Robert Blair Kaiser clearly from the tone and tenor of the writing appeared to be a strong advocate of a NEW AGE future -- and as soon as possible, as far as he was concerned.
Last year strange events in the Roman Catholic Church transpired. Pope Benedict XVI suddenly resigned and he was quickly replaced by Pope Francis, the former Cardinal Mario Bergoglio. I personally could not help wonder if the formerly vigilantly anti-New Age Pope Benedict XVI had been forced out of his job by hidden pressures.
Today I was scratching my head over the ADVOCATE ("gay" magzine) naming of Pope Francis as their "Man of the Year." The Huffington blog of the former Arrianna Stassinopolous enthusiastically reported on that as they do on all events and personages they view as New Age. Arrianna Huffington f/k/a was a close friend of Marilyn Ferguson and she was (maybe still is) a minister in John Rogers "Messiah" cult, "Movement for Spiritual Inner Awareness."
I suddenly recalled the list I had compiled from Kaiser's book of the short list for Pope that Ratzinger had not appeared on -- and those who were for "Change" and those who were not.
Pope Francis as Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio was #2 on that list and classified as "for change."
Now, today, I read another alleged statement from Pope Francis that the Creation Centered Spirituality people are taking no small degree of comfort from. It appears in the current ATLANTIC Magazine. You may read an online version by clicking here.
I thought my old article deserved re-reading in light of current events. I'm interested in your opinions.
Stay tuned!
CONSTANCE
The Battle for the Roman Catholic Church Future – New Age vs. anti-New Age? What is author Robert Blair Kaiser really saying?
I made the costly mistake of dropping by Border’s on my way home tonight. I saw husband Barry’s car parked there. Hubby graciously offered to buy me a cup of coffee. I accepted that after noticing four new irresistible titles on the new non-fiction table. One of them is the subject of this blog. That is Robert Blair Kaiser’s new book, A Church in Search of Itself: Benedict XVI and the Battle for the Future.” For many of the same reasons for which I found myself comforted by openly anti-New Age Cardinal Ratzinger’s elevation, Kaiser finds the same distasteful. It appears that Robert Blair Kaiser and Lee Penn, author ofFalse Dawn, are at opposite theological poles. Obviously so are Robert Blair Kaiser and yours truly.
It might even be that Robert Blair Kaiser’s BOOK
is a type of “The Aquarian Conspiracy” manifesto for integrating more “New Age” change into the church. The people he praises are for the most part open syncretists, those openly promoting apostasy and denial of orthodox tenets. Those he denigrates bluntly are guilty of nothing but keeping the faith.Robert Blair Kaiser seeks “a Church in Search of Itself.” Lee Penn ably articulates (using the verb “pens” would seem a littlepunnish!) the need instead of a church in search of God. Kaiser wants a church whose theology swings daily in the opposite direction. The author’s syncretistic biases shine throughout the book. His chapter, Cardinal Francis Arinze on “Developing Local Theologies” probably shows the author’s biases more than the reportedly more conservative Cardinal Arinze (and probably Lee Penn might have more knowledge about this).
Kaiser refers to an address Arinze gave at a year 2000 “Millennium World Peace summit of Religious and Spiritual Leaders” at the UN in New York.[1] Kaiser says Arinze there called upon world leaders not to misuse religion by promoting violence. I have no quarrel with that premise. Kaiser was even happier that “since that meeting, “Arinze had presided over at least three major interreligious gatherings in turn, raising his media profile.” He then writes:
“Four months after 9/11, he helped organize a huge gathering of leaders – Moslems, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, and Catholics -- in Assisi, where a similar meeting had been held a decade before. Curiously, the delegates prayed separately, because Cardinal Ratzinger had decided not to encourage joint prayer by men and women who believed in different Gods [sic]. Arinze didn’t fight Ratzinger on that. Neither did the pope.”
Well, score one hooray for Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI)! Kaiser also wrote about those he considered the brave, good guys – those who were for “developing local theologies”[2] Furthermore, Kaiser probably misread Arinze’s whose agenda was never syncretism, but evangelism. Arinze has personally, even earlier than the last pope himself, spoken out strongly against spiritualism and New Religions, including but not limited to New Age religion.
My admitted light reading of the volume last night makes it appear to me as though Los Angeles' Cardinal Mahoney is a Kaiser favorite. He rapturously describes his do-it-yourself skills with such detail as to make Mahoney look like a natural replacement for the host and star of "This Old House". However, in this case it looks like home construction and church destruction may well go hand in hand in southern California Catholic land. Faithful Christians in Cardinal Mahoney’s diocese succinctly described his actions:
"The Cardinal is bringing in speakers who openly trample on official Catholic teachings," Fisher observed. "He's subjecting Catholics to talks by advocates of abortion, sodomy, homosexual 'marriage,' fornication, ordaining priestesses and homosexuals, occult "New Age' practices, 'dismantling' the Church, defying the Vatican's authority, redefining God, and MORE
. He should stop thumbing his nose at Pope John Paul II and leave office."[3]While Kaiser was scathingly indignant about Ratzinger/Benedict XVI’s orthodox theology, he was curiously enraptured by those who would deny our Lord, including but not limited to prominent New World Religion proponent Leonard Swidler. Now Swidler is a name well known to me. One of his closest confidants is Jordan’s Prince Hassan, who currently serves as President of the Club of Rome. I’ve kept internet archived files on Swidler for the past few years. I even tried to get him on my radio program once. Luckily for Swidler, he was out of the country and unavailable for that BOOKING
. I had planned to use him as Exhibit A to demonstrate the intensity and determination of New Age theologians.Just what is my issue/problem with “A Church in Search of Itself”? The answer is contained in the very title. A true church is one in search of God, not itself. Kaiser boasts that Belgian and former Pax Christi head, Cardinal Godfried Danneels (one who also at times claimed to speak out against the New Age Movement) proudly said that his theology ‘changed daily.’ [4]
Kaiser, an unapologetic proponent of syncretistic change, gives an interesting list of those who were on the short list for the papal replacement. Kaiser says Ratzinger made none of those 2004 lists:
Papal Candidate Location Liberal Change or “no Change”
Cardinal Francis Arinze[5], Nigeria No Change
Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Buenos Aires, Argentina Change
Cardinal Godfried Danneels, Mechelen-Brussel, Belgium Change
Cardinal Ivan Dias[6], Bombay, India No Change.
Cardinal Cláudio Hummes, São Paulo, Brazil Change
Cardinal Walter Kasper, Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity in Rome Change
Cardinal Norberto Rivera Carrera[7], Mexico City No Change
Cardinal Oscar Andrés Rodríguez Maradiaga[8]. Tegucigapa, Honduras ChangeCardinal Christoph Schönborn[9], Vienna No change
Cardinal Dionigi Tettamanzi, Milan No change
It is more than interesting to note that just about everybody labeled “No change” spoke out boldly and strongly against theNew Age Movement. Those on the list indicated for “change” were considerably more tolerant, if not openly sympathetic to it.
With all the current talk and songs of “New Church”, and writers out there like Robert Blair Kaiser, not to mention the Matthew Foxes, Basil Penningtons, and Thomas Keatings lurking in the background, it appears that Catholic New Agers have not gone away. They merely went underground, but they are resurfacing. Last week I had an anguished call from a local client who was staying with a convent in Rome. Her daughter had called her from
Michigan, USA to say that here local Catholic hospitals are now adopting the very New Age Reikki practices along with the unfortunately usual “healing touch” and other such “transformative technologies.”
My Catholic friends, fasten your spiritual seatbelts and pray for the Pope. As the political agenda of the New Age advances via the European Union, “the men who stare at goats" in the USA military a la Jon Ronson’s analysis, the attempt to again forcibly impose it on Catholics as once happened in the 1980s appears to be once again on the militant march.
The battle is not over. In fact, it may be just beginning. Jesus once said to his apostles, “it is inevitable but that evil comes, but woe to him through whom it comes.”
A word to the spiritually wise should be sufficient!
[1] Kaiser, Robert Blair. A CHURCH IN SEARCH OF ITSELF: Benedict XVI and the Battle for the Future. New York: Knof BOOKS
, 2006. Page 131.[2] Kaiser, op. cit., page 131.
[3] Quoted from http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-16878.html>
4/2/2006, 10:21 PM
[4] Kaiser claims that Cardinal Danneels, once head of Pax Christi, and even the author of an anti-New Age tract, said that his theology changed daily. Whether that is good or bad, one would suppose, would be the direction in which the theology changes – closer to or further away from Jesus Christ whom he is pledged to serve – closer or further from God the father. I am dismayed to learn that Danneels was so overwrought by the election of the conservative Ratzinger to the papacy. Danneels' purported anti-New Age ADVOCACY
, shown to me a few years ago by another anti-New Age author, Donna Steichen, had once given me hope. Disturbingly, Danneels and nine other cardinals would not stay for the impromptu supper served up by the new Pope Benedict XVI. It has a ring of someone else who at times convincingly professed orthodoxy, but would not stay for dinner – Judas Iscariot on the night of our Lord’s Last Supper.[5] Cardinal Arinze issued a strong statement against “New Religious Movements” including the New Age Movement in 1991, two years even before Pope John Paul II issued the first such statement known to me. See http://www.ewtn.com/library/NEWAGE/ARINNEWM.TXT.
[6] Ivan Cardinal Dias has spoken out against syncretism and the New Age Movement. See, e.g., http://www.ewtn.com/library/NEWAGE/ARINNEWM.TXT.
[7] Cardinal Carrera’s election would not have disappointed me either. He issued a superb condemnation of the New Age Movement, even as some Evangelical cult-watchers were downplaying the threat of the Movement to true Christianity. Seehttp://www.ewtn.com/library/bishops/acall.htm. Among the topics covered by Cardinal Carrera in that pastoral letter to his Mexico City Catholics were:
New Age and the False Hope, The Rapid Spread of New Age. New Age Beliefs, Environmentalism, Gnosticism, Pseudo-Science, Incompatibility of New Age and the Gospel . Reincarnation, and Non-Christian Meditation, Responsibility of Catholics in Face of Confusion
[8] This Maradiaga is the one that Rastafarian “Squeakbox” the author of the sycophantic biography of Javier Solana referenced in my last blogspot was so terribly disappointed was not elected pope. He posted that to 2005 comment sections on my then blogspots. This is also the one that well meaning readers frequently and wrongfully confuse with Solana’s grandfather Salvador de Madariaga. Maradiaga looks similar, but the spellings are distinctly different on closer inspection.
[9] Cardinal Schonburn strongly spoke out against the New Age Movement. Reviewer James Likoudis writes: "Cardinal Schonborn insists on the historical reliability and credibility of the Gospels. He sharply criticizes the New Age movement and emphasizes that "[t}he dogma of original sin is of inestimable importance for the whole structure of the faith" (p.67). He echoes the Rule of St. Benedict, which asserts that "[n]othing should take precedence over the work of God,' that is, solemn worship" " (p.67). He is reviewing Schonborn’s book, Loving the Church, By Christoph Cardinal Schonborn, Ignatius Press, 1998
507 comments:
1 – 200 of 507 Newer› Newest»Constance,
You attempt to sort out the good and bad in mega sized powers and principalities by dissecting their history and the current flow within them. This is like chasing the wind. Are you appointed to separate the sheep from the goats? There are many simple scriptures that clue us as to whether or not some person or institution is of God or not. We know by the catholic institutions fruit that they do preach another gosphel. They also leave a wake of damaged lives, with an incidence of abuse that far exceeds the general population. All the he said she said, lengthy affidavits, and what this pope and that pope did or said will not change that fruit. This will only increase more and more in these last days. There are numerous simple scriptures that should be our guide rather than what any expert has to say about it, whether here, or in numerous books on the subject. That is why I said in the last thread you should perhaps seek the Holy Spirit, and I should have added scripture to that. As opposed to seeking Susanna's opinion,,, which generally is very pro catholic to say the least. And for that I was called mean spirited and even perhaps diabolical. Slightly over the top perhaps Constance?
