bilderberg, on the topic of "The World Government." The selected quotes from Estulin's book focused on material credited to Lyndon LaRouche and members of his movement.

Apparently, word about Fidel's admiration for Estulin's conspiracy theories got around:


As the following gem of an article indicates, the socialists are not amused....

Daniel Estulin and the phony 'Bilderberg conspiracy'

Statement from the Party for Socialism and Liberation

September 1, 2010

While much of what the article says about Estulin might be valid, the thing that had me rolling on the floor is the statement that "Marxism rejects conspiracy theories" - "false conspiracy theories" that is.

Apparently, only the worldwide Marxist "class struggle" is the "true conspiracy theory."

It is the opinion of the socialists that Estulin’s worldview is incompatible with revolutionary Marxism. :-)

Susanna said...


Here is another fine article by Cliff Kincaid.



By Cliff Kincaid
June 5, 2012
_____________________________ is almost reminded of Sorcha Faal.

Constance Cumbey said...

The people making me feel as though I am walking on eggshells dealing with them who throw tantrums if I write an article for NewswithViews have done far more to slow down my work than Christine. Frankly, I wish her posts were fewer and further in between, but your bullying and marginalizing are not helping anything and are doing more to poison the atmosphere here than Christine.


Anonymous said...

Funny, funny Constance. When I was giving you information I found without ever challenging you, there was no complaint. Queen of the hill you are not any more. Of course you know who I am. While I truly respect what you did in the past, it's past. Your words about not being antisemitic are just that, words, similar to the words of any New Age politician. (Be careful people...New Age antisemitism leads to New Age anti-Christianity over time.)

Don't complain about my posts. Just pretend that I am someone like Christine, who you say you don't agree with but who you never post anything against New Age that she spouts. I've done 30 plus years of research against the New Age movement,similar to you, and I have called it as I see it. I didn't back off against them because they had power and sounded so sweet.

Bullying when you were a child. How old are you now? We were all bullied as children. Forget it and move on. You have power and you have a great intellect. Don't play emotional games.

And no, I'm not part of any gang of people who are concerned about your feelings. People I know continue to post because they still hope there is a place where information against the New Age appears.

Where in the heck is the old Constance, the brilliant woman who made such a change in the world around her? Doing radio shows with old information and praises for her? You have lots of years ahead of you Constance.

Anonymous said...

The strike in Damascus is much more important than the small talk on this blog.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

we will see if it happens in our lifetime or not. There is also the issue of 1. how literal exact and how poetic and partly physical partly political and for how long to last was it meant and 2. how much of the Damascus of the time is buried and Damascus rebuilt to now merely an extension?

These issues may mean it has already happened, which does not in itself rule out it happening again.
There is a certain tendency for prophecies to play out twice.

Right now there are 3 flash points for WW 3, two of which could result in either case in Damascus' destruction and the third one MIGHT do so.

1. Syria, Russia backs Assad. 2. Iran, Russia and China and Pakistan back Iran. 3. the Pacific, incl. North Korea.

A good saying is "never mind what they say, look at what they do." China is telling NK publically to cool it, but before the saber rattling started China was moving troops to the NK border, capable of backing NK in a ground war. China is also making a fuss again over disputed islands with Japan and disputing fishing waters with the Philippines. NK is most likely to result in war, but if this happens, the other issues in the Pacific will probably go active.

time will tell. Obama will probably take us into WW 3, if at all, slowly. McCain would have had us in there by now. Both are controlled by the same puppet masters, and you don't need Estulin's dubious sources to figure that out, the independent information is out there. observed behavior is out there. (for the second or third presidential election, I forget which now, I did not vote for either candidate, this however I wrote in my cat Bill as write in candidate and added "vote for Bill
the cat, he's where its at," my campaign slogan for him.)

John Rupp said...

Anon 6:10 PM
The Israeli strike on Damascus is very significant and this developement will have to be watched closely.

Syrian officials are calling this a declaration of war by Israel. This could be just enough to draw Iran into this and turn into an all out middle east war. Israel also deployed their "Iron Dome" missle defense system on their northern border. Israel is saying they are targeting any arms in Syria that could be sent to Hezbollah to use to attack Israel.

Anonymous said...

Isaiah's prophecy that Damascus would be reduced to rubble is not so clear. Damascus claims to be the world's oldest city thaty has been continually inhabited, from a time before Isaiah, and at first glance this suggests that the prophecy has not been fulfilled and that it will get nuked. But I would like to check its earthquake record. And this could still be how it happens if it hasn't happened yet.

Susanna said...

Anonymous 6:10 and John Rupp,

Just this morning I learned some rather startling news......namely, that the UN is accusing the Syrian rebels ( not Assad ) of Chemical weapons use in Syria.

U.N. has testimony that Syrian rebels used sarin gas: investigator

GENEVA | Sun May 5, 2013 6:13pm EDT

GENEVA (Reuters) - U.N. human rights investigators have gathered testimony from casualties of Syria's civil war and medical staff indicating that rebel forces have used the nerve agent sarin, one of the lead investigators said on Sunday.

The United Nations independent commission of inquiry on Syria has not yet seen evidence of government forces having used chemical weapons, which are banned under international law, said commission member Carla Del Ponte.

"Our investigators have been in neighboring countries interviewing victims, doctors and field hospitals and, according to their report of last week which I have seen, there are strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof of the use of sarin gas, from the way the victims were treated," Del Ponte said in an interview with Swiss-Italian television.

"This was use on the part of the opposition, the rebels, not by the government authorities," she added, speaking in Italian
.....reads more...


UN accuses Syrian rebels of chemical weapons use

Syrian rebels have made use of the deadly nerve agent sarin in their war-torn country's conflict, UN human rights investigator Carla del Ponte has more...


Was it the Syrian rebels that used chemical weapons?

posted at 9:21 am on May 6, 2013 by Ed Morrissey


If you think about it, this is not so far out as it seems at first. Many are clamoring for Assad to go. But if Assad were to fall, one has to wonder who would take his place? Moreover, if Assad's would-be successors are the ones who are using the chemical weapons, we had better be very careful about aiding and abetting those who are trying to overthrow him in Syria,

If I tend to doubt that the Russians want to see Assad go, it is on account of the arms deals that they have already made with Assad. It seems to me that the people who would most like to see Assad fall are the Iranians who recently sent the weapons to Syria that the Israelis just destroyed, al-Qaeda , the Muslim Brotherhood and all their terrorist confreres.

On the one hand, the UN could be blowing smoke. On the other hand, this could be the Arab version of the Reichstag fire - most likely caused by the Nazis - which led to laws that deprived people of nearly all their civil liberties and brought Hitler to power.

Assad is a dirtbag to be sure, but when you think about what is replacing Mubarak in Egypt and Qaddafi in Libya, when it comes to Syria, one is reminded of the old aphorism "better the devil you know."

Constance Cumbey said...

I agree fully -- what has happened in Syria is much more important than "small talk" on this blog. I just wish that some people on this blog wouldn't think it their personal mission to chase others from my blogspot and the open forum I allow here. If people don't like what Christine says, either ignore her comments or offer factual refutations, not personal insults. All my life I have disliked pettiness and unfortunately some of my best friends are displaying it here.


Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

if you follow the alternative news (with caution), there is no question but that the Syrian rebels have been equipped with chemical weapons by the US or NATO (essentially the same thing), and that al Qaeda is the backbone of the revolt. US opposes them elsewhere, supports them in Syria.

Russia has EXPLICITLY stated Assad should stay.

Everywhere the Arab spring has won, Christians of all sorts come under fire much more than before. Why would Iran want Assad to fall? I think they have a mutual defense treaty with Syria.

Anonymous said...

Why is this blog useless? Because it was set up to fight the New Age movement and instead it has turned into Christine's Conspiracy Website with no opposition from Constance. Let's call it the CCCC, Constance Christine Conspiracy Column.

Right now across the US a major fight against New Age is taking place. A major New Age connection is pushing Common Core, a major takeover of the education system across the US, where the federal government will determine what is taught in every school system across the US using local taxpayer money to pay for it. The New Age connection paying for it? The Bill Gates Foundation which is connected with the Lucis Trust system. And that connection is through his being part of New Group of World Servers according to their website. Other than having someone one foot away from you spit in your eye, it couldn't be clearer and more open. His InBloom company will be gathering the information gathered on you and your family through the school, using it for God knows what purposes plus selling it to others.

All of this is online and easily checked out. Yet after thirty plus years of information on the New Age movement being available no one here, including Constance, is writing about it and sharing what they have found. No one is sending others to websites fighting Common Core, exposing the New Age connection.

What is left...
Christine probably will point to a sentence she wrote back heaven knows when, Constance will say she is so tired, other will say we are in end times and Jesus will take care of all of it, just trust and pray.

The New Age leaders will sit back and say...suckers.

Constance Cumbey said...