Dear Constance,
Are you aware that Robert Blair Kaiser was at one time a Jesuit novice and accused Malachi Martin of having an affair with his wife? Martin reportedly "conspired" to have Kaiser admitted to a mental hospital. It is quite a Bizarre story.
The fact that Pope Francis is a Jesuit priest is being used by dissenting Catholics - including some leftist Jesuits - as a means of portraying him as a "liberal" -which is a political term, and not a religious one.
It is not to be forgotten that it was as Father Jorge Bergoglio, S.J. that Pope Francis dropped the hammer on Jesuits in Argentina who were peddling Liberation Theology.
As I have said before, Pope Francis is against globalization. He is insistent that globalization is "detrimental to the poor."
His own humble devotion to the poor combined with the stand he took as Jesuit provincial against his own fellow Jesuits who were peddling Liberation Theology is a statement to the world that Marxism/Communism/Socialism is not the way to go if a Christian wants to really help the poor and not merely exploit the poor for the sake of political gain.
Catholic teaching on good stewardship ( proper use of the goods of the earth ) is not a new teaching. What is "new" about it is its having been glommed onto by Gramscianesque Marxists who have incorporated it into their ersatz religion called Liberation Theology - which has about as little to do with "liberation" as it has to do with "theology".
Liberation theology, moreover, is joined at the hip with environmentalism. Not because Marxists truly care about the environment, but because environmentalism provides them with a species of "fig leaf" with which to conceal the injustice of their so-called "social justice."
This is the Catholic teaching on stewardship from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops website.
STEWARDSHIP
http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/stewardship/
________________________
Christian Stewardship What God Expects from Us
PHILIP C.L. GRAY
What is Christian stewardship? How can I be a faithful steward of God's gifts?
Response: Christian stewardship is a way of living in which we recognize that everything belongs to God. All resources must be used for His glory and the common good. ( i.e. in living out the Great Commandment to love God and neighbor )Solidarity is the fruit of stewardship.
http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/environment/en0007.html
cont.
Dear OZ,
I hadn't seen that interview. Thanks for posting it.
"Only Jesus provides the answer to this rampant idolatry," declared Pope Francis.
"Gnostic paganism" is the term he used in reference to this idolatry.
Globalism is only one part of the New Age.
As for Kaiser and his claims about Malachi Martin, I checked with the Jesuits and he WAS "laicized" which is RC lingo for "defrocked."
My own take on Martin after much study of the information from people who knew him and some others, on the yahoo egroup http://groups.yahoo.com/group/malachimartin
(and I took the most important stuff and put it on my egroup, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/malachimartinetc )
I came to this conclusion (aided by a sense of something silvery about him on a TV interview and I didn't trust him).
That all accusations about him are true, that he was playing both sides of the street, that it is not inconceivable that he even dabbled in the ultimate wrong side of the street, BUT.....
he got a scare, repented and was working against evil when he died, which may indeed have been the work of a demon pushing him downstairs.
In any case, his published information seems pretty legitimate.
Religious 3 ring circus. Send in the clowns! Oh wait, never mind.
You are welcome Susanna. Its no easy task Francis has ahead of him, is it? but with God's grace I pray he can get the work done.
From OZ
Send in the clowns!....
They're already here.
2 Corinthians 11:4
For if someone comes along and preaches another Jesus than the one we preached, or should you receive a different spirit from the one you received or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you are all too willing to listen.
OZ 10:03 P.M.
I'm sure your a nice person and all, but I'm thinking you might be a bit discombobulated.
Oz 10:03,
That Pope Francis certainly has his work cut out for him is an understatement!!!
He certainly seems to have lived up to his evangelical counsels of poverty, chastity and obedience.
To Anonymous 8:26
Maybe you need to go back and read my series of articles on THE HIJACKING OF EVANGELICALISM. As regards the Catholics, the biblical test of antichrist is clear: A denial that Jesus is the Christ and that Jesus is come in the flesh. Some Catholics meet those sorry tests. some don't. Some Protestants meet those sorry tests, some don't.
So far, the Catholics for the most part have held the line on abortion, same sex marriage, and AFFIRMING that Jesus is the Christ.
There are well documented apostates within Catholic ranks, such as Matthew Fox, Teilhard de Chardin, and others who very distinctly preached a different gospel.
You say, "we know by the catholic institutions fruit that they do preach another gosphel (sic)."
Please specify what "fruits" you are referring to.
My grandmother was one of the most Godly women I ever knew. She lived to be almost 100. At age 94 she took me aside and told me the Lord had very plainly shown her that she was to REPENT of her bigotry against Catholics. Grandma died in late 1989, about a year after I returned to the active practice of law from 7 years on the road.
Maybe YOU are slightly over the top. Pride and self-righteousness are as big a sin as about any other one.
Constance
To Susanna,
Yes, I'm aware of Robert Blair Kaiser's book about Malachi Martin. I believe I may hae commented on it in the comments section of this blog wen I read it,perhaps 1 or 2 years ago. His New Age, pro liberal theology sentiments, came through in that book as well.
Kaiser was plainly for the things I am against, although I heard from more than one source about Malachi Martin's human failings.
Constance
To "From OZ, :38 pm"
Thanks for that video. I would like to believe that is how he believes and that ADVOCATE magazine is attempting to imply a laxness or endorsement that does not exist.
Time and events will tell. New Oxford Review has been critical of the Pope.
Constance
Constance
Yes Constance, I'd seen the Advocate magazines praise for the Pope. They are brazen. People who run these kinds of magazines have their own agenda.
Its really off putting having the word 'catholic' alongside Matthew Fox and the like, they really threw in the towel on their Catholicism a long time ago (in my humble opinion). And the fact that Thiellard De Chardin is Barbara Marx Hubbards hero says it all, doesn't it?
I appreciate that snippet about your grandma.
From OZ
Constance
I am partly in agreement with your usage of John 4:1-3 as the example for recognizing the spirit of anti-christ. I say partly because I am still not sure I have the absolute right answer.
I believe it has a dual meaning. It may be that it is both confessional (what a person believes) and christological (what a person believes about Jesus).
Considering that authors have used the term anti-christ in other various places within the Bible to describe opponents that are guilty of christological heresies (teaching distortions about Jesus), I would lean towards that confession alone is not always an acceptable test.
Luke 8:28, 4:41
Mark 5:7, 3:11
Matthew 8:29
James 2:19
All of these contain examples of "even demons believing" and "trembling" as well as addressing Jesus as the Son of God.
So, I think that is where some people may have a problem with relying on confession alone and outward appearances from certain denominations.
Sheriff Cumbey !
There's a posse outside and they're all a'worked up ain't a'takin' no for an answer.
They know all about your due process this, and fairness that, but they got a lynchin' in mind.
What chew gunna do ?
cont.
Papus left Blavatsky's Theosophical Society because of his objection to its focus on Eastern occultism at the expense of Western occultism.
He started his own organization called the Kabbalistic Order of the Rose-Croix.
Gerard Encausse was born at Corunna (La Coruña) in Spain on July 13, 1865, of a Spanish mother and a French father, Louis Encausse, a chemist. His family moved to Paris when he was four years old, and he received his education there.
As a young man, Encausse spent a great deal of time at the Bibliothèque Nationale studying the Kabbalah, occult tarot, magic and alchemy, and the writings of Eliphas Lévi. He joined the French Theosophical Society shortly after it was founded by Madame Blavatsky in 1884 - 1885, but he resigned soon after joining because he disliked the Society's emphasis on Eastern occultism.
In 1888, he co-founded his own group, the Kabbalistic Order of the Rose-Croix. That same year, he and his friend Lucien Chamuel founded the Librarie du Merveilleux and its monthly revue L'Initiation, which remained in publication until 1914.
Encausse was also a member of the Hermetic Brotherhood of Light and the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn temple in Paris, as well as Memphis-Misraim and probably other esoteric or paramasonic organizations, as well as being an author of several occult books. Outside of his paramasonic and Martinist activities he was also a spiritual student of the French spiritualist healer, Anthelme Nizier Philippe, "Maître Philippe de Lyon".
Despite his heavy involvement in occultism and occultist groups, Encausse managed to find time to pursue more conventional academic studies at the University of Paris. He received his Doctor of Medicine degree in 1894 upon submitting a dissertation on Philosophical Anatomy. He opened a clinic in the rue Rodin which was quite successful.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%A9rard_Encausse
cont.
Mr. Paul
Even before sherrif Cumbey rode up guns a blazing, cheif deputy Sussana baked up a nice pope cake with them horse apples you done sent her from Maine. She decorated it to absolute perfection of course n she stuck a charming plastic little pope Francis right on top! The guests raved about the frosting, but even though the cake seemed oddly bitter, no one said a word. So now peace prevails in Harmonyville.
Constance 1:36 A.M.
As far as self I righteousness goes, well I think outside of Y'shua I would have no hope what so ever. As far as pride goes, that's a stubborn one, I pray about that regularly. Have you nailed pride to the cross to the extent that it has died completely?
"So far, the Catholics for the most part have held the line on abortion, same sex marriage, and AFFIRMING that Jesus is the Christ"
Is a Christ centered relationship a kinda sorta relationship concerning right and wrong? Just addressing the abortion issue alone catholics are divided nearly 50/50. That is hardly holding the line! If Jesus is the Christ, then why the fervent prayer to Mary? Is she now omnipresent?
Constance,
Please check your email.
rich
Some Wikipedia history on the LIBERAL CATHOLIC CHURCH:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_Catholic_Church
Constance
Fascinating, also, vis a vis the PERENNIAL PHILOSOPHY of whom Aldous Huxley was a principal proponent and expositor, having written a book by that very title, is that HUXLEY credited WILLIAM LAW as a primary source of inspiration and thought leader for PERENNIAL PHILOSOPHY. LAW translated JACOB BOEHME into English. BOEHME was Madame Blavatsky's inspiration for naming her society THEOSOPHICAL. Both LAW and BOEHME are generously referenced in BLAVATSKY's book, THE KEY TO THEOSOPHY.
LAW and BOEHME are both generously referenced by NORMAN GRUBB, who published DAVE HUNT's first two books, THE POWER OF THE SPIRIT (Hunt/Law -- Dave Hunt claimed that God had called upon him to finish that book started by WILLIAM LAW), and CONFESSIONS OF A HERETIC (later renamed ON THE BRINK). For all of Dave's Catholic bashing, it is interesting to note that the New Age Catholics loved Dave and listed his book "co-authored by im and centuries dead WILLIAM LAW) as recommended reading in their CLASSICS OF WESTERN SPIRITUALITY series book on WILLIAM LAW.
Dave directed his "new inquisition" criticisms specifically against Ratzinger who was saying the same things about the New Age Movement then as Dave Hunt and I were saying.