Assad was an ophthalmologist who never wanted to be a politician. He has given relative shelter to Christians in Syria that will undoubtedly disappear when he leaves or is forced out. I too am smelling THE ARMAGEDDON SCRIPT in this series of unfortunate events.

Many thanks to SUSANNA for the excellent contribution!


Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

anon has a good point that people should fight the common core thing, though harping about it here over and over is nothing but preaching to the choir.

TOOLS AGAINST THIS that I can think of, and offer to any here to use, are
1. equip children against it. notice that the whole system starts from the last phase of knowledge category (aside from content
of information about it), and ends with the person, the reverse of how all creatures learn.

take a hand in educating your kid and helping them to induce curiosity in other kids. broadside this thing. but keep under its radar, don't attract trouble with "home schooling" and taking the kid out of school, but supplement the schooling.

2. the very fact that the common core stuff goes in REVERSE of normal development can be used against it in arguing in PTA and so forth and to legislators and school boards.

Anonymous said...

Christine,your input is stupid and useless as anyone who researches Common Core and those who oppose it can easily find out.

Instead of trying to make yourself important, take a few days off and learn what really is going on. You might find you can really make a difference.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

if you want to fight it, its boots on the ground, and use the weapons I just gave you. there are probably others, but this is what I got for now. basic principle, evil is out there in the world, always has been, incl. in the US. innoculate the kids against it. isn't that what the family is for? sounds like you are the one who is trying to be important. shut up and get to work.

Susanna said...

U.S Schools Adopting Muslim Common Core Standard Idea
Posted: January 8, 2013 in CAIR, muslim brotherhood, Schools
Tags: CAIR, Common Core Standards, ISNA. COnvention, School
Should’ve known. All across the U.S the push for Common Core State Standards is on, and guess who is behind this push? The Muslim Brotherhoods number one front organization ..ISNA ( Islamic Society of North America) more...

Susanna said...

Outrage as high school recites Pledge in Arabic saying ‘One Nation Under Allah’

Guest Contributor | May 3 2013

By Janet Levy

The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) is a Muslim Brotherhood front group that supports Hamas. CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism funding trial in U.S. history – the Texas Holy Land Foundation Hamas-funding trial that took place in Dallas from 2007-2009.

Reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in Arabic with the substitution of “Allah” for G-d is an attempt to sanitize and normalize Islam to win student acceptance.

The CSCOPE and Common Core curriculums promote Islam and give short shrift to Judaism and Christianity. Students are taught that “Allah is the Almighty G-d” and that Christianity is a cult. (Islam refers to Jews as “apes and pigs.”) more...

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

hah! islam had no play in establishing the USA which is post revolution against brits and totally anglo in origin with input from indians and peripheral (to us) elements.

the presence of islamic seafarers means nothing. The viking presence, Chinese and Japanese again has no relevance, since the former (and the welsh contingent) and the latter were absorbed into first nations cultures and bloodlines, mostly in the west.

so its a big "so what?" piri reis map (a turkish sea captain) might incl the new world I forget, but it was the spanish and anglos and french who built what we have now.

Anonymous said...


I offer Christine factual refutations when she has spoken incorrectly about physical science, and tailored explanations of what is really going on, but she rejects them. She reacts similarly regarding other topics. And she posts almost nonstop. THAT is why some of your guests here get frustrated.


Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

really? there is plenty of evidence even in Christopher Columbus' own logs, he reports the presence of Chinese junks. Surely the Europeans of the time know one when it is seen or described. Ming Dynasty pottery has been found in Zimbabwe ruins, and the extinct Phu Quoc Island Dog has its duplicate in the Rhodesian Ridgeback. If Africa why not America?

I won't belabor this, but a few years digging in libraries and a few days on google should find you some interesting stuff.

Anonymous said...

140 years ago "Allah" would have been the correct word to use when translating the Bible into Arabic, as its literal meaning is "THE God". By by now it has so many Islamic connotations that such a translation is unhelpful and it is obvious that CAIR were up to trickery.

Anonymous said...

Wise realpolitik re Syria:

Anonymous said...

Sorry, missing zero - that should be "1400 years ago" at 2.21pm, ie

1400 years ago "Allah" would have been the correct word to use when translating the Bible into Arabic, as its literal meaning is "THE God". By by now it has so many Islamic connotations that such a translation is unhelpful and it is obvious that CAIR were up to trickery.

Anonymous said...

2:33 p.m. April 24, 2013 offering from Christine follows:

Menstruating women have long been noted to often have effects on the rate at which food spoils and flowers wilt.

witches of the down and dirty real thing sort have long valued menstrual blood.

living vampires with a psychic bent have observed a different psychic flavor to menstrual blood.

I personally know the smell is not the same as that of normal blood.

How's that for the "helpful" info that comes from Christine's non-stop blah blah blah?-with some added yuck on top of the way too much personal info that really really really does (oh please) get to the point of the topic of current new age policies unilaterally (all across the globe) being implemented as we speak...collapse comments won't help the poor newbie to this blog.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

Anonymous said...

Big deal Christine. Anyone can go on line and find links to the fight by those against Common Core. There are many, yet no one has shown a link to New Age which is what this blog is supposed to be about. Neither you nor Constance brought this up on this blog and neither of you has shown any more information about the connection.

I brought this up hoping someone, anyone, could add to the information I presented. Instead Constance is silent and you, Christine, just yammer on about "stuff".

I have no following. I have no funding. I have no organization. It's just me sitting by the computer at this point in my kitchen. Thirty years plus of work trying to warn others about New Age and this is what I have. And what does it lead to, arguing with a simplistic person who talks about "stuff" and has the support of a person like Constance.

Twenty years from now academics will be writing about how a Holocaust happened and how hundreds of thousands were killed, including some of you and your family members who are reading this. History repeats.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

Constance is hardly silent. do you read anything she writes that isn't on the forum but on the blog front page which is all and only her posts?

"Robert Muller long ago claimed to have developed the "global core curriculum". He then said that he couldn't take personal credit -- that he had to give credit where credit was due -- to the Tibetan Master Dhwhal Khul. For the benefit of the 'uninitiated,' that was the 'presence' or more likely demon speaking through Alice Ann Bailey and her Lucifer Publishing Company renamed in 1923 as Lucis Publishing Company 'Tibetan telepathically dictated' writings."

Wednesday, April 24, 2013
Global Core Curriculum -- Robert Muller is dead but his AAB inspired 'Global Core Curriculum' lives.

you can't get more of a New Age connection than that.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

I might add, that it is easy enough for anyone to put core curriculum and new age in a search engine and find all those connections.

but the majority of people you have to persuade to drop it, don't care about the NAM or maybe like it, and you have to scale your arguments to things that matter to them. That incl. legal and practical issues.

And of course, since the purpose of core curriculum is dumb kids down and throw the focus off personal identity into a big picture that blurs everything, there are going to be practical problem issues that can be exploited to stop this.

Anonymous said...

I was the one who pointed out the connection between Muller and Common Core. I sent the information out in a email message to many people on Tue, April 23, 2013 12:46:44 AM. Constance has been on my email list for a very long time. I posted the information on this blog.

Based on what has transpired since then, it really doesn't matter. No one reads this blog any more to learn what is going on regarding the New Age movement or to share what they have researched. It's the CCCC website.

If that's what people want to read, it doesn't matter what I've researched. You have your audience Christine, and Constance has lots of postings on her blog. The world is full of people who watch American Idol or other such shows. You are entertainment, nothing more.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

well, Constance accepted the information and put it on her blog. don't try to write her out of this.

there are lots of pages on the web that tackle the NAM some as overview some in more detail some focussed on one part of it some on another.

how do you know what other people do how many read this blog or don't? there is a lot of sharing going on here Susanna and John Rupp have put information links and article excerpts here on this segment of the forum, and others earlier. you have some kind of tunnel vision.

Anonymous said...

Is anybody out there willing to set up a mirror site to this one with Christine's comments edited out?

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

I was going to suggest, why don't you set up your own page and say all the stuff you want to say? perhaps if you are not wrapped up in your anger you will do something constructive.

Anonymous said...

In reply Christine, why don't you put your comments on your own blog rather than lower the quality of this one?

Anonymous said...

"I wish her posts were fewer and further in between" - Constance on Christine, 10:01 PM above.

Anonymous said...

I came across this video. Very scary if it is TRUE!!! Any thoughts??? It looks like the Armageddon Script is being played out...

Craig said...

I find it strange that the Core Curriculum is backed by the Muslim Brotherhood all the while the homosexual agenda continues to be pushed unabated in these same schools. Strange bedfellows [pun not intended].

On a somewhat related note, I've been skimming through D.A. Carson's book Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church: Understanding a Movement and Its Implications [2005, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI] and found this astute observation:

"...[M]any homosexuals label anyone 'homophobic' who dares to make a case, no matter how careful, reasoned, compassionate, and humble that the practice of homosexuality is wrong. I cannot be certain, but I suspect that nowadays there is more danger of homophobia-phobia than there is of homophobia...." [pp 171-172]

Craig said...

Vatican invites Buddhists to help build culture of life

Extract from the article follows:

Vesakh is a major Buddhist holy day that commemorates the birth, enlightenment, and death of Gautama Buddha.

According to tradition, the historical Buddha was born, achieved enlightenment and passed away during the full moon of the month of May. This means that Vesakh is a movable feast, which this year falls on May 24 or 25, depending on the country it is celebrated in.

On those days, Buddhists visit local temples to offer the monks food and to hear the teachings of the Buddha, taking special care to meditate and to observe the eight precepts of Buddhism.

This year's message is entitled: “Christians and Buddhists: Loving, Defending, and Promoting Human Life.” The letter is signed by Cardinal Tauran, prefect of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, and Father Miguel Angel Ayuso Guixot, the council’s secretary.

Cardinal Tauran also recalled that Pope Francis believes in the importance of interreligious dialogue.

Why would the Vatican promote, in any form or fashion, Gautama Buddha? I hope this isn't some sort of oblique nod to either Wesak or "World Invocation Day":

Since 1952 World Invocation Day has been observed as a global day of spiritual healing.

Just to be clear: This is not an attempt at "Catholic bashing", it's a sincere question and concern. I'd ask the same as to why the likes of Rick Warren would promote a similar sort of ecumenical dialogue as he's done, and is currently doing, as a board member of Tony Blair's ecumenical Faith Foundation.

Anonymous said...


Interreligious dialogue is not the same as compromising one's own principles.

You have to sometimes meet people where they are.

The early Christians did not refuse to dialogue with pagans.

In fact St. Catherine of Alexandria was a pagan convert, whom the pagan King sent 100s of his philosophers to debate her. She ended up converting every single one of them.

We have to plant the seeds and let God do the rest.

There is a new website being launched called and it’s designed to be the central place of dialogue between Catholics and atheists.

"Strange Notions gets its name from St. Paul’s speech at the Areopagus in Acts 17:16–34. There he proclaimed the Resurrection to the intellectual elite of the ancient world, who responded by saying, “you bring some strange notions to our ears; we should like to know what these things mean.” helps those asking the same thing today. Open-minded atheists will encounter reasonable arguments for God and his Church, maybe for the first time in their lives, and like St. Paul’s listeners they’ll leave intrigued by these strange notions.

The site's creator Brandon Vogt, has gathered several top Catholic minds to contribute to the site. Right now we have over 30 on board, including Dr. Peter Kreeft, Dr. Edward Feser, Fr. Robert Barron, Fr. Robert Spitzer, Dr. Benjamin Wiker, Dr. Christopher Kaczor, Dr. Janet Smith, Dr. Kevin Vost, Christopher West, Jimmy Akin, Jennifer Fulwiler, Marc Barnes, Leah Libresco, Stacy Trascanos, Mark Shea, Tim Staples, Carl Olson, and many more."

Craig said...

anon 1:35,

The thing is, the Apostle Paul used Mars Hill as an opportunity to promote the God of Christianity (as their "unknown god"), in other words, it was an expressly evangelistic effort. Finding out about the religious beliefs of other religions is one thing, promoting it on one's own 'denominational' (I use the term not to speak of the RCC as a denomination, but as convention) forum the specifics of the Buddhist belief of Gautama Buddha's "enlightenment" (nirvana) in such a matter-of-fact manner does not seem like 'mere' "dialogue" to me, as it looks like promotion instead. Why no sort of disclaimer? Are Catholics to seek a similar state of 'enlightenment' as Gautama Buddha?

Do you realize that per Alice Bailey/New Age that Gautama Buddha was "the Christ" who directly preceded Jesus as "the Christ" for the Piscean Age?

Susanna said...

Craig 8:33 A.M.

Insofar as "homophobia" is the natural revulsion that unnatural acts invite in most people, then I am definitely a "homophobe" with apologies to no one.

This "homophobia" twaddle is all part of the Marxist "conscientization" strategy by which people are guilt tripped into buying into Marxist "morality" which is not morality at all.....just politics.

And when it comes to Marxism, politics is all about the "class struggle" which included "gay vs. straight."

Of course, "conscientization" is the height of hypocrisy on the part of the Marxists because Marxism is militantly atheistic. And as Ivan says in THE BROTHERS KARAMAZOV - "If God does not exist then everything is permitted." INCLUDING HOMOPHOBIA!

Speaking of "strange bedfellows," have you ever heard of the "dancing boys of Afghanistan?"


Afghanistan sees rise in ‘dancing boys’ exploitation


Susanna said...

Craig 9:50,

I do not believe that your intention is Catholic bashing.

Yours is a perfectly legitimate question.

Moreover, I would like you to know that I would have the same concerns as you if I had reason to believe that the Vatican were actually peddling Buddhism.

You will probably recall the "Assisi Conferences."

Then Josef Cardianl Ratzinger - who later became Pope Benedict XVI - was not too thrilled with Pope John Paul II's decision to convoke this conference because the thing he feared would happen did happen....namely, people thought that the Catholic Church was promoting syncretism - even though Pope John Paul II went out of his way to insist that there was no such intention to do so.

In fact, the absence from Assisi of Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, the prefect for the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, was not improperly interpreted as the self-distancing of the cardinal who, by his office, is the custodian of sound Catholic doctrine.

The pope himself did not escape criticism.

There have been memorable occasions during the papacy of Pope John Paul II which can be said to have fostered confusion among the laity regarding the truth of the Catholic faith, especially concerning the Church's relationship to other religions, but the most controversial and oft-mentioned was the 'Day of World Prayer for Peace' at Assisi -- in 1986,and in January 2002, following the 9/11 attacks and a time of high tension between Islam and Christianity.

While the interfaith gatherings in Assisi were conceived and carried out with the most orthodox of intentions, and can certainly be defended as such, their potential for promoting confusion among the laity regarding the salvific truth of the Catholic Christian faith had to do with the fact that even though the idea was far from John Paul II's intention, the message that came out of this meeting, for many, was one of a kind of United Nations of faiths. It seemed to speak of a multireligious coexistence in which each faith was as good as the other, and among which the Catholic Church took its place as an equal.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and its Prefect, Cardinal Ratzinger were quoted as saying of Assisi 1986 "this cannot be the model" for ecumenical dialogue.

Believe me, Craig, I couldn't agree more!!!!

Susanna said...


Craig, I read the article you linked us to and I do not interpret it as a promotion of Buddhism by the Pope.

That same article is from the Catholic news Agency and Cardinal Tauron's actual quote reads thus:

Cardinal Tauran also recalled that Pope Francis believes in the importance of interreligious dialogue.

“Pope Francis, at the very beginning of his ministry, has reaffirmed the necessity of a dialogue of friendship among followers of different religions. He noted that: ‘The Church is … conscious of the responsibility which all of us have for our world, for the whole of creation, which we must love and protect. There is much that we can do to benefit the poor, the needy, and those who suffer, and to favor justice, promote reconciliation, and build peace.’”

It seems to me that the "dialogue" the Pope is talking about is a "dialogue of friendship" and that there are things that we can do as human beings to make the world a better place to live in.

Susanna said...

Is That Occupy Portland Dancing Around a Golden Calf on May Day?

May. 5, 2013

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

the article says that this was a statement that the golden calf or bull they called greed was the false god of the general public, wall street, big business, politicians, etc.

Susanna said...

Pope Francis: “There can be no dialogue with the prince of this world”

May 04, 2013

Susanna said...


That may be partly true, but many of these little OWS punks who trash the private property of others while decrying eeeeeevil Capitalism are themselves Starbucks coffee drinking trustfund brats sporting the latest i-pods and other pricey accoutremonts while manifesting the anarchistic brainwashing their parents have paid big bucks for at Moonbat colleges whose "professors" are granola eating Berkenstock n'sock wearing losers like Bill Ayers and his ilk who hate this country and teach their students to hate it as well.

Even for those OWS punks who are not so well off, the "politics of envy" is no less a golden calf than the "politics of greed."

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

true to a large extent. my point was, they weren't starting a pagan cult, but denouncing the equivalent of a pagan cult.

that Occupy had a lot of middle class and upper middle class people in it means really nothing, this is precisely the element that has the time to look into things. However, Occupy had no formal structure or coherent plan, and were easily coopted and infiltrated and some incidents were as much the fault of police agents making them look bad as of the despicable filth category of anarchists moving in and getting a place to play like Berkeley 1960s riots or something and non stop party.

Occupy doesn't so much hate America as hate Wall Street and the values that America has let take over, which are on the face of it unbiblical anyway.

Craig said...