Hmmmmmm!!!!! Norman Grubb was very close to ABRAHAM / ABRAM Vereide. See my series on THE HIJACKING OF EVANGELICALISM to do more exploring on this sorry thread.
Constance
Constance
I am curious about your thoughts on my 6:28am post. I am not implying that you believe in confessional only but I was hoping to get clarification on where you stand as I wasn't really clear from your statement earlier.
"Just addressing the abortion issue alone catholics are divided nearly 50/50. That is hardly holding the line!"
That is irrelevant. What the catholics in general believe or don't, or do or don't, is not the same thing as what the official position and efforts of leaders and many laity are.
that is the same as if someone viewing judaism of the time of apostasy of the Israelites said that the religion of YHWH consisted precisely of all the stuff YHWH says He hates and viewed Josiah or Hezekiah as innovators. (which is I think what some hairbrained bible "scholars" and interpreters of archaeology of the times think.)
Anon @10:39,
I'm sorry but I can't follow a metaphor that's been
mixed up that many different ways.
I don't even know what you mean.
But the current; "I know the Catholic Church is completely evil, because I just got done reading seventeen different websites that proved it", crowd
has their minds made up, just like an old time lynch mob, which by the way is exactly like the current Muslim Brotherhood attitude, which is the result of having read the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion", and believing every word of it.
Patient: "Doc, I keep getting these migraine headaches every time I start banging my head against the wall"
Doctor: "Stop banging your head against the wall"
Or to put it another way:
Philippians 4:8 Finally brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things."
No Paul
Your post was trying to be funny.
The response to your post was hilarious!!
I posted this in the previous comments section because it relates to a topic posted there. It also relates to the bigger picture of what this blog should be.....
Thank you Christine for noticing the information I shared from Natural News and commenting on it. There is more I could have written pertaining to that post. I'm glad I didn't waste my time and do that. This blog appears to be not ready for that.
Interest here has become focused on what's considered heresy in various religious organizations for a long time now. Interest in the overall New Age theme has disappeared. As we each have different interests in some aspect of New Age, I would still have thought that the history of various pieces of niche information could be related to their connection to the big picture of names and organizations operating now. Specifically while not all have details about the heresy history of the Catholic Church, we would understand how it relates to the now for example.
It appears the big New Age picture is no longer discussed here other than that there is some vague connection to a religious and political side of New Age.
If any reader has worked on it, what is the New Age connection to what is happening on the Mexican border? What is the New Age connection to what is happening in the Middle East by name and organization? What is the New Age connection to Obamacare by name and organization? What is the connection by name and organization to New Age that is happening now in the Catholic organizations? What is the New Age connection to Common Core by names and organizations?
I understand that most of the posters here will say skip New Age and just read the Jesus connections in the Bible. However that's like a teacher telling a music student to just practice the scales and the rest will take care of itself. Now I can understand that teacher is probably an expert in scale practicing and focuses on that.
There is no way to warn others about the New Age movement anymore if no one can tell others how it affects what is going on NOW.
It's all well and good that Constance might, given enough time, tell some individual someplace, somewhere. Using a Bible reference, how can we be watchmen if we don't know what we are looking for? This is a place where we are to share what we know in order to warn others. Are there enough people reading this blog now who care to try?
http://www.activistpost.com/2014/07/the-reasons-we-fight-new-world-order.html
Wednesday, July 16, 2014
The Reasons We Fight The New World Order
Countless people … will hate the new world order … and will die protesting against it. — H.G. Wells, The New World Order (1940)
Brandon Smith
Activist Post
"Throughout our lives and throughout our culture, we are conditioned to rally around concepts of false division. We are led to believe that Democrats and Republicans are separate and opposing parties, yet they are actually two branches of the same political-control mechanism. We are led to believe that two nations such as the United States and Russia are geopolitical enemies, when, in fact, they are two puppet governments under the dominance of the same international financiers. Finally, we are told that the international bankers themselves are somehow separated by borders and philosophies, when the reality is all central banks answer to a singular authority: the Bank for International Settlements (BIS).
"We are regaled with stories of constant conflict and division. Yet the truth is there is only one battle that matters, only one battle that has ever mattered: the battle between those people who seek to control others and those people who simply wish to be left alone.
"The “New World Order” is a concept created not in the minds of “conspiracy theorists” but in the minds of those who seek to control others. These are the self-appointed elite who fancy themselves grandly qualified to determine the destiny of every man, woman and child at the expense of individual freedom and self-determination. Such elites are often very open about their globalist intentions and ambitions, much like author H.G. Wells, a socialist member of the Fabian Society and friend to the internationalist establishment who put forth his blueprint for world governance in the book quoted above. ..........."
Chicken at 4:37,
So if I were to focus as you do on the New Age which is a pseudo-religion, quasi-political, gigantic multi headed monster, but if I were to study it and it alone and leave out how it relates to what JESUS is getting ready to do, how in the world would that change anything or enlighten anyone or even slow down this tidal wave of Apostasy, which is what it is ?
Dorothy, I know you want it to be just like you want it to be, but this is Constances blog, not yours.
Constance has written a couple of very powerful books and has a number of fans, so to speak, and that is the reason that this blog exists. You seem to think that it's a shame that many of us are only interested in the prophetic Biblical ramifications of
this New Age thing, but that is precisely why some of us are here.
You, with your relentless whining about how we aren't focused on "fighting the New Age", just don't seem to want to acknowledge that Constance Cumbey is a Christian, and wrote her books from a
Christian perspective.
Too bad about you. You are the one who "doesn't get it".
Write your own best selling book and then you can have a blog and kick everyone out who doesn't toe your line.
Everything in this world is vanity and a vexation of the spirit.
Jesus is the only hope.
Paul
Were you addressing the anon poster as Chicken to insult? That's what it seems.
That's what I mean about this blog, some of you all can talk like that to people who disagree with you, but when people talk back you don't like it.
Paul, you really are an ASS! And you kiss alot of it too.
The heading on the blog:
News and views of Constance Cumbey concerning "Radical Middle", New Age Movement, Communitarianism, "planetary humanism," "global governance," European Union, Javier Solana, Jeremy Rifkin, "New Age Politics," law in the USA, combined with life in general -- sometimes humorous, sometimes not!
Constance' support of the Catholic Church has stumped me for years. They are rife with pagan practices and indeed preach another gospel. I believe with all my heart (as did hundreds of church fathers) that the anti-christ (whoever he is) will hold the office of the pope. The Catholic church is corrupt and evil to it's core, full of pedophilia and doctrines of demons.
Anonymous @ 8:37 PM
Well, since you believe with all of your heart that the anti-Christ will hold the office of pope... then, obviously, anyone who tries to convince you otherwise would just be wasting their breath. (It must make you feel all puffed up with pride that you have all of this inside information.)
The same holds true of trying to convince you that pedophilia is hardly confined to the Catholic Church. Rather, it is an epidemic of sin which is happening all over the world... including the protestant churches as well as the public schools.
8:37 P.M.
True about the catholic institution!
But I think the pope will be the 'false prophet', not the antichrist.
After the World Cup win of Germany there was a rumor that Angela Merkel is going to leave office early to head either EU or UN:
http://rt.com/news/172508-merkel-chancellor-possible-resignation/
Better to leave on a high note.
Since we are talking about the number 7 in Christine's speech, the airplane that went down was 777.
Anti Christ is here already, and its all around us. People are so busy worrying about 'who' its going to be and so forth but what I notice is a 'way' which is opposed to Christ and its here loud and clear and getting worse by the day. The anti chris'ts way is overtaking the Christian way of living, at least once upon a time most people knew the difference between right and wrong, that is questioned nowadays and laws are made to lean toward the wrong. How can we fix this anti Christian society?
People also talking here about Constance's blog, well, I've only been reading this site for about 4 years now but its nice to have discovered some place where some like minded people can air their thoughts, or just have a read and know that there are others out there who share the same worries about what's permeating our society at a rapid pace. I found this site whilst reading about Barbara Marx Hubbard and realised Constance was onto things years ago. The day I saw the video of Barbara so delighted with her self over being the speaker at the LCWR and planting her seeds etc I nearly had a stroke, I kid you not. HOw could this be? she was mixing it in with Nuns. I thought, who do I tell? can't call the cops, can't ring a lawyer, don't know the Pope's phone number....do we call the ghostbusters? nope, just have to read it and weep. The 60 minutes interviews with the Nuns in question was even more horrifying than Barbara's little gleeful tidbit coz they plainly omitted the real reason for the Church being up in arms over these nuns. So one sided an interview, I felt sick, and still no one you can speak to or warn or anything...so, its very nice to be able to pop in here and leave thoughts, or ask a question and I personally would like to thank Constance for having this blog open for people, like myself, who are truly truly truly worried about the way things are headed.
From Oz.
Thanks, "From Oz", and I'm very glad you are here. Your kind words are appreciated.
Constance
To Anonymous 12:38
Your points are excellent and disturbing. I am watching. CAREFULLY.
Thanks!
Constance
Constance Cumbey said...
Susanna, Oz, and others,
One of the interesting things that has come to light in recent years was the Hi-Jacking of Jack Chick (Chick Publications) by Alberto Rivera who we now learn thanks to Roy Livesey's conscientious research, had a distinctly Theosophical Agenda. I had noticed that some of the back Chick comics had references to Blavatsky's ISIS UNVEILED and Lady Jane Queensborough's OCCULT THEOCRASY.
What Livesey learned when researching by personally travelling to some of Alberto's old haunts was that Alberto had never been either a Jesuit nor even a Roman Catholic priest. He had floated between both Protestant and Catholic ministries as an employee. His "Catholic priesthood" was in the LIBERAL CATHOLIC CHURCH, which was the branch of the THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY founded by ex Church of England priest turned Theosophical activist CHARLES WILSON LEADBETER.
This FAITH AND FREEDOM newsletter contains much of the relevant Roy Livesey information. Roy Livesey is a dedicated truth seeker. I've not talked with him now in many years, although I wish I could track him down telephonically. He spent a week with us in mid 1985 when he was researching the New Age Movement for his books which published in the British Isles. Livesey was and probably still is anti-Catholic and he originally, I believed, thought Alberto was truthful. When he discovered he was not, he courageously got the word out on him.
http://www.tabernaclebpc.com/others/Faith&Freedom/140401-April.pdf
or
http://tinyurl.com/qysf6bj
Constance
Dear 'from Oz' and others:
Since the Catholic Church is made up of over 1 BILLION Catholics, we can hardly be responsible for those radical nuns or priests who decide to 'go rogue' - who attempt to pass themselves off as representing the official church... when in fact they do NOT!!!
OZ 12:50 A.M.
There is no way to turn things from "the way they are headed". Read the book of Revelation. These things are upon us now. Scripture will be fulfilled. It would do you no good to call ghost busters, the pope, the cops, or a lawyer. " The christian way of living" has always been a narrow path, if its real, and active in an individual there will always be persecution, corporately or individually. I understand your being "truly worried". Who of us seeing the things that are coming upon the world would not worry? Nevertheless we have an Advocate with The Father who knows our issues, and cares, and loves us. That Savior/King is infinitely better to call upon than the pope, or the cops etc. He is the only WAY that can strengthen, and guide us to face this end of the age. Bring all of your questions, concerns, and petitions to Him alone, in faith, and He will bless and comfort you OZ.
11:01 AM
Exactly.
I have thrown in my lot with Him. Just Him. Jesus Alone is LORD.