I don’t even care for the term homophobia. There’s acrophobia (fear of heights; ‘acro’ from Gk. akros "at the end, the top" + phobia = fear), and, likewise, there’s arachnophobia (fear of spiders; from Gk. arakhnē “spider” + phobia); so, what’s homophobia? The prefix homo means “same kind” – therefore, what? ‘fear of same kind’? While I still have a bit of acrophobia, or fear of heights, I don’t suffer from ‘fear of same kind’. Is this some sort of mental condition recognized by either/both/and the American Psychological or Psychiatric Associations?

But, even if we accept that the prefix homo refers to homosexuality, do we then also accept that one who opposes homosexuality in any form or fashion has a fear of it? Does that necessarily follow?

Similarly, I don’t wish to go along with the hijacking of the term fundamentalism to mean, essentially, extremism. So, if a 3rd grader learns the times tables, does s/he become an extremist? “I see you’ve mastered the times tables and you’re using them in your calculations. You mathematical fundamentalist, you. I bet you’re a homophobe, too.”

As regards the other links you referenced, I wasn’t even aware of the distinction between pederasty and pedophilia. I think it’s a distinction that could well provide a bridge towards a larger acceptance of pedophilia. By reading the links it seems that pederasty follows the usual pattern of the abused eventually becoming the abuser; so, if pederasty can gain wider acceptance, then this, in turn, could make it much easier for folks to ‘turn a blind eye’ towards pedophilia, as is being done by some cultures currently with regard to pederasty.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

pederasty is essentially homosexual, and historically it was the relationship of an almost teen to teen youth to an older man who would tutor him in manliness, and the relationship would cease at adulthood. (Athens.) pedophilia however can be homosexual (usually) or heterosexual.

The key is that the pedophile wants persons either same sex or opposite sex who are prepubescent, but the term is now used to refer to that and any underage person incl. "jail bait," a physically mature girl who is technically under the age of consent (whatever that is, varies per state and country with some distinctions sometimes as to age to legally marry and age to legally have sex without marriage).

Anonymous said...

Multifaith gatherings? St Paul wrote: "What fellowship can light have with darkness? What harmony is there between Christ and Belial?...What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God…Be separate, says the Lord" (from 2 Corinthians 6:14-17). How separate? We should gladly befriend people of other faiths as we find them in our daily lives; we should unite with people of other faiths against secular evils; we should debate people of other faiths in front of uncommitted audiences (including online) so that the audience can hear or see the Christian position stated and defended; but where is the good in taking part in multifaith gatherings in which people discuss their own religions amongst each other? If prayer is offered at a multifaith gathering, TO WHOM?

Craig said...

Following are Alice Bailey’s instruction as to what should be done to celebrate Wesak/Vesakh:

When the Great Lord was on Earth, He told His disciples that successful spiritual effort of a healing nature went not forth except by prayer and fasting. Will you ponder on these words? This is a group effort towards a vast group healing and by prayer (sanctified desire, illumined thought and intense aspirational longing) and by the discipline of the physical body for a short period and for a definite objective, the work can be done.

What is it that should be accomplished at each momentous full moon in May? I shall state the objective sequentially and in the order of their importance, and with as much clarity and brevity as this abstruse subject permits.

1. The releasing of certain energies which can potently affect humanity, and which will, if released, stimulate the spirit of love, of brotherhood and of goodwill on the earth. These energies are as definite and as real as those energies with which science occupies itself and calls the "cosmic rays." I am speaking of real energies and not of emotionally desired abstractions.

2. The fusion of all the people of goodwill in the world into an integrated responsive whole.

3. The invocation and the response of certain great Beings, Whose work can and will be possible if the first of the objectives is achieved through the accomplishment of the second objective. Ponder on this synthesis of the three objectives. By what name these Living Forces are called is entirely immaterial. They can be regarded as the Vice-Regents of God, Who can and will cooperate with the Spirit of Life and of Love upon our planet, the One in Whom we live and move and have our being. They may be regarded by certain thinkers as the Archangels of the Most High, Whose work has been made possible through the activity of Christ and His body of disciples, the true and living Church. They may be regarded by others as the guiding heads of the planetary Hierarchy, Who stand behind our planetary evolution, and Who seldom take an active part in the world activity, leaving it to the Masters of the Wisdom except in the time of an emergency such as this. By whatever name we call Them, They stand ready to aid if the call comes forth with sufficient strength and power from the aspirants and disciples at the time of the May full moon and the June full moon.

4. The evocation from the inner side of a strenuous and one-pointed activity on the part of the Hierarchy of Masters, those illumined Minds to Whom has been confided the work of world direction. A responsiveness is desired and can be effective between the following three groups:

Craig said...

a. The waiting and (at this time) anxious Hierarchy-anxious because even They cannot tell how humanity will react and whether men will be wise enough to avail themselves of the proffered opportunity. They stand, organised under the direction of the Christ, the Master of all the Masters, and the Teacher alike of angels and of men. He has been constituted the direct intermediary between the earth and the Buddha, Who is, in His turn, consecrated intermediary between the entire waiting Hierarchy and the attentive Forces.

b. The New Group of World Servers, composed at this time of all those sensitive and consecrated servers of the race whose objective is world peace, who aim at the establishing of goodwill on earth as the basis for future living and world expansion. Originally, this group was composed of a handful of accepted disciples and consecrated aspirants. Its ranks have been opened - . . to all those people of goodwill who are willing to sacrifice themselves for the helping of humanity, and who see no separating bar of any kind, but feel alike to the men of all races, nationalities and religions.

c. The masses of men and women who have responded to the ideas which have been set forth, and who react favorably to the objective of international understanding, economic interdependence and religious unity. When these three groups of thinkers and servers are brought en rapport with each other, and when the three groups can be aligned, even momentarily, much can be accomplished; the gates of the new life can be opened, and the inflow of the new spiritual forces can take place. Such is the Group objective and idea.

Craig said...

Following is the message sent by Jean-Louis Cardinal Tauran representing PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE to “Buddhists Friends”:

1. On behalf of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, I am happy to offer again, this year, heartfelt congratulations on the occasion of Vesakh/Hanamatsuri. It is my wish that this annual feast may bring joy and serenity to the hearts of all of you throughout the world.

2. Today, more and more in classrooms all over the world, students belonging to various religions and beliefs sit side-by-side, learning with one another and from one another. This diversity gives rise to challenges and sparks deeper reflection on the need to educate young people to respect and understand the religious beliefs and practices of others, to grow in knowledge of their own, to advance together as responsible human beings and to be ready to join hands with those of other religions to resolve conflicts and to promote friendship, justice, peace and authentic human development.

3. With His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI, we acknowledge that true education can support an openness to the transcendent [ED: is my Transcendent the same as yours?] as well as to those around us. Where education is a reality there is an opportunity for dialogue, for inter-relatedness and for receptive listening to the other. In such an atmosphere, young people sense that they are appreciated for who they are and for what they are able to contribute; they learn how to grow in appreciation of their brothers and sisters whose beliefs and practices are different from their own. When that happens there will be joy in being persons of solidarity and compassion called to build a just and fraternal society giving thus hope for the future (Cf. Message of World of Peace, 1st January 2012).

4. As Buddhists you pass on to young people the wisdom regarding the need to refrain from harming others and to live lives of generosity and compassion, a practice to be esteemed and recognized as a precious gift to society. This is one concrete way in which religion contributes to educating the young generation, sharing the responsibility and cooperating with others.

5. As a matter of fact, young people are an asset for all societies. By their genuineness, they encourage us to find an answer to the most fundamental questions about life and death, justice and peace, the meaning of suffering, and the reasons for hope. Thus they help us to progress in our pilgrimage towards Truth. By their dynamism, as builders of the future, they put pressure on us to destroy all the walls which unfortunately still separate us. By their questioning they nurture the dialogue between religions and cultures.

6. Dear friends, we join our hearts to yours and pray that together we will be able to guide the young people by our example and teaching to become instruments of justice and peace. Let us share the common responsibility we have towards the present and future generations, nurturing them to be peaceful and to be peace makers.

Craig said...

From the Pope’s message cited earlier: “There can be no dialogue with the prince of this world: let this be clear! Today, dialogue is necessary among us humans, it is necessary for peace. … But with that prince, it is impossible to dialogue; one can only respond with the Word of God who defends us, for the world hates us…”

Ephesians 6:12: For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.

It’s not the flesh and blood, it’s the spirit behind the flesh and blood.

Now, of course, there are not direct correlations between these two statements (Bailey’s and the Cardinal’s), yet there ARE some similarities, which I’ve tried to highlight without going into a lengthy one-for-one/line-by-line comparison.

My suspicions are raised because of the timing as well as the promotion of Vesakh/Wesak at the link I referenced yesterday, which mentions matter-of-factly the ‘enlightenment’ of Gautama Buddha. So, while this is not meant to be an indictment against the Catholic church, it is a concern. I see this as not much different than those of Protestant persuasion who have one foot on one side and one foot on the other.