14 Reasons Obama is Lying When He Claims The World Is 'More Stable' And 'Less Violent' Than Ever
www.tedmontgomery.com
July 18, 2014 post
Paul, what helps you get through life works for you and others. Those facing difficult times can try what has helped you and if not other ways of coping with what life throws at us. I would never attempt to lay a guilt trip on those who had no need to research the New Age movement.
You present your way and I'll present another way. The end is facing what life throws at us and still being biblical moral.
12:03 A.M.
So tell us, just what is this "other way" that you would present?
Constance, I've just read that Alberto Rivera article on the link you left. I'd never ever heard of this man before or even the Chick Comics. Interesting read though. In fact there were many interesting snippets in that newsletter, for example I actually had to go and double check to see if we here in OZ were having a giant golden Buddah being built in New South Wales and it seems we are. Also an interesting article on gay acceptance being pushed (or should I say 'taught') in schools here in Western Australia which I'd not heard about either, so thanks for the link. Much to read, then much to worry about, as per usual.
Never forget to have a word with Himself just before you nod off people.
From Oz
Just an afterthought(regarding the story in the newsletter from Constance about gay acceptance being taught in Ozzie schools) - how are children supposed to be taught to accept a 'way' which many still find to be wrong? How can they enforce this in schools when all parents will not be in agreeance to a 'way' the schools are almost promoting by making it acceptable?
It sort of reminds me of the story of the prostitute that was going to be stoned - Jesus prevented that stoning by asking whoever was without sin to cast the first stone and naturally, none of us are without sin,,,,but, he didn't turn to the prostitute and say, right, off you go and get back to it,,,did he? no, he told her not to sin again. NOT TO SING AGAIN. So, we can teach our kids not to bully those that are doing something unnatural but who is going to tell that child in question that they must not carry on this way? you can't even get help from doctors or psychologists etc as many of them are gay themselves or just don't diagnose gayness as abnormal.
what to do????
from Oz.
when telling your kids not to bully them, add that it is only likely to make them more into it but tell them if they come on to you that it is unnatural and you won't go for it, and to gently explain this without bullying if they get into a casual conversation, throw in the idea that you don't have to act on bad desires. Teach the kids to say all this.
and to say that the adults who say it is okay and professionals ditto are just fooled by those who weasled into psychiatry or whatever who were that way themselves so twisted others' world view when they could.
interesting articles
http://watch.pair.com/stuph.html
http://watch.pair.com/chuck-pierce.html
However, it strikes me that the usual signature wrath of God indicator is a drought and famine, though I probably forgot something somewhere in The Bible this stands out, the other is defeat in war and foreign conquest of the land. drought involves heat, not fire itself but reminiscent of fire of judgement. Pierce's prophecies deal more in storms and rain, though of course there was The Flood, but that was a one time event.
If these are engineered, God may be allowing it because of His anger at the people who draw the demons in the first place, and the NAR casting out of demons or breaking their strongholds may be more of a ploy to make themselves look legitimate. How effective these measures are is anyone's guess. Seems odd to break a demonic stronghold then call down wrath instead of working for human repentance.
http://watch.pair.com/hurricanes.html
http://watch.pair.com/hurricanes-2.html#sorcery and read the rest of the article before this point. The photo of the "Christian" with the sword on the stage, note the wiggly look of the blade, this is a feature of some satanic swords.
these articles are apparently written by Barbara Aho who I recall drew some criticism, but the critic I am reading now seems to be of the why would God allow this sort of thinking and also makes this howler regarding an interlinear Aho likes.
" The author, Thomas Newberry, used the New Age title, "the Coming One" in reference to Jehovah and I AM. He also paved the way for the Sacred Name Movement by stating that "YAH" (which is a pagan Hebrew mystery name) is a name of God: "The Title JAH or YAH is at once one of the sublimest yet simplest of the Divine names." (7)" http://libertytothecaptives.net/george_ricker_berry_corrupt_foundation.html
Jah is used in KJV as short form of Jehovah, there being no hard J in Hebrew it should be Yah and there is no pagan "god" that I recall being called this.
Strong's Concordance online confirms what she said about the Greek word charagma used for mark being a stamp engraving sign or even a sculpture.
Unfortunately, children are being robbed of their "age of innocence" even before they have "the use of reason" ( traditionally at seven years old).
Thanks Susanna for expounding about this.
From what I have observed (even involving family), in the broadest sense of this issue, it does not go unnoticed that that 'mode of being' requires recruitment because it does not naturally reproduce. That is the mandate in Genesis that was set by God and goes to an extreme to counter it by sexually abusing the young. Add to that the conditioning from the culture (degraded for decades now) to take away absolutes of right and wrong taught by the judeao/christian ethic, coupled with near parentless (by divorce) or very unattended children for whatever reason, we are witness to see that it has afforded huge opportunity to make easy prey of the them to carry on abnormal behavior.
11:27 The other way for some of us is to learn what is going on, to understand why as a country we are being dragged through cultural mud, who is doing that kind of dirty work and to expose them. Manipulators come into a community of people and do their dirty work because they are so sure of themselves and think they are intellectually superior as they pull their dirty tricks for the good of others as they see it. Morality plays no role in their efforts.
Manipulators work under many labels. Inevitably they lead a community to destruction. They know the methods to use to gain followers. They know most people are lazy and are easily led by people who know how to tag with labels. Labels such as Democrats, Republicans, bankers, communists, revolutionaries, hippies, homosexuals, the left, the right, atheists, Catholics, Zionists, Protestants, Muslims are useful because there are enough people in those groups so that there can always be found some among them those who are imperfect humans who have been used and who themselves use others. Even those who are innocently trying to understand what is going on find themselves labeled as suckers who believe conspiracy theories. Very few people look at what is actually in the can behind the label.
Truth remains hidden by those who find it easier to manipulate, find reasons to not look at what is going on in their lives, or plain just don't care about their fellow man. Truth remains hidden by those whose lives are bounded by thoughts only of themselves.
Truth is the fact that there are people networked under a multiple set of beliefs that were set in a new motion when occult ideas met political ideas under the label New Age. Destructive ideas from the past were given a new life and enhanced by additional input because times do change.
That network is extremely powerful now in open and hidden ways. Millions of people are manipulated by it. Yet there has been no meaningful exposure of it by conservatives, liberals, left, right, or any other organized group. That hasn't happened by chance. Part of learning what is going on is asking why. It's as if a planned plague is destroying the world and can be ignored because after all some woman in Michigan has written about it.
You asked what other way is there. There are people all over who have parts of the answer and who are not part of the manipulation community. We try to find each other and expose to others what we have learned. We have gone behind labels and taken off mud spattered glasses to see the truth.
Rather than part of the answer, I believe the whole answer is Y'shua the Messiah. His word, in contrast to the serpents word. We who believe know there is no solution to counter networking. The evil that is going on in the world will wax worse and worse until Satan is locked up! If your looking for a quasi religious type of secular utopia then your wasting energy. Everything is subject to corruption until Satan is locked up. Even during the millennium there will be sin, but it will me little compared to what is going on now. Once Y'shua is ruling this earth, we will then have a perfect ruler, and perfect justice.
I'm not saying we should not be informed, or that we should not warm others. We should watch, and pray, but the Lord's will, will be done.
Thanks for those stats Susanna (almost 3 percent). Way back when, 97 percent would make 3 percent null and void.......not any more, so it would seem.
And for any young people who might be feeling 'mixed' up about their orientation etc, it does NOT help when 'family' tv shows have 2 gay dads raising a little girl (that they just magicked up outta nowhere), or music video's and concerts where women are all over each other (thinking Madonna encouraging some of this) and so on.Or bearded 'ladies' winning music contests. Or you have guys like Elton John and Ricky Martin who are great musicians getting to push their ways via magazines, the shows they are on etc,,,,I think if I see one more snippet from Elton John on what's what and who's who I'm gonna have to write a letter of complaint to someone, somewhere, but where? and you notice every time Putin makes a stance on such things in Russia you get a whole listtttttttttttt of names from the west which usually include all of the above plus Obama telling Putin what he should be doing. (I'm talking homosexuality here not all of Putins other political interests). The Ellen show is another one that 'makes all of this ok' and the massive push from that Uni in the US along with Oprah and Deepak Chopra all backing Lady GAga a couple of years back with the BORN THIS WAY thing almost blew my mind. So blatant, so wrong. So, with all of this, how on earth would a confused young soul get back to the straight and narrow? or should I just say, get back to normal? They can't if they are being told over and again in all these different ways that they are perfectly normal.
From Oz
note on Barbara Aho's material at Watch Unto Prayer, she has a distinct "Jewish Conspiracy" bent, but her analysis of current trends and what NAR is up to are based on the NAR leaders' words, and networking. These people are all over the prophecy channel and even drag in some legitimate sorts like Berit Kjos who wrote Under The Spell of Mother Earth on their shows.
It is of course easy to denounce obviously Christ rejecting stuff, and look good doing it, which is why the evil Paul Crouch would have Constance on his show.
study up on psychopaths, most are not violent serial killers, they gravitate to positions of power over others - military, politics, surgery and other medicine, church leadership, business management, and the extreme individualistic competitive and self advancement culture of the US and Europe is a good fit for these people.
It is unfortunate that Aho fell for some of the antisemitic propaganda.
Frankly I think that these people pushing Israel and encouraging aliyah to Israel comes from a hope (at least on the part of the unholy spirit behind them) that all the Jews will get concentrated in one place and evaporated in a nuclear war.
Joel's Army as one observer put it, is an incubating terrorist organization. It is not always called by this name but that's what is being taught whether called Joel's Army or not.
Joel's Army name comes from a prophecy in Joel, but the CONTEXT shows it is not believers cleansing the church, but an army of unbelievers sent against backslidden Israel, and that army will be DESTROYED by God.
Dear OZ 8::10 P.M.
Good list of cultural agitprop in favor of the gay lifestyle.
Are you wondering how the gender-bending agenda ties in with the occult and with the New Age Movement?
I will give you a clue.
In occult parlance, Lucifer is referred to as "The Divine Androgyne."
In the 19th-century, utopian socialism morphed into Saint-Simonianism - which in turn morphed into an androgynous religion clled "evadism."
SAINT = SIMONIANISM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint-Simonianism
____________________
One of the more notorious disciples of Saint-Simonianism was Barthélemy Prosper Enfantin whose religious agenda involved the quest for the "female messiah."
BARTHELEMY PROSPER ENFANTIN
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barth%C3%A9lemy_Prosper_Enfantin
_________________________
Enfantin was succeeded by the socialist "prophet" Simon Ganneau who claimed to be the reincarnation of the "lost king" Louis XVII
(who some occultists and "legitimists" believed survived the French Revolution) and developed the androgynous religion which came to be known as "evadism."
The following biography of Ganneau is in French but it is more complete that the others I have been able to find online.
SIMON GANNEAU
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Ganneau
_________________________
It was one of Ganneau's disciples who is said to have fired the first shot that led to the uprising in Paris in 1848.
Among Ganneau's disciples was the French socialist magician Eliphas Levi whose works were plagiarized by American Freemason Albert Pike.....and socialist Flora Tristan, grandmother of the famous painter Paul Gaugin.
If you look at the famous - or rather infamous - drawing of the Baphomet by Eliphas Levi, you will find that it is androgynous.
BAPHOMET
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baphomet
Genetically modifying everyone/everything!
www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/evolution/crispr-gene-drives/
OZ 8:10 P.M.
OZ, you mention how you would like things to "get back to normal" and "get back to the straight and narrow"
Grated, there have been much better times than these in history, regardless of Obama saying things have never been better. But, "normal" has always seen sin, and injustice to say the least! Even in the so called best of times. As far as "getting back to the straight and narrow", as the world goes, things have never been straight or narrow. The world system is a wide path, and it has never been straight. Until the Lord returns to rule with a rod of iron things will wax worse, and worse. No need to over much worry or fret. The weapons of our warfare are not carnal. We may see small victory here and there, but the general trend is that things will wax worse.
Find your peace in the Savior. No matter how bad things get in the world, and how much that is frustrating, we have hope eternal in Christ. Read 2 Thessalonians chapter 2. It has a lot of answers in there as to what is, and will happen in these last days. Don't worry so much OZ.
To Anon at 11.54
I read Thessolonians 2 and yes I think reading the bible is a reassurance when we get into a state of worry (like I'm usually in). So thank you for that. And that's an apt passage.
From Oz
If we are going into deep philosophy, I'm throwing this in. The basic question is--Is the world perfect or imperfect. I'm not putting in the question of a definition of God. Both views claim a definition of God.
There is the view that nothing in the world is bad and so it is not allowed to be judged The only bad thing is judging. Everything, every little animal, every sexual possibility, everything basic is part of an organized perfect whole. The WHOLE must be accommodated, seen as acceptable and not changed. Any attempt to force separation or change is a negative action.
This sounds accepting, kind and loving, caring and accommodating. Above all, it is seen as not judgmental It works on a personal level because if the system says judging is wrong, no one is supposed to be judged. Whatever one does is just part of the WHOLE and is acceptable or can be explained away.
Along comes a system accepted by the Jewish community which is accepted by the Christian community. It says some behavior is positive and some negative. Do the positive, avoid the negative. Use your brains. Negative behavior will always damage. Avoid it.
Even people who work hard at following religious guidelines are in fear of being judged by their neighbor. That's what makes the no judgment mindset so attractive as a thing to follow.
Bapomet is a symbol of the WHOLE. That's what's important to those who see it as a valued symbol.
There are many different organized belief systems people join. While we early on choose which we will follow, it is also important to know what attracts human beings like ourselves to other belief systems.
Anonymous 1:58 P.M.
Re:If we are going into deep philosophy, I'm throwing this in. The basic question is--Is the world perfect or imperfect.
The world is fallen.
This is not deep philosophy. It is self evident/common sense.
The reason the world is fallen is because of man's abuse of free will which has resulted in exponentially progressive violations of the natural and supernatural law .....which, in turn, results in the exponentially unpleasant/horrific - and often unforeseen - consequences we are currently witnessing.
And how do we know there is such a thing as free will?
Because there have always been laws.
God's giving Adam a rule to obey in Genesis had a twofold purpose.
1. To inform Adam that while he had been given dominion oover the earth,he was NOT God and had to answer to a higher authority.
2. To reveal to Adam that he had been endowed with the gift of free will.
Why would God "legislate" something that Adam couldn't help doing anyway?????
From the perspective of the necessitarian "dark side," why do totalitarian regimes which deny free will - calling free will in man "an illusion" - have to lie to people and/or hold guns to peoples' heads in order to force them into doing things that they "can't help doing anyway????????"
OZ 12:24 P.M.
I also find it difficult to look at that Baphomet pic.
But nevertheless, it represents a deeper meaning of "androgyne" which is to be found in radical gnostic dualism, accordind to which "matter is evil" and only "spirit is good."
If "matter is evil," then procreation is also "evil" since procreation involves "imprisoning" souls in matter.
St. Augustine was a Manichean hearer before his dramatic conversion to Christianity. He saw the "matter is evil" twaddle for what it really was.....a direct attack on the MATERIAL humanity of
Christ.....the spirit of the Antichrst which denies that
Christ has "come in the flesh."
St. Augustine not only came to understand the demonic origin of the Manichaean condemnation of matter but he also came to understand how the Incarnation pulled humanity away from evil saying:
man is taught by it ( the Incarnation )not to prefer the devil to himself, nor to honor him who is the author of sin; hence Augustine says (De Trin. xiii, 17): “Since human nature is so united to God as to become one person, let not these proud spirits dare to prefer themselves to man, because they have no bodies.”
One more thing:
It is a mistake to confuse abstract "masculine" and "feminine" with concrete "male" and "female."
Abstract "masculinity" and "feminity" indicates a hierarchical structure to creation. You will observe in Scripture that angels are always referred to in masculine terms. This is because in the order of nature, the angelic nature is higher than human nature.
God reveals Himself to Moses as "HE WHO IS." ( The most high ) The Divine Nature is not only the highest Nature, but also the Cause of all other natures.
Androgyny attempts to do away with this hierarchical view of creation. A kind of infernal PC.
Peter Jones is professor of New Testament at Westminster Seminary.
Professor Jones maintains that the goal of Gnostic sexuality is androgyny, the blending of male and female in one person.
ANDROGYNY: THE PAGAN SEXUAL IDEAL . . . Peter Jones
www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/43/.../43-3-pp443-469_JETS.pdf
Susanna, my only point in sharing what I did was to let others know how the New Age followers, aware and unaware, take a philosophy and live by it. Most people have a belief system which they follow and live by. They don't explore their own belief system much less understand why others have taken a different path. They just say "My way is the right way. Just do it because I say so."
The accepting a WHOLE doesn't fit in with the way the universe, including our earth, is set up. There is order in the physical world. Science grows by learning the correct patterns for everything. There is no mishmash in the world of any of the sciences. One can't take an lawnmower and put it in the middle of the road to take out the bumps. We as a civilization have learned what works and doesn't over thousands of years, not only in the physical world but in all other interactions. There are shades of good and bad in food preparation and in morality.
That is difficult for individuals to accept. Every human must learn from scratch from the day they are born how the world works best. Religion gives guidelines as much as medical books teach guidelines. While life offers many options, many choices, it is wisest to go with the ones that work long term for the individual as well as the community he lives in. Individuals need to know that what they do might in the short run benefit them, but in the long run the community they affect by their actions just might come back to bite them in the you know what. (This was getting too serious.)
All that said, we need to know, though not accept, why individuals are drawn to other patterns so we can help them avoid the pitfalls in life.
ANDROGYNY: THE PAGAN SEXUAL IDEAL . . . Peter Jones
Susanna, thanks, I just read this piece. (even see Barbara Marx Hubbard noted).
For me, the only way a man and a woman become ONE is via marriage.
And the other thing is: how do these people who are 'men' on the outside, know that they are 'women' on the inside? how do they know that what they are feeling is a feminine feeling? this is something that has always had me wondering. They are obviously feeling something, but who's to say its feminine?? and vice versa.
The Shift is mentioned in this article and last yr I was reading the Shift Network and the chap who runs it actually had a video up about now being the time for the DIVINE FEMININE (probably due to this age of aquarius bizzo as well). The way I see it is its more of the feminine over the masculine these days. The devil has to screw with every single thing God created, doesn't he? he must be so peeved coz he's always at it. What on earth is wrong with a man being a man and a woman being a woman, they were made to complement each other and to create life....very straightforward really.
Thanks for the link.
From Oz.
Anonymous 5:43
My comment was not meant to be snarky or disrespectful.
I was trying not to get too philosophical in my comments, but sometimes I have to explain things that way so people will get what I am talking about.
Odd Susanna, I just left you a comment re the Shift Network, IONS etc and some links on Trans Med (david lynch, Oprah) and also Mindfulness from Tim Ryan (congressman) and it didn't show up.....there's not normally a waiting period for comments, is there???
From Oz
"Abstract "masculinity" and "feminity" indicates a hierarchical structure to creation. You will observe in Scripture that angels are always referred to in masculine terms. This is because in the order of nature, the angelic nature is higher than human nature. "
Actually, the angels are a non reproducing species, so have no sexes. But being large and powerful we cue on them as male.
The only reference to Eve as being subordinate to Adam is in the curse to her AFTER The Fall. "helpmeet" is not a subordinate gofer, ezer helper of a partner sort, neged face to face can be as friend or opposition, several applications, see Strong's Concordance online, adds up to partner fit for because like unto him.
" how do these people who are 'men' on the outside, know that they are 'women' on the inside? how do they know that what they are feeling is a feminine feeling? this is something that has always had me wondering. They are obviously feeling something, but who's to say its feminine?? and vice versa."
This is because they accept sexist notions of gender of personality and interests and activities. Which is ironic since these things change over the centuries in one culture and differ cross culturally. In general whatever is prized is hogged for men and considered superior.
The whole born in the wrong body thing is a delusion. And those who think that by reinforcing gender roles prevent homosexuality are working from the illusion that homosexuals are always cross gender in other behavior and likes. This is false.
the gay crowd in our culture is dominated by the fag type, so they think so too. there was a gay historical encyclopedia I looked into once, and stumbled on the 500 women disguised as men on both sides of the Civil War discovered only because of wounds being treated or dead, not whole squads of such just individuals.
Deborah Sampson was another case in point in the American Revolutionary War.
They just ASSUMED these were lesbians because of cross gender role behaviors. But the fact is, that when such women are known about mostly in European history, there is no indication they had female lovers, a very few married women as covers to keep their male public identity from suspicion, but a typical case in England the wife was the ignorant sheltered sort who could be expected to know nothing about sex and not expect it and kept separate rooms.
Several women warriors in disguise in Napoleonic wars were following their male lovers. Pope Joan was a very smart gal who disguised as a man and became a monk actually to be with her male lover and was discovered when she gave birth during a papal procession, she and the infant were killed by the mob.
As one woman put it, we don't envy the penis we envy the social acceptance and freedom that having a penis gets you.
"The only reference to Eve as being subordinate to Adam is in the curse to her AFTER The Fall."
Dear Christian Feminist, Eve was created from Adam, for Adam and after Adam.
Some extreme anti-feminist Christians seek to claim that only men, not women, are in the image of God. The most obvious meaning of the image is that man is capable of personal relationship with God in a way that animals aren't, which obviously includes women as much as men. And the final Judgement proceeds by the same criteria for men and women.
But you, Christine, have gone way too far in the other direction.
Part of the New Age motivation for androgyny is that NA philosophy is monist, all is unity if we see deep enough, and all differentiation including between the sexes is illusion. To which I reply: MALE AND FEMALE CREATED HE THEM. Amen!
By the logic of Eve made after Adam you can argue Adam was made for the rest of creation, since made last. While you need to make a context for something, like a proper home environment for a pet before you bring it in usually, it is also true that to some extent he was made for the rest of creation, to "tend the garden and keep it" as an overseer.
I am not sure what other direction I have gone too far in by comparison with nut cases who say only women are made in the image of God.
Regardless of what you are used to, regardless of what legal and social situation the early church had to operate in, but also that Paul pulled the teeth of by turning the priorities of marriage upside down, with men to be supportive of women instead of vice versa,
the BIBLICAL FACT is that before The Fall there is no "your desire (longing, recourse, whatever) will be to your husband and he will rule over you."
Go see for yourself. from Genesis 2:18 through the end of Genesis 3.
I suppose you expect to find it early on, you won't
It is part of the curse on Eve AFTER the fall.
and in case the obvious is too much for you to comprehend, if it was stated after the Fall, IT WAS NOT PRESENT BEFORE THE FALL.