Craig said...

The Cardinal's message above was from last year.

Susanna said...


I don't care for the term homophobia either. For that matter, the words "heterosexual" and "homosexual" are relatively new term as well. Before those terms entered our lexicon in the mid-nineteenth century, homosexuals were often referred to by the more biblical term "sodomites."

This is just my opinion, but the more modern terminology seems to have been created with a view towards "normalizing" what has been regarded as a moral perversion and an "abomination" in the Judeo-Christian tradition.

Anonymous said...

"the words "heterosexual" and "homosexual" are relatively new term as well. Before those terms entered our lexicon in the mid-nineteenth century, homosexuals were often referred to by the more biblical term "sodomites.""

I'd go further Susanna, and question the very category (so that names are irrelevant). The Law of Moses is careful to forbid sexual acts between men and does not raise the notion of orientation. That fine essay by Dennis Pager which Dorothy pointed us to makes very clear that most so-called homosexuals have had heterosexual experience so are making informed choice:

Prager understands the issue rather better than the last Archbishop of Canterbury, who wrote the foolish statement that he considered the Levitical prohibitions to be on so-called homosexuals seeking sexual variety.

Anonymous said...

Constance, just an update from the Shift Network. I believe the people noted in this article are tied directly to this New AGe business. I have followed the Shift Networks movements for a couple of years now. Marianne Williamson is a worry too. I see she has a do on of her own where she is honouring Sister Joan Chittister. Sister Joans blog on Huff Post. Her thoughts on Bebedicts retirement. Now it really bothers me that a Benedictine Nun would be receiving an award at any event run by Marianne Williamson. What is with these so called nuns?

Concerned , OZ.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

the terms about perversions were developed as categories in the psychiatric and legal scene, when these things were still considered abnormal.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

"Prager understands the issue rather better than the last Archbishop of Canterbury, who wrote the foolish statement that he considered the Levitical prohibitions to be on so-called homosexuals seeking sexual variety."

agreed. however if you want to use the latter's phrasing, let's face it, God called seeking sexual variety an abomination, so we're back to square one no matter who phrases it how.

Susanna said...


Re: Cardinal Tauran

I don't know much about Cardinal Tauran, so I have been doing a little research on him.

The following is from his biography:

He (Cardinal Tauran )went on to describe his role as president of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, ..."Every human being has a religious dimension. Between believers we try first of all to know each other. And the first thing you have to do is to proclaim your faith because you can not build that dialogue on ambiguity. When we are understood, we have to see what separates us and what unites us and to put those commonalities at the service of society. Dialogue is not for the consumption of the community. It's at the service of society. And remember that man doesn't live only on bread. There are spiritual dimensions. Believers have a special role to play in the public dialogue".

Unfortunately, the "dialoguing" that takes place between certain Catholic bishops and leaders of non-Christian religious leaders - especially since the Second Vatican Council - is often abysmally lacking in a point where it can be mistakenly understood by lay Christians to mean that "one religion is as good as another."

I DO NOT believe that "one religion is as good as another."

As a traditional Catholic Christian, I learned that the "one religion is as good as another" mentality is a heresy as well as the sin of "religious indifferentism."


The term given, in general, to all those theories, which, for one reason or another, deny that it is the duty of man to worship God by believing and practicing the one true religion. .....

....In the Catholic Church, the belief that one religion is as good as another, and that all religions are equally valid paths to salvation, is believed to be obviously false, on the grounds that nobody honestly believes that, for instance, a religion based on human sacrifice and the subjugation of rivals is as good, true, and beautiful as one based on heroic love of God and neighbor. The condemnation of Indifferentism as a heresy is closely linked to the dogmatic definition that outside the Church there is no salvation, a complex idea postulating that many people are followers of Christ without any specific understanding that it is in fact Jesus whom they are following more....

I also learned as a Catholic Christian that whatever goodness or truth may be contained in non-Christian religions is "a preparation for the Gospels."

This means that if Cardinal Tauran were to explicitly declare Buddhism to be "just as true" as Christianity, he would be a heretic, probably excommunicated ipso facto and I would be under no obligation to pay attention to what he had to say.

I hope I have made myself clear!

Susanna said...

Anonymous 11:33

That fine essay by Dennis Pager which Dorothy pointed us to makes very clear that most so-called homosexuals have had heterosexual experience so are making informed choice:

I recall that article Dorothy pointed us to, and agree with it.

Anonymous said...

Anon@11:33 a.m.

Sexual orientation is a recent concept. So the writers of the bible were not talking about it as an identity. Homosexual couple would have been unknown to them.

They were talking about homosexual actions.

Homosexuality was tolerated in many cultures, but what is different about us is that we call homosexual sex an identity, when others saw it as a preference, rather than something hard-wired like race, or eye colour.


Craig said...


I never doubted for one second your stance on this issue.

Unfortunately, the "dialoguing" that takes place between certain Catholic bishops and leaders of non-Christian religious leaders - especially since the Second Vatican Council - is often abysmally lacking in a point where it can be mistakenly understood by lay Christians to mean that "one religion is as good as another."

Yes, and I concede the difficulty in putting some sort of disclaimer on every single statement. But, then again, with something this important, a certain redundancy may be in order, just so all readers are clear on the intentions of the speaker.

I also learned as a Catholic Christian that whatever goodness or truth may be contained in non-Christian religions is "a preparation for the Gospels."

This means that if Cardinal Tauran were to explicitly declare Buddhism to be "just as true" as Christianity, he would be a heretic, probably excommunicated ipso facto and I would be under no obligation to pay attention to what he had to say.

While I agree with the thrust of this statement, I find that many (speaking of those of Protestant persuasion here) do not ever explicitly make such overtly syncretistic, heretical statements, yet some statements seem to implicitly accede points which run counter to their other orthodox statements, or the ambiguity in some statements can cause raised eyebrows. A case in point is Rick Warren, who will say all the right things at the right times, all the while promoting other things that cause suspicion. It’s duplicitous.

Back to Cardinal Tauran, the info you cite on Wikipedia is orthodox (mostly, see below), yet his statement re: Gautama Buddha can provoke confusion as to his stance. E.g., has he changed his mind since the quote cited on Wiki? Yet on the Wiki statement, I flat out do not like this part, “…And remember that man doesn't live only on bread. There are spiritual dimensions.…” As a Christian I strongly believe that man can only live on the “Bread” of Jesus Christ, the true Bread of life, any other “bread” does not provide life. I get his point, that each person has a spiritual dimension, but it sure could have been worded better. The way it’s phrased could be construed such that ‘my bread is as good as your bread’.

And, I’ll add, the section between the ellipses is flat out confusing! The part in bold completes this statement:

He went on to describe his role as president of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, saying, "you have to remember that interreligious dialogue is not dialogue between religions. It's dialogue between believers. It's not a theological, philosophical exercise. First you have to accept that we live in a world that's plural: culture, religion, education, scientific research. Every human being has a religious dimension.

A “dialogue between believers”?! “Believers” of what exactly? I think he’s trying to say that the interreligious dialogue (discussions among adherents of different religions) is somehow also a dialogue among believers in/of the RCC. Huh?

Susanna said...


I pretty much agree with your concerns......especially with regard to some of Cardinal Tauran's statements And I am not the only Catholic who does.

You are right. Many of those who are veering in a syncretistic direction do not make explicit statement. If they do not do so, it is because they know that they would be leaving themselves open to official censure.

This was what happened with many of the documents of the Second Vatican Council. Some of the documents were weasel-worded in such a way as to allow for the most liberal interpretations.

One of more notorious liberal theologians involved with the Council is Hans Kung. I have publicly taken him on - especially with regard to his book "
Does God Exist?" in which he very cunningly places the divinity of Christ in doubt with his insinuation little "questions" that reminded me of the Pharisees "little questions" designed to trip up Jesus Christ Himself.

You yourself have pointed out, you would be no less disturbed if it were someone like Rick Warren muddying the theological waters.

I appreciate that.

If I am not mentioning Protestants here who do similar things, it is because I feel that Protestants are more qualified than I am to police their own.

Anonymous said...

Where can we find the public record of your riposte to Hans Kung and any resulting dialogue, Susanna?

Anonymous said...

Concerned OZ,

The average age of these so-called nuns is 74. They picked the wrong time to move beyond Jesus.

They refuse to leave, simply because they would be another splinter group that nobody would pay attention too.

Anonymous said...

Of course they are not going to leave the Catholic church even if they become raging pagans, at 74 they have nowhere to go to and no means of support.

Anonymous said...

It's rude when you are distracted playing with your computer while you are doing a radio interview. It's disrespectful to Dr. Stan and it's rude to the audience.
I stopped listening when it appeared you couldn't give your full attention to doing the show. My time is valuable too.

Anonymous said...

Anon@2:04 p.m.

They do have means of support. Some of them are being ordained (even though it's fake) by liberal Protestant church's while they claim to be Catholic.