Paul's remarks are obviously in context of uproarious disruptive types and well, if they want to have the questionable personality tendencies Eve developed - deceivable and ambitious after wisdom which since she shared this with Adam was not a ploy to gain equality with him she already had - they can keep her curse.
So if this isn't some conditional instead of absolute prohibition, why does he address Priscilla ahead of her husband Aquila as often as the more proper vice versa?
someone once said regarding the radical feminists, that the problem with the feminists of the 1970s was that when women stopped being ladies they did not learn how to be gentlemen.
Speaking of gender issues.
Marvel Comics turns Thor into a Goddess
the open scroll.blogspot.com.
Sunday, July 20, 2014 post
Spoken like a true amazon, Christine.
You walk on the weird side when you talk Bible. Yes, you go too far (as usual), and are easily dismissed, because your context does not stay with the text.
Re:and another Marvel change. They have been busy working toward changing things for a while. I find it sad that the characters people have grown to love HAVE to change. Couldn't they just create some new ones if need be?
Well....no they cannot. Not if they are going to continue with the implementation of their Antonio Gramsci-inspired "cultural hegemony" which involves emptying popular/traditional cultural icons and symbols of their original meaning and assigning them new ones which are in conformity with the Marxist/progreassivist agenda.
"the BIBLICAL FACT is that before The Fall there is no "your desire (longing, recourse, whatever) will be to your husband and he will rule over you." "
I agree Christine, which is why I didn't quote that verse. I simply pointed out that Eve was created after Adam, for Adam and from Adam. The second of those is something you haven't engaged with. Woman was created to help man, not vice-versa; what does that imply about their relationship? St Paul answers: “The head of every man is Christ, and the head of woman is man… for man did not come from woman, but woman from man” (1 Cor 11:3&8). Paul here justifies their relative position using a fact from before the Fall, clearly implying it was the same before that event.
I suspect you misunderstand even the verse you quote. God’s curse on Eve and womanhood, following the Fall, includes in Gen 3:16: “You will desire-your-way [TSHUQAH] with your husband, but he will master [MASHAL] you.” This much mistranslated phrase means that the woman will desire to dominate the man, but will fail. In the Hebrew original, the same construction appears shortly afterwards in Genesis 4:7 when God says to Cain, “Sin desires-its-way [TSHUQAH] with you, but you must master [MASHAL] it.” The two words appear together nowhere else. So the Fall is the start of the ‘battle of the sexes’.
"and in case the obvious is too much for you to comprehend"
I have been taught that people resort to insults when they run out of arguments. You are near-unique in running out of arguments yet not running out of words.
Thank you 7:02 p.m.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Right on the money with your biblical answer and noting Christine's trouble with biblical topics.
Anonymous 7:02
I also concur!!!!!
United States Does Nothing While One Million Christians Are Slaughtered In Iraq
www.nowtheendbegins.com/blog/?p=23554
"Woman was created to help man, not vice-versa; what does that imply about their relationship? St Paul answers: “The head of every man is Christ, and the head of woman is man… for man did not come from woman, but woman from man” (1 Cor 11:3&8)."
Leaving out context which includes vss. 11, 12 "nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man in the Lord.
For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman, but all things of God."
Paul here caveats his whole statement.
"I suspect you misunderstand even the verse you quote. God’s curse on Eve and womanhood, following the Fall, includes in Gen 3:16: “You will desire-your-way [TSHUQAH] with your husband, but he will master [MASHAL] you.” This much mistranslated phrase means that the woman will desire to dominate the man, but will fail." then relates this to Genesis 4:7 which is part of a very peculiar picture clarified by Septuagint which shows the problem was not that Cain's sacrifice was wrong but that he divided it wrongly, and it is ABEL not sin that longs for or whose "recourse is to" him so why be jealous correct your way and since Abel leans on you as older brother your position is secure.
Strong's online says this is "in the original sense a stretching out after, a longing." The mastery by Adam is the RESULT of her longing after him because what you yearn after will rule you because you adapt to it.
""and in case the obvious is too much for you to comprehend"
I have been taught that people resort to insults when they run out of arguments."
YOU WERE TAUGHT WRONG.
(I hate to think what other garbage you may have been taught.)
My first reaction to most garbage I run into is contempt, which instead of verbalizing I set aside and present the argument against the garbage.
I say this because I have been over this ground before. And everyone has read this, why so blind they can't see, that the whole situation described being post Fall is curse not original condition?
EVEN IF YOUR INTERPRETATION IS CORRECT, YOUR ARGUMENT STILL FAILS.
Here's why.
If she is desiring to rule Adam, and he instead will rule her, this is itself consistent with a change from an equal position. SO IT DOES NOT REFUTE THE EQUAL POSITION.
Women's feminine wiles and various means of seeming submission and so forth are all part of an effort to rule, ever read that Mormon abomination The Feminine Woman? (I think I have the title right.)
the importance of flattery and acting like you need his help on every little thing and soothing and encouraging his pride with constant praise and so forth is emphasized, explicitly as a means of control,
because it says, some men get cynical or whatever the term used is, used to not getting flattered, learn to do without it, and are no longer amenable to this. so they are out of control, and it is important to raise a young man to depend on flattery and to have a sensitive pride and ego, easily managed by such flattery.
In sloth and deceptiveness then, Eve would attempt to either maintain a ruling she originally had legitimately but now by underhanded means, but it wouldn't work well because her very means she used would put her in the subordinate position in fact, ruling by manipulation so adapting constantly to him instead of vice versa or to each other, and eventually through the generations this would deteriorate into the fakery becoming a reality,
OR she would attempt to move from equal to superior by whatever means, but would fail.
So your argument still fails.
Again I fall back on the meaning of the phrase translated "helpmeet" good enough in Elizavethan I guess meaning helper fit for him. "meet" means "fit, correct."
EZER NEGED don't rely on modern Strong's they made a change. Use the older version online.
eser a helper like a partner may even be from a stronger position like when you help someone by pulling them out of a ditch you are not yourself in.
NEGED face to face either as opposition or like "man to man" likeness is emphasized.
I can just see you lording things over your resident seer fiance. (you certainly take that tone here with us)
Cart before the horse and a good example of why you have this portion of scripture so misunderstood. Men and women are equal spiritually but the roles in the relationship have an order that God Himself established. That was already expounded and what you dismiss in 1 cor 11. You are out of order sweetie pie. And because you live with a man you are not married to, and thus out of order there also, I can see your mix-up in these issues. What you have in reality Christine, is two ticks and no dog. No sanctity and no relationship with the order that God can bless. (yet you would lord your idea of this over us)
You need to go back to the drawing board. Go reread the scripture and submit to it's authority in obeying it and maybe we'll hear you next time you speak bible.
Susanna,
Thanks for the links, have only read the one from Constance thus far - "THE FAMILY" AND ITS HIJACKING OF EVANGELICALISM and what a mind blowing read that is. Have not even gotten to the highlighted links in this article yet ......always we see Barbara Marx Hubbard noted in the mix. She was trying to do her thing with the Evangelicals in this article and got busy with the nuns further down the track I suppose. Sharing her 'wisdom'.
Do you know if Constance got to writing any feature articles on the 'twelve' mentioned at the end of this series?
I have read a fair bit about Edgar Mitchell but I'm sure there's more to learn. Noticed all of these types are joined at the hip. 'www' should be the the title for all these likeminded new agers on a mission.
From Oz
anon 10:17, as I said before I don't have sex with him.
and I could have exactly the view you have and be in some cult that says women have to be so in submission to men that they put out for whoever and everyone on order.
There is no logical connection between the two issues.
Now, when you take the attitude you have, and work it into law what you get is no inheritance, votes, jobs, etc. for women (why not have us wear the burka while you're at it?) precisely the point you make was the argument in 1836 in the state of New York against The Married Women's Property Law which was the opening wedge of the feminist movement, which in those days was very different from the present one.
Indeed, your attitude would fit nicely with "difference feminism," itself no stranger to perversion, atheism, heresy and immorality. Again, there is no connection between one thing and another such that one automatically flows from another.
Scene at home includes various role taking depending on who is right or wrong, I accept "get rid of that shit!" to help me stop hoarding (I don't hoard any more, but I don't get rid of everything for someone whose idea of proper amount of stuff is clothes on his back, driver's license and phone). I put my foot down and "and don't even think of buying more beer for Brian after all his seizures! not to mention the verbal abuse I get when he's drinking!" (the tenant here whose brother who won't have him in his home figures I saved his life a few times and counts me as family therefore.)
It is my house and I can make some rules. If it were Mike's house logically he could make the rules except where these collide with God's rules.
Everyone respect each other and don't mess with their stuff.
Christine, you have been asked by the blog owner to restrict yourself to one post per day. She is very long-suffering and has asked you this now three times. Don't you care?
You complain that everybody is ignoring the difference between the biblical portrayal of relations between man and woman before and after the Fall. But I - and another Anon - are not. Eve was created as a helper for Adam, not vice-versa, and St Paul states: “the head of every man is Christ, and the head of woman is man"; Paul's reason comes from before the Fall: "for man did not come from woman, but woman from man” (1 Cor 11:3&8)." Your response is that I left out "context", in particular these verses: "nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man in the Lord. For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman, but all things of God." These verses don't make a cent of difference to what I said.
Your response to my explanation of Genesis 3:16 (tshuqah/mashal) is this: "If she is desiring to rule Adam, and he instead will rule her, this is itself consistent with a change from an equal position. SO IT DOES NOT REFUTE THE EQUAL POSITION." Indeed. But it is also consistent with a change from a position in which Adam is the head, which you carefully didn't say and which I established above using a Pauline argument which harks back to the pre-Fall era.
Me: "I have been taught that people resort to insults when they run out of arguments."
You: "YOU WERE TAUGHT WRONG. My first reaction to most garbage I run into is contempt, which instead of verbalizing I set aside and present the argument against the garbage."
If you think that you set aside contempt in your replies then you are mistaken. But do tell me why I was taught wrong.
You have actually boasted on this blog how tough you consider you are in physical confrontation with men. I am more perturbed by your attitude than anything else, but having seen you on YouTube I can assure you that you are again inaccurate. What counts in unarmed combat is seldom strength but awareness, speed, knowledge ingrained by practice, and determination. Fitness helps. Of these, you have perhaps determination and awareness, which is not enough.
Christine, you live with a man you call your fiance and use the fact that you do nothing to sexually stimulate him (because of his health, as mentioned on previous threads) to assert that this is not a sinful arrangement. But it is very different from a man and a woman simply sharing a flat. I trust that you do not permit him to stimulate you. When you call him your fiance, what do you mean? Why do you not marry?
" What counts in unarmed combat is seldom strength but awareness, speed, knowledge ingrained by practice, and determination. Fitness helps. Of these, you have perhaps determination and awareness, which is not enough."
so far my opposition wasn't special forces trained.
number of posts, yes I care and that is why I am going silent again for several days to make up for this. I originally intended not to post for the rest of the month.
"Why do you not marry?"
two reasons. I have been on SSI for a long time, which is going to end. never mind why. I am better.