Craig said...

I would hardly call St. Andrews United Church of Christ a "liberal Protestant" - liberal, definitely; Protestant, absolutely not. This "church" openly welcomes anyone without regard to religious background, sexual orientation, etc:

If this former Carmelite nun wishes to go outside the RCC, yet continues to claim that she remains a Catholic nonetheless, that's her own prerogative, though, of course, it doesn't make her a Catholic in the RCC sense. But, I see nothing suggesting this church is even remotely Protestant. It's clearly a New Age church.

Anonymous said...


The United Church started out as Protestant. they have turned New Age, much like the Episcopal church today.

"The United Church of Christ (UCC) is a mainline Protestant Christian denomination primarily in the Reformed tradition,[1] in "historical continuation of the Congregational churches founded under the influence of New England Puritanism."[2] The Evangelical and Reformed Church and the Congregational Christian Churches united in 1957 to form the UCC. These two denominations, which were themselves the result of earlier unions, had their roots in Congregational, Evangelical, and Reformed denominations. The UCC's 5,287 congregations claim 1,080,198 members, primarily in the United States.[3]

The UCC maintains full communion with other mainline Protestant denominations. "

Craig said...

The UCC can make whatever claim it wants; yet, I'm quite sure that any other true Protestant church would not return the "full communion" claim.

I certainly wouldn't claim any sort of solidarity with the UCC nor the Episcopalian, among some others, which have obviously turned apostate. The primary Protestant doctrine of sola Scriptura is quite obviously violated. None could, with any sort of intellectual honestly, sanction any sort of same-gender union as congruent with sola Scriptura.

I concede that my definition of "liberal Protestant church" is not the same as others. With that in mind, any church which upholds any sort of same-gender union is not "Christian" in the historic, orthodox meaning of the term.

Craig said...


Reading between the lines a bit, I hope you don’t mind this question: Are you one of those who affirms all Catholic beliefs up to but excluding Vatican II? That is, are you a Traditionalist?

Here’s the thing as regards Cardinal Taurin. Given that the council he heads is titled the PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE, this explicitly points to papal agreement. In fact, in the 2012 letter the Cardinal specifically mentions sitting Pope Benedict XVI, as if the Pope approved the statement:

3. With His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI, we acknowledge that true education can support an openness to the transcendent as well as to those around us…

I’d think if the Pope had had a concern with either the wording of the statement and/or with the Cardinal, something would have happened, i.e., either the Pope would have made a public statement correcting the Cardinal, or the Cardinal would have been removed. In addition, the recent news article on Vesakh/Wesak name checks Pope Francis. I would think the same scenario above would apply. Silence implies consent.

Going back to definitions, I personally have a problem with the way most in media define “liberal Christian” and the like. There are certain basic truths in Christendom, and either one upholds these truths or one does not. Rejecting these truths necessarily places one outside of Christianity. For example, John Hick, religious pluralist and author of the book The Metaphor of God Incarnate (the Incarnation was merely metaphorical and not actual), can make the claim that he’s a Christian; but, having rejected almost every (if not every) basic Christian truth, to include the Deity of Christ, the Atonement, the inerrancy of Scripture, etc. he most certainly is not a Christian in any historic sense. It seems like Hans Kung may fall in this same category.

Anonymous said...


A lot of these churches still subscribe to the Apostles Creed, but still have gay marriage etc.

I am outraged that they would attempt to dictate to someone else, what their sacraments should be.

There are Catholics who do think, ecumenical ties should be cut off with groups that do these things.

Craig said...

Anon 10:43:

You wrote, A lot of these churches still subscribe to the Apostles Creed, but still have gay marriage etc.

In my studies of primarily what I term "hyper-charismatic" churches within Protestantism many will have a very orthodox Statement of Faith, yet in actual practice they do not adhere to or even explicitly deny its tenets. Once again, it's duplicity with the intention to deceive. I'd be surprised if the same were not happening in Catholicism.

You wrote, There are Catholics who do think, ecumenical ties should be cut off with groups that do these things.

And that would be the prudent thing to do.

Here's my belief in all this. Recognizing that there have been and will continue to be tares among the wheat / wolves among the sheep, the Christian body is made up of all true Christians past, present, and yet future. These include those of all different denominational persuasions, those not even in any sort of denomination, and those not attending, or part of, a particular "church". To define "true Christian": these are those who've accepted the simple Gospel message and are therefore Holy Spirit indwelt, and who will "stand firm till the end".

And there have been, are, and will be those who are bent on trying to destroy Christianity both from without and from within. Infiltrating the ranks can be a very effective way of neutralizing the effectiveness of true believers, while preventing those seeking from reaching a saving faith.

Anonymous said...

Benghazi looking worse for Hillary Clinton as State department lies exposed:

Craig said...

anon 3:26,

And that also includes our Commander-in-Chief.

I can't help but think that the timing was just too inconvenient for the elections and was thus deemed a "demonstration" rather than the terrorist attack it truly was.

I like one of the comments on the abc report:

How about that? A random act of journalism by ABC News. Good job.

Anonymous said...

Like many of the dark secrets most don't know about in Obamacare having nothing to do with medical care....

The immigration reform measure....

the Senate began debating yesterday would create a national biometric database of virtually every adult in the U.S., in what privacy groups fear could be the first step to a ubiquitous national identification system.

Buried in the more than 800 pages of the bipartisan legislation (.pdf) is language mandating the creation of the innocuously-named "photo tool," a massive federal database administered by the Department of Homeland Security and containing names, ages, Social Security numbers and photographs of everyone in the country with a driver's license or other state-issued photo ID. —

Dave in CA

Constance Cumbey said...

Jeremy Scahill has an important new book out which I have started reading, DIRTY WARS. It deals with drone strikes, etc. and that the Obama administration has greatly expanded the use of such tactics.


Constance Cumbey said...

To Anonymous 6:10 and everybody else.

1. The "Arab Spring" is definitely a New Age revolution.

2. The Syrian Revolution is part of that "Arab Spring" scene."

3. Sarin gas was a tool used in Japan by the New Age cult AUM SHINKYKIO.

4. As with Jonestown, the New Agers tried to thereafter pass off their New Age "co-creators" as "an apocalyptic cult" in an effort to get it classified as "fundamentalist" rather than the New Age one both actually were.

5. I'm nervous about the findings that the rebels in Syria possibly were the purveyors of the Sarin gas if it existed.

6. For all his faults, the prime minister/president of Syria has accorded protection to the Christians.

7. Could this be the uglier, more barbaric side of the New Age revolution now manifesting its Barbara Marx Hubbard style colors of "We come to bring death, we do this for the sake of the world . . ."???

Just thinking out loud!


Anonymous said...


I respectfully disagree (10:21pm). Whatever originally fomented the Arab Spring and Syria, its main beneficiaries are Islamists who want Sharia courts only in those lands, not side by side with a State-run justice system. They want a theocracy but their idea of the Creator God is very different from ours and it shows. Islam is NOT New Age; it has spent 1300 years fighting the source of the modern New Age movement - the Hindus and Huddhists of India - and killed 50 million of them, most recently in the fighting that broke out when the British quit in 1947 and the land schismed bloodily into Pakistan and today's India.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

I must respectfully disagree and at the same time partly agree with Anon 4:06. Constance is looking at the immediate situation dating from the late 1800s and early 1900s, and the issue of "who gains" right now. True, Islam is not New Age in its nature.

But New Age in the sense of the political side of it is definitely gained by the developments in the Middle East. Remember that elimination of the Abrahamic religions is a major plan with the NAM, and right now, Abrahamic Islam is a good tool against Abrahamic Judaism and Abrahamic Christianity.

also, the kind of fundamentalist Islam is as unkoranic as much of the reconstruction Christian movement is unbiblical. For example, in theory there should be no persecution directed against followers of a "religion of the book," if they pay the dhimmi tax. But Islamic extremists don't follow this.

Modern Islamic extremism has had heavy sufi (mystical Islam) and Nazi connections in the 20th century, and the Wahabbi House of Saud was supported by British interests, themselves occultic and amorally imperial seeking their own version of one world govt. (under Britain) in the 1800s to 1900s.

The development of ethnic nationalist mysticism, its doctrines being the backbone to later Nazi racial mysticism, by Mazzini who seems to have been a British agent of Lord Palmerston, in the 1800s might initially lead to Christian focussed as part of their identity Catholic and Orthodox nationalist groups, but the undercurrent was not Christian as much as ethnic mysticism which in time could play into the NAM ideas. The German Romantic Movement also contributed to this.

Anonymous said...

Christine, you in turn are partly right and partly mistaken at 4.23am.