SSI based in Washington DC one of the jurisdictions which recognizes common law marriage, has the rule or did last I heard, that if you marry OR EVEN PRESENT YOURSELF AS MARRIED call him husband, you will lose the SSI because hubby is expected to support you, and if male ditto. Mike can barely support himself and is on edge of disabled.
secondly, he comes from a closet devil worship or at least occultist family one of those embedded in the Republican Party (his dad used to lunch with Jeb Bush) and such people will use The Bible as much as anything else. Severe beatings he used to get (probably partly earned given his arrogant and rebellious personality milder now) were in context of not wanting to go to church (an Old Catholic church whose Holy Water was good but this denomination or whatever often hides liturgically minded occultists) and "honor your father and mother" in the sense of obey every last damn fool thing they say.
This is not untypical satanist ploy to alienate children from Jesus Christ.
Traditionalist notions of sex role and man as head and marrying into his family play a role because they are about power a thing very important to satanists. Frankly, having met his parents and dealt with them on the phone many times, I am not sure who is really the power there.
This means that official marriage will put me in a lower position in his mind and there are still times, may always be times I don't know, when that would make it harder for me to deal with any reversionist tendencies on his part. Occultism, ritual and such like are addictive.
While my life would have been better if my biological so called mother had taken my father's lead instead of persuading him to adore and follow her, in my situation it is throwback to gynalocal matrilineal - oops, I repudiate her, find, Mike and I start our own lineage, which goes nowhere we both being sterile, I am post menopause and he had a vasectomy. (The idiot and yes, some brain damage, seems to think this is retroactive, so when his ex wife became noticeably pregnant soon after the vasectomy, he always assumed it couldn't be his kid though obviously he impregnated his ex wife before the vasectomy, and the daughter, now dead of liver failure, looked a lot like him.)
Christine, you seem to be unaware that young men in gangs regularly fight amongst themselves and pick up a lot of streetcraft that way. You wouldn't stand a chance in unarmed combat against a fit young man from that background.
Marriage is a public matter. The authorities have to know who is married and who is not because they have the duty to enforce laws pertaining to adultery, inheritance etc. Do you consider that you and your man are married in God's eyes?
3:10 AM & 5:41 AM posts of yours Christine prove you live an arrangement that is not the biblical description of a godly home. (and where is your trust in God to care for you without this 'arrangement'? because He can--I have been there myself).
I called it correctly because you fit the pattern by your own admission and you dare to expound the correct way to do relationship/marriage from the Bible? (wow)
Most definitely, two ticks and no dog.
Susanna, there is some misunderstanding in that critique of the Max Planck Society. This Society runs all federal German non-university scientific research institutes - to take one example among many, the Max Planck Institute for Quantum Optics in a particular area of physics. An equivalent would be a "US National Institute for Quantum Optics". To tar the entire Max Planck Society with the eugenic misdeeds of three or four of the many Max Planck Institutes would be like tarring the US National Institutes of Science umbrella organisation with the misdoings of a couple of its many member Institutes, when its job is simply to arrange the handing out of government money to them all. It is rather the individual Max Planck Institutes that got involved in eugenics which deserve censure. Anybody still involved who was part of the eugenics program must be purged, and the present leadership of those particular Institutes should confess their shame of the past. But the Max Planck Society itself is no more culpable than any other branch of the German government. I have been a guest lecturer for a 3-month stint at one of its Institutes, in my area of physics, and obviously physicists have nothing to do with eugenics and never did.
Physicist
Dear Physicist,
I agree that it would not be fair to tar everyone with the same brush, but I did say that SOME (not all) branches of the Kaiser Wilhelm Society were involved in criminal experiments on human beings.
It was Dr. William Seidler who tarred the Max Planck Society for trying to cover up the misdeeds of its Kaiser Wilhelm Society predecessor - as late as the 1990's.
Moreover, the Max Planck Society itself admits to its predecessor's Nazi links and even offered a public apology to its victims.
Max Planck Offers Historic Apology
BERLIN--For half a century, survivors of cruel experiments at Nazi death camps have been seeking a formal apology--as well as more details about the research abuses they endured--from Germany's scientific societies. On 7 June, a few of those victims finally got an explicit apology from the head of the country's premier basic research organization, the Max Planck Society, on behalf of its forerunner, the Kaiser Wilhelm Society (KWG), some of whose scientists were implicated in the nefarious research.
The historic overture came here at a symposium on human experimentation sponsored by the Max Planck presidential commission that is investigating the KWG's activities from 1933 to 1945. At the opening ceremony here, Max Planck president Hubert Markl offered survivors of concentration-camp experiments "the deepest regret, compassion, and shame at the fact that crimes of this sort were committed, promoted, and not prevented within the ranks of German scientists."
cont
Susanna: At risk of going round in circles, the Max Planck Society and its lineal predecessor the Kaiser Wilhelm Society is (or was) simply an arm of German government. So it is of course culpable to some extent, because the German government was culpable - after 1933 it WAS the Nazi party. I am simply concerned that people who do not understand how German science is organised will suppose from what you quote that most members of the Max Planck Institutes were active eugenicists. Most were physicists or chemists, and even in biology the vast majority worked in areas and Institutes that were totally unrelated to eugenics. They would simply have had views on the subject similar to a cross-section of the German, and perhaps European and American, population at the time.
More a matter of shame for the whole Max Planck Society was the way Jewish scientists were purged from EVERY Max Planck Institute in the 1930s. But that has already been apologised for, and it also carried its own penalty, for Germany ceased overnight to be world class - probably no.1 - in physics. (Between 1901 and 2007, Jews won 48 of the 181 Nobel Prizes awarded in physics – more than 1/4, despite comprising 0.2% of the world’s population and perhaps 1% of the population of the developed world at the time.) - Physicist
Dear Physicist,
You are right. Most members of the Kaiser Wilhelm Society were not eugenicists. But as you said, the society itself was an arm of the German Government.
The main criticism of certain members of the Max Planck Society was their failure to return the remains of those children who were subjects of Nazi experimentation by the KWS eugenecists, their selective "amnesia," (understandable), and, as you said, their purging of Jews from the organization.
Many are not aware that the Kaiser Wilhelm Society was renamed the Max Planck Society as an alternative to the resolution made by the Office of Military Government, United States(OMGUS) on July 11, 1946 to dissolve the Kaiser Wilhelm Society.
Meanwhile, members of the British occupation forces, specifically in the Research Branch of the OMGUS, saw the Society in a more favorable light and tried to dissuade the Americans from taking such action. The physicist Howard Percy Robertson was director of the department for science in the British Zone; he had a National Research Council Fellowship in the 1920s to study at the Georg-August University of Göttingen and the Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich. Also, Colonel Bertie Blount was on the staff of the British Research Branch, and he had received his doctorate at Göttingen under Walther Borsche. Among other things, Bertie suggested to Hahn to write to Sir Henry Hallett Dale, who had been the president of the Royal Society, which he did. While in England, Bertie also spoke with Dale, who came up with a suggestion. Dale believed that it was only the name which conjured up a pejorative picture and suggested that the Society be renamed the Max Planck Gesellschaft. On 11September 1946, the Max Planck Gesellschaft was founded in the British Zone only. The second founding took place on 26 February 1948 for both the American and British occupation zones. The physicists Max von Laue and Walther Gerlach were also instrumental in establishing the Society across the allied zones, including the French zone.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaiser_Wilhelm_Society
_____________________________
Ergo, it is the British who deserve the credit for coming up with the idea of changing the name of the Kaiser Wilhelm Society to the Max Planck Society. Otherwise, it might have been "kaput." :-)
Dear Physicist,
Regarding your comments on LaGarde, I would just like to add that when I was in banking, some of the executive officers ADMITTED that they based their investment strategies on astrological charts.
Needless to say, I didn't keep any money there!!! LOL
Susanna,
I hadn't known that story of how the Kaiser Wilhelm Society was renamed after Max Planck - interesting - thank you! I often found it surprising that even the biological research institutes in Germany were named after a physicist, and it is nice to know why.
Incidentally, every institute of the Max Planck Society today is known as the "Max Planck Institute for [field of research]", but when it was the Kaiser Wilhelm Society they were just called the "Kaiserliche Institute for..." The "Wilhelm" was not included.
Max Planck was a superb physicist and seems to have been a fine man. But he was human... a story is told by another physicist, PP Ewald, of Planck, who was then the President of the Kaiser Wilhelm Society, opening one of its Institutes in 1934: "We were all staring at Planck, waiting to see what he would do at the opening, because at that time it was prescribed officially that you had to open such addresses with "Heil Hitler". Well, Planck stood on the rostrum and lifted his hand half high, and let it sink again. He did it a second time. Then finally the hand came up, and he said "Heil Hitler"... looking back, it was the only thing you could do if you didn't want to jeopardise the whole Kaiser Wilhelm Society." [from "Scientists Under Hitler" by Alan Beyerchen, Yale U Press 1977, p.1].
"when I was in banking, some of the executive officers ADMITTED that they based their investment strategies on astrological charts"
When I look at the disputes among economists, I *almost* sympathise!
Physicist
Dear Physicist,
Unfortunately, Max Planck's view
of God was said to be pantheistic - although he professed Christianity.
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Max_Planck
_______________
Of course, in and of itself, this does not mean that Max Planck was a bad man.
But the "Heil Hitler" incident does seem to indicate that Max Planck was aware that Hitler did not pass the moral smell test.
As you said, however, Planck was human.....and as C.S. Lewis once wrote in his essay entitled THE INNER RING:
Of all the passions, the passion for the Inner Ring is most skillful in making a man who is not yet a very bad man do very bad things.
http://www.lewissociety.org/innerring.php
Thanks for this discussion Susanna and Physicist. Good background to know.
The Greens' bid to control agriculture worldwide:
http://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2014/07-08/greens-audacious-bid-control-agriculture/
Just checking in. Saw on online AP news tonight that Sarah Palin got a speeding ticket in her home town of Alaska, coming from a HOT BIKRAM YOGA class!
Yoga and Christianity are incompatible. The yoga postures are acts of obeisance to other gods. I am surprised and saddened. This proves how pervasive New Age is in our culture and that nobody is safe.
Constance
Here is a link to another story about her Bikram Yoga involvement. Her husband went along.
"The family that STRAYS together, STAYS TOGETHER"????
http://tinyurl.com/kobxpbf
If she is a "Conservative Christian," she won't stay one for long being involved in that practice!
Constance
Marilyn Ferguson's survey of how people entered into the New Age Movement showed Zen Buddhism and Yoga as being the two largest ENTRY POINTS. 40% for each. It is on page 419 of the 1980 version of THE AQUARIAN CONSPIRACY.
Constance
From THE AQUARIAN CONSPIRACY:
Spiritual disciplines and growth modalities the respondents considered
important in their own change: Zen, 40 percent; yoga, 40
percent; Christian mysticism, 31 percent; journals and dream journals, 31 percent; psychosynthesis, 29 percent; Jungian therapy, 23
percent, Tibetan Buddhism, 23 percent; Transcendental Meditation,
21 percent; Sufism, 19 percent; Transactional Analysis, 11 percent;
est, 11 percent; the Kabbalah, 10 percent. Earlier religious background
of the respondents: Protestant, 55 percent, Judaic, 20 percent;
Catholic, 18 percent; other, 2 percent; none, 5 percent. Eighty-one percent were no longer active in the religion of their childhood.
Constance
Susannah, regarding Cardinal Mullers words on LCWR and Barbara's response, yes, I'd read them and posted them a couple of months ago. Wondrous how Barbara Marx Hubbard uses the 'catholic' reference to Thielhard De Chadrin when it suits! And yes, I'd read various links on the churches view of Thielhard.