"Modern Islamic extremism has had heavy sufi (mystical Islam) and Nazi connections in the 20th century"

The principal figures in the revival of Islam as a political force in the 20th century were Abul Mawdudi and Sayyid Qutub. Neither had anything to do with sufism. As for the Nazis, the timings of meetings and writings suggest that they escalated from planning to deport the Jews to the idea of the Holocaust, due to the influence of Haj Amin al-Husseini the mufti of Jerusalem; see

"Remember that elimination of the Abrahamic religions is a major plan with the NAM, and right now, Abrahamic Islam is a good tool against Abrahamic Judaism and Abrahamic Christianity."

The concept of Abrahamic religion was propaganda (taqiyya) invented by Muslims. The Arabs who claim descent from Abraham via the wrong side of the bed were pagans until Muhammad.

Also, you are assuming with very little justification that Islam (1400 years old) can be used as a tool by the NWO (200 years old). Sometimes tools run out of control...

"the kind of fundamentalist Islam is as unkoranic as much of the reconstruction Christian movement is unbiblical. For example, in theory there should be no persecution directed against followers of a "religion of the book," if they pay the dhimmi tax. But Islamic extremists don't follow this."

What you need to know is that the Quran often contradicts itself - which clearly implies (unless you are a Muslim!) that it was not written by an omniscient divinity. The Muslim way of resolving these contradictions is to prefer the verses that came to Muhammad later. Those are, unhappily for everybody else, the warlike verses which supersede the peaceful ones. This is known as the doctrine of abrogation (in Arabic, naskh) and is based on the unconvincing verse that Allah sometimes thinks of something better (Q2:106).

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

The dhimmi rule was observed (except when it wasn't, probably mostly by Turks who were fast and loose with islamic law starting with the practice of murder by the heir at the sultan's death of his brothers so no rivalry could result in a civil war, this being approved instead of opposed by mullahs on the basis that it was better a few murders than massive death in civil wars), until recently.

So obviously naskh (how old is this?) wasn't the main interpretation.

Abrahamic religions as far as I understand it has nothing to do with bloodlines such as Muhammad's, but is about claiming to worship the God of Abraham. Christians, Jews, and Moslems all so claim.

Yes, a tool can run out of control. That is the larouchean (or is it really Tarpleyite before his falling out with them?) assessment of communism, that it was a creation of the captialist elite monopolist globablist aka nwo crew and it became a frankenstein monster, as this assessment calls it, a tool intended to be controlled opposition that has broken loose and run on its own.

However, at present, using radical Islam as a tool seems to be working.

If NATO had stepped in and squashed the Serbian aggression at the start in Bosnia, Al Qaeda would never have gotten a foothold there. Islam in Bosnia was moderate, relations with Christianity good, some moslems even attended churches and called Jesus "the Son of Allah," at least in Sarajevo. the supposedly Christian Serbs changed all that.

Absent their actions, given another generation or two, there might have been a massive gradual Christianization of the Bosnian moslems.

Anonymous said...

Naskh, according to Wikipedia on it, dates back to the start of Islam. It had to, didn't it, because there are contradictions in the Quran and a reply to critics was necessary (never mind how unconvincing).

"If NATO had stepped in and squashed the Serbian aggression at the start in Bosnia, Al Qaeda would never have gotten a foothold there. Islam in Bosnia was moderate, relations with Christianity good, some moslems even attended churches and called Jesus "the Son of Allah," "

Ther are plenty of moderate Muslims but there is no moderate Islam. Muhammad called the moderate Muslims of his time munafiqun (hypocrites) for not doing what he said, ie fighting.

Democracies used not to start wars - then NATO, none of whose nations were at war with Serbia or even threatened by it, disgraced itself by bombing the place. The result is a Muslim sovereign State on European soil for the first time in centuries. That is not to applaud the Serbs, but not everything is everybody else's business.

"Allah" means literally "THE god" and would have been the correct translation of Elohim when rendering the Bible into Arabic 1400 years ago. (It's the same word, in fact - Elohim is the plural of Eloah (Hebrew) or Allah (Arabic); the plural hints at the Trinity.) But today "Allah" is universally taken to refer to a deity who claims to have created the universe and has the personality revealed in the Quran. The Quran is very clear in asserting that Allah has no son. Translation of the biblical names of God into Arabic today is a delicate matter, and in conversation with Muslims it might be best to say that Jesus is the son of the Creator.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

The way things were handled in Bosnia was a disgrace, "peacekeepers" were not armed and not to interfere. people were massacred and worse than merely shot.

this whole way of pretending to intervene while not really doing so, effectively made it look like a much more severe arming and permanent world presence of UN troops is needed, when a few quick actions would have stopped this, and prevented the islamic warriors from being called to for help and getting credibility with the locals.

Serbia is a classic case of ethnic mysticism disguised as Orthodox Christianity, and as such it makes sense that a NAM mentality leadership might handle it with kid gloves, and finally clumsily bomb it later regarding Kosovo, after a really corrupt KLA was empowered by the situation.

The whole situation played to the interests of globalism, while a quick suppression without a continuing presence and anti Milosevic elements put in charge would have prevented the Kosovo situation, and been eventually forgotten instead of being part of an ongoing picture of martyred Serbia to now.

Sure, destruction of sovereign nations is a part of the plan, but Serbia was out to destroy any sovereignty but their own in the Balkans anyway, so what's the difference? Serbia has to have a still current pagan undercurrent, in that the city named Velez after a pagan deity that bears an uncanny similarity to European ideas of the devil, got this name in the mid 20th century.

Anonymous said...

"Serbia is a classic case of ethnic mysticism disguised as Orthodox Christianity"

Given that Orthodoxy organizes itself by country and has been the form of Christianity most resolute in practising mysticism, is that statement not something of a whitewash?

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

1. ethnic mysticism is blood and soil stuff, totally unlike any individual relationship to God or to any concept of personal God as distinct from impersonal ideas of God. The latter scene can incorporate ethno mysticism as lower and necessary forms, so not as incompatible as you might think.

2. not all mysticism is the same. Orthodox mysticism is not mental blank out. it is precisely the sort of conscious deliberate contemplation of God that is considered by Hinduism to be a starting point to be "transcended."

While it is possible to treat the Jesus Prayer as a mere mantra and seek a state of mind not focus on the Person Jesus, that is not its intent.

I have a copy of The Mystical Theology by Lossky and as I expected, all this does is describe that the Creed and the forms of worship and even personal morality are an issue of constant living of the Kingdom of Heaven in this world, this age, and not separating real life from church life and so forth. That is the kind of mysticism not the sort you are used to thinking of.

That all these things relate to the personal but infinite God Who is unknowable in His essence, and beyond any comparison that is absolute instead of minimal, but Who has revealed Himself in actions and words.

When the earlier evangelicals wrote about regeneration and sanctification, they were working on the same ideas called theosis in Orthodoxy, and which in protestantism seem to come largely from Wesley's influence called holiness, which in turn came from his reading the early Fathers, who in turn were drawing on some points in OT and NT. (the holiness crowd got hog wild later.)

Sure, there is a certain going beyond rationalISM but the mind is not shut down either. But let's face it, the finite human mind cannot comprehend the infinite.

Meanwhile the concept of prelest or spiritual deception, ranging from private delusions to serious errors or deceptions by demons to possession is something that is warned about in Orthodox writings, but not in mystical non Christian groups or writings, or in any charismatic groups, in protestantism this would be called the matter of discernment. The only warnings the false mystical writers Hindu and NAM give is being hung up on some intermediate state of unusual powers instead of pursuing personal cessation in samadhi.

Anonymous said...

"I have a copy of The Mystical Theology by Lossky and as I expected, all this does is describe that the Creed and the forms of worship and even personal morality are an issue of constant living of the Kingdom of Heaven in this world, this age, and not separating real life from church life and so forth. That is the kind of mysticism not the sort you are used to thinking of."

Actually Christine it was me - with whom you are currently in dialogue - who alerted you to Lossky's book here some months ago.

Just how many of the blood-and-soil mystics in Serbia whom you are criticising do you think are regular communicants in the Serbian Orthodox Church...?

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

According to Orthodox persons who visited Serbia, seems the vast majority of them do not in fact go to church, and the few who keep icons do so as a Serbianism instead of an Orthodoxism, so to speak. "Vid's Day" has gotten itself into at least one Serbian city's church calendar, something to do with old pagan holdovers, and the dubiousness of the glorification of "St." Nicolai Velimirovic is detailed on some links on my blog,

A witch on a witch egroup, and this was one of the more real thing instead of white light fluff bunny wicca sort egroups, had visited Belgrade several years ago, and reported that the atmosphere there was very witchy. Well, she ought to know her own kind by their feel or the heavy presence of residual wrong spirits or both.

There are some Serbian Orthodox who are legitimate. One of them in this country, who had a brother who is a monk on Mount Athos, said that anyone using religion as a reason for war in the Balkans was playing a game.

Even Velimirovic had to admit that the major besetting sin of the Serbs is pride. However, that fellow was quite creepy, and had the eyes and aggressive stare of a sorcerer.

One bishop said that Serbian Orthodoxy was special, Orthodoxy ennobled by a vigorous nationalism, as if Orthodoxy needs ennobling!
you will of course find ethnicism in other jurisdictions, but it is really endemic in Serbianism.

Anonymous said...

"Even Velimirovic had to admit that the major besetting sin of the Serbs is pride."

And of just about everybody else!

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

but he was looking at them from the ethnic nationalist romantic notion of there being a national soul with national characteristics, and added that this had led them into disasters periodically. Well, yes, it did. It was arrogance and dreams that led to their failures that came on the heels of bad actions for centuries. The persecutions the Turks did were, granted, excesses but normal for most of prior centuries, and were triggered by revolts begun by a Montenegrin bishop I forget his name, who argued that the Serbian soul needed full control of their old lands, not merely peace within those lands. Up until then, the relationship with the turks was pretty good. But after that, it went from bad to worse.

Turkish behavior got worse over time, as their focus shifted from a partial Islamism to fully ethnic turkocentricity, during which time the Armenian holocaust happened.

Both Serbian, Turkic and other ethnocentric semi mystical dreamy feeling plus militarism fed the turmoil in Europe and elsewhere, keeping the pot boiling and people pitted at each other.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

Try to locate R. C. Zaehner's Mysticism Sacred and Profane. This book derails the idea they are all the same and that differences from descriptions by mystics are because of the indescribable nature of the experience.

Zaehner examines mysticism and comes up with three categories.

Then looks at the writings of Rimbaud, who pursued all three kinds, each time to their conclusion. And from that one man's
experience of all three, it is evident that they are NOT all the same things.

Also, Rimbaud decided that all forms of mysticism, even Christian theistic, is a deception, and he died reconciled to the Roman Catholic Church.

Constance Cumbey said...

To Anonymous 2:56

I think the "rude"ness is coming from your corner and not mine I was using the computer screen to monitor the chatroom and was having some distracting problems with unexpected noises. It was part of the attention to both Dr. Monteith and the chatroom participants, not a separate project altogether. I sincerely hope you are not whom I suspect you might be.


Constance Cumbey said...

To 4:06

This time I do believe I am right and you are wrong. The same forces behind "Arab Spring" were the ones behind the Occupy Movement. Yes, they were NEW AGE. Did they use Islamists? You bet! The overarching strategy of the New Age was to pit the three major monotheist religious groups off against each other and the subdivisions of each. That was well detailed in Alice Bailey's RAYS AND INITIATIONS as well as Peter LeMesurier's THE ARMAGEDDON SCRIPT. They would not have to worry about the "Old Age" because the "massed forces of the Old Age would go on to defeat each other . . . "


Anonymous said...

"The same forces behind "Arab Spring" were the ones behind the Occupy Movement. Yes, they were NEW AGE. Did they use Islamists? You bet!"

Constance, I'm not sure how the Arab Spring got started so I'm not disputing that from a position of knowledge, but I do dispute that Islamists are being exploited by NWO figures who have it all smoothly under control. They are a clear and present danger to EVERYBODY else. Islam has been a mortal threat to the West for 1300 years and in overthrowing the Christian roots of our civilisation we have just thrown away the breastplate of righteousness, shield of faith, etc. In Europe people smell the coffee - literally. (It became popular after large amounts of it were abandoned following the lifting of the Muslim siege of Vienna in the late 17th century.)

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

being exploited and being under smooth control are not the same thing.

Susanna said...

Dear Craig,

Good grief! I am most certainly NOT a Traditionalist. While I DO uphold the TRUE teachings of Vatican II......I have never bought into the pseudo-theological moonbat myth that is often erroneously referred to as the so-called "Spirit of Vatican II." Moreover, I roundly reject the "New-Agey" syncretism between Christianity and gnostic/pantheistic/Buddhist/Hindu worldviews being peddled by certain heretics such as members of certain religious orders as well as certain members of LCWR who seek to go "beyond Jesus" as they channel their inner Teilhard de Chardin during their pseudo-mystical meanderings.

That said, I must add that in terms of papal "silence" automatically implying "consent," I must respectfully challenge that because Cardinal Tauran has not explicitly equated Buddhism with Christianity. That he has done so is an interpretation being made by others of what Cardinal Tauran has actually said, and while I can sympathize to an extent with those who are interpreting Cardinal Tauran's comments thus, we need to be very careful not to make Cardinal Tauran's comments say something they simply do not say.

I must add that the papal consent to dialogue with other non-Christian religions does not mean that the Pope is equating any of them with Christianity either........proof of this is the way in which Pope Benedict XVI deliberately absented himself from the Assisi gatherings because he feared that they would be interpreted in a syncretistic way.

With regard to certain other astute comments of yours, I would like to say here that you absolutely right in saying that "there are certain basic truths in Christendom and either one upholds these truths or one does not.

If one does not uphold these truths, he is not a Christian.

The late great C.S. Lewis once said something very similar when referring to the theological adventurism of certain Anglican priests.

He pointed out that whether an Anglican priest is left-leaning or right-leaning in his theology, there is a boundary beyond which each ceases to be orthodox. He wasn't criticizing the sincerity of those Anglican priests who crossed that boundary. He was criticizing their decision to remain Anglican priests as long as they continued to sincerely believe as they did.

It is not, of course, for me to define to you what Anglican Christianity is—I am your pupil, not your teacher. But I insist that wherever you draw the lines, bounding lines must exist, beyond which your doctrine will cease either to be Anglican or to be Christian: and I suggest also that the lines come a great deal sooner than many modern priests think. I think it is your duty to fix the lines clearly in your own minds: and if you wish to go beyond them you must change your profession. This is your duty not specially as Christians or as priests but as honest men.
C.S. Lewis

One of the times when Hans Kung crossed that boundary was when he had the audacity to cite the Scriptures with a view to placing the divinity of Christ in doubt. As a result, Pope John Paul II deprived him of his "missio canonica" (his license to teach as a Catholic theologian.)

As I have clearly stated before on past threads, the basic truths of Christendom which one must sincerely uphold in order to be truly a Christian - whether we are talking about Roman Catholic or non-Roman Catholic Christians - are those embodied in the Creeds of Chalcedon and Nicaea

Anonymous said...

"wherever you draw the lines, bounding lines must exist, beyond which your doctrine will cease either to be Anglican or to be Christian: and I suggest also that the lines come a great deal sooner than many modern priests think. I think it is your duty to fix the lines clearly in your own minds: and if you wish to go beyond them you must change your profession."

Dear CS Lewis

You have put your finger on it with your customary lucidity in making the claim that the church is a profession. Having a professional paid ordained priesthood is asking for those who lose their faith to stay quietly in place and live off the faithful - for if they no longer fear God, why not? And let us not condemn them, for Jesus always honoured the freedom of conscience of persons while warning of the direct consequences in the next life.

Craig said...


Sorry, it wasn’t my intention to offend (if you took offense) in asking if you were a Traditionalist. I’m probably showing my ignorance here, as I just wasn’t sure of the practical ramifications with regard to how a Traditionalist works out his/her Catholic faith. In any case, no further discussion is needed on this. I think I’m clear on your position now, thanks.

We’ll have to agree to disagree on the Cardinal Taurin issue. I find his statements regarding Vesakh/Wesak unclear. However, I concede that I should have been more careful with the last sentence in that particular paragraph as it should have read “Papal silence could be construed as consent” rather than “Silence implies consent”.

We are in agreement as regards just what constitutes a Christian. I’ve been focusing primarily on Christology in most of my writings, stressing the importance of Chalcedon. It may interest you that in an article in the works (for over a year!), I’ll be quoting Gerald O’Collins, SJ. O’Collins was cited in a work by Protestant philosopher/theologian Oliver Crisp, and I’ll be quoting even more from the source Crisp used (O’Collins’ book titled “Incarnation”). Interestingly (to me anyway), O’Collins reviewed this particular book of Crisp, noting a few criticisms; however, I see O’Collins as misunderstanding Crisp, which I point out in this review (it’s a bit technical):

Susanna said...

Dear Craig,

I am not in the least offended by your question as to whether or not I am a Traditionalist.

Actually I am amused.

The reason why is because apart from letting you know that you were going to hell in a handbasket for no other reason than being a Protestant the more radical Traditionalist Catholics wouldn't give you the time of day.

As for Cardinal Tauran, I am cheerfully willing to agree to disagree.

You probably know more about him than I do.

For me, the jury is still out until I learn more about where he is coming from.

Re:However, I concede that I should have been more careful with the last sentence in that particular paragraph as it should have read “Papal silence could be construed as consent” rather than “Silence implies consent”.

Much better.

You will have to link me to your article when it is finished. Christology is key, as is the importance of the Chalcedonian Creed.

Johnycomelately said...

Is there any place to get these radio shows as a podcast or audio file.