I see the LCWR need a new 'boss' https://lcwr.org/media/news/lcwr-search-executive-director
Although I'd read all sorst about the 'sisters' I hadn't come across this particular link till now - http://www.catholicworldreport.com/Item/1299/the_church_and_the_sisters_what_is_really_happening.aspx
Interesting that as far back as Paul vi the church was trying to get certain caatholic religious groups to toe the line. As one of the ex leaders suggested, why didn't they just break away and become a group separate to the church (but without special interest). No, its easier to have that 'catholic' connection, much like the way Barbara M Hubbard makes sure to us the word when discussing Thielard De Chadrin.
Interesting to see who gets the job.
From Oz
And yes Constance, good Christian people hardly know what's ok and what's not anymore (the Sarah Palin Yoga links). That's because the other side are doing such a good job and making sure everything is pushed on us and its becomes common place. Which brings to mind Congressman Ryan.http://davemosher.wordpress.com/2013/03/30/who-is-congressman-tim-ryan-and-why-is-he-pushing-new-agebuddhist-mindfulness-in-public-schools/
From Oz
Ferguson also says that journaling or keeping a dream journal results in a 31% chance of entering the "New Age" belief system or initiation. Does that mean we should not keep journals or remember our dreams?
I have also felt uncomfortable with the Western obsesison with Yoga, but I am not sure that this particular passage is the best argument against the practice.
This is anon 4:25am with an additional thought about yoga, zen meditation, and journaling.
Quote: "The yoga postures are acts of obeisance to other gods" - and in a physical manner, not unlike the practice of liturgy for Christians to God.
It would be interesting to know how many non-Christians who repeatedly practice a Christian liturgy with faithfulness ultimately become Christians. Probably it is a high number and Yoga positions are a similar phenomena but to lower gods.
Zen Buddhism I don't know the mechanism.
Journaling or recording dreams is not bad per se, although it is very self-centered. If a person does not realize his faults, past trauma, sins, he might begin to think that his journals represent some sort of ideal, instead as a window to his damaged self. Likewise with a dream journal.
Joseph, Daniel, and John all had vivid dreams and they wrote them down so we know of them. Interestingly, each of these men of the Bible were especially pure of heart. Handsome Joseph who rejected the other man's wife, Daniel who would not even eat defiled food, and John the young apostle beloved of Jesus and obviously a virgin.
Dream interpretation by those weighed down by past trauma and sin could be dangerous without proper context and anchor of truth.
"Ferguson also says that journaling or keeping a dream journal results in a 31% chance of entering the "New Age" belief system or initiation."
I suspect that what is meant is that 31% of New Agers have done this, which is very different from "31% of non-New-Agers who do it enter the New Age movement". If I am right then the simple explanation is that this is simply a New Age tradition. As someone above has pointed out, God has been known to speak through dreams.
Please,
Sarah Palin doing yoga does not negate her Christian faith. Yoga isn't a religious practice UNLESS you make it one. IT DOES NOT MEAN SHE IS A WITCH! So, refrain from burning her at the stake. Food offered to idols can be consumed by Christians.
The love of money and Christianity do not go together, yet how many wealthy Christians are there?
Yoga persists in the America because people make money selling it. Yoga is marketed as an alternative to physical exercise, which is total nonsense. It's also sold as a means of relaxation when a walk in the woods would achieve the same thing (for a lot less). Anyone who has a solid faith in Jesus will not be undone because of Yoga. However, their bank accounts would be better off if they avoided this hokey practice.
There's many things that Sarah Palin has done that's way more questionable than yoga...like quitting her governorship and trying to make sense whenever she talks. However, none of that negates her Christian faith anymore than yoga.
Dear Ubetcha,
Ubetcha, you are wrong. Yoga is a distinctly religious practice. There is no way to Christianize it, although many lies have been told to that effect. Each one of postures is a bowing down to a different Hindu god. It is the EXPERIENCE that causes the initial explorers to delve further, as accurately told by Marilyn Ferguson in her pro New Age book, THE AQUARIAN CONSPIRACY.
"If a little bit seems good, a lot more might be better." The brand of Yoga the story says she is involved in is BIKRAM YOGA.
Check that out:
http://www.vanityfair.com/society/2014/01/bikram-choudhury-yoga-sexual-harassment
or tinyurl
http://tinyurl.com/l9gcdlo
Yoga is one of the primary "triggers" as Marilyn Ferguson put it of the "transformation" from say, "Fundamentalist" to "New Ager."
Here's how Marilyn Ferguson describes the process of becoming possessed (because that's what follows):
The difference behveen transformation by accident
and transformation by a system is like the difference
between lightning and a lamp. Both give illumination,
but one is dangerous and unreliable, while the
other is relatively safe, directed, available.
The intentional triggers of transformative experiences are
numberless, yet they have a common quality. They focus
awareness on awareness--a critical shift. For aU their surface
variation, most focus on something too strange, complex, diffuse,
or monotonous to be handled by the brain's analytical,
intellectual half: on breathing, repetitious physical movement,
music, water, a flame, a meaningless sound, a blank wall, a
koan, a paradox. The intellectual brain can only dominate
awareness by affixing itself to something definite and bounded.
If it is captured by a diffuse, monotonous focus, the signals
from the other side of the mind can be heard.
And those triggers include, as I posted last night:
Meditation of every description: Zen, Tibetan Buddhist,
chaotic, Transcendental, Christian, Kabbalist, kundalini,
raja yoga, tantric yoga, etc. Psychosynthesis, a system that
combines imagery and a meditative state.
I'm quoting from pages 85-86 of the 1980 edition of THE AQUARIAN CONSPIRACY.
But even more than that, the postures are nothing short of bowing to other gods.
Count me out! There are far better ways to exercise which do less damage to the soul!
Constance
To ALL:
Somebody, without my knowledge or consent, has put HIDDEN DANGERS up as a Kindle edition for $.99. I am the sole copyright holder of the book and the only person who has the right to commercially market it. I placed it in the public domain as a type of LICENSE to copy, circulate, but NOT FOR PROFIT, NOT FOR MERCHANISING, and NOT FOR EDITING.
I am getting touch with Amazon to see who did it. A few months ago, I found a paperback being sold on Amazon for nearly $50. I ordered a copy to see who was violating my copyright, but I couldn't identify it from the book, the name of the publisher was in the Russian language.
If anybody here has any insights, let me know. I would rather let people have it for free than let people profiteer off of my work with a sloppy, unindexed version at that.
Constance
More from Marilyn Ferguson on the "spiritual" aspects of Yoga. Bear in mind that "connectedness" is a central theme of the New Age, "WE are all one" and "The God in One is the God in All" theme:
The second principle of wholeness- non-distinction- represents
the connectedness, the context, of everything. Just as
science demonstrates a web of relationship underlying everything
in the universe, a glittering network of events, so the
mystical experience of wholeness encompasses all separation.
"In free space there is neither right nor left," says a Hasidic
master. "All souls are one. Each is a spark from the original
soul, and this soul is inherent in all souls." Buddhism maintains
that all human beings are Buddhas, but not all have
awakened to their true nature. Yoga literally means "union."
Full enlightenment is a vow to save "all sentient beings."
This wholeness encompasses self, others, ideas.
Love is felt as a dynamic state of consciousness rather than as
an emotion. just as fear is constricted and chaotic, love is wide
and coherent-a creative flow, harmony, acceptance of human
frailty imbedded in deep self-knowledge. It is defenseless
power, communication, vanished boundaries, closure.
You are joined to a great Self: Tat tvam assi, "Thou art That."
And because that Self is inclusive, you are joined to all others.
In the mystical vision of William Blake , , ,
AND, from Alice Bailey, page 588 of THE EXTERNALISATION OF THE HIERARCHY, we read:
1. Emphasis should be laid on the evolution of humanity
w1th peculiar attention to its goal, perfection . . .
2. The relauon of the individual soul to all souls should
he taught, and with it the recognition that thl· long-awaited
kingdom of God is simply the appearance of suul-controlled
men on earth in everyday life and at all stages of that control.
3. From a recognition of this relationship, the fact of the
spiritual Hierarchy can then be deduced and the normality
of its existence emphasised. The fact will appear that the
Kingdom has always been present but has remained unrecognised,
owing to the relatively few people who express, as yet,
its quality.
4. When this rewgnition has become general. the idea (by
th is time permanently present in the human consciousness
everywhere) and good sense also will testify to the fact of the
presence of Those Who have achieved the goal; Their demon
stration of divinity will be regarded as normal, as consti·
tuting a univnsal objective, and as the guarantee of humanity's
furure achievement; degrees of this divine expression
can then be pointed out, ranging from that of the probationary
disciple, through disciples, to Those who have achieved
mastery, and up to and inclusive of the Christ.
5. Thus gradually the idea or concept of the existence. in
bodily presence. of the Masters will be inculcated . . .
Constance
Anon 4:25 again...
It is important to note that God follows a patriarchal European code law system vs. British/American common law. This means that there are lots and lots of rules, most of which can be waived under special circumstances.
Naaman was required to bow to the god "Rimmon" in a manner that would likely be similar to a yoga pose. Even though the God of Israel healed Naaman, Elisha told him that he could continue to do his bowing in the temple to the idol and God would not hold this against him.
Likewise yoga practice is dangerous, though God may pardon or protect certain people. These people who can be exempt from this law are most likely native Indian children who know nothing else and have enormous social pressure to conform to this way of life. It is much harder to imagine that Westerners and Christians who choose to do yoga without the threat of loss of life or loss of livelihood are excused from the consequences.
http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/07/23/worldbank-india-idINKBN0FS1MV20140723
Didn't someone mention the BRICS bank here the other day?
From Oz
Dear OZ 12:52 A.M.
Re :Interesting that as far back as Paul vi the church was trying to get certain caatholic religious groups to toe the line. As one of the ex leaders suggested, why didn't they just break away and become a group separate to the church (but without special interest). No, its easier to have that 'catholic' connection, much like the way Barbara M Hubbard makes sure to us the word when discussing Thielard De Chadrin.
The dissenters need the "Catholic" label. Without it, not many would pay any attention to theml
It is generally believed that Vatican II was hijacked by liberals and that Vatican documents were interpreted - if not written - in such an ambiguous way as to make it appear that the Roman Catholic church was leaning radically left.. But the hijacking itself may have been a part of something even more sinister........the infiltration of the Catholic Church - especially the Catholic clergy - by Communists.
Bella Dodd - who was born in Italy – became one of the most powerful figures of the American Communist Party at the height of its power during the late 1930’s and 1940’s.
Polish Catholics Call on Priests Who Spied for Communists to Come Clean and Resign
LifeSiteNews.com by Hilary White
.....In the west since the fall of the Soviet state, evidence has come forward of extensive ties between US Catholics and the Soviets in the 1940’s and ‘50’s. The so-called “Venona Papers” were declassified in 1995 and showed that Stalinist era agents were working closely with members of the legal US Communist Party.
Dr. Alice von Hildebrand, philosophy professor and widow of the renowned philosopher and anti-Nazi activist, Dietrich von Hildebrand, has said that Americans are “naëve” to think that Soviet agents, whose intention was to undermine the then-powerful political influence of the Catholic Church, would have passed over the Catholic seminaries.
Von Hildebrand cites the voluminous Senate committee testimony of former Communist Party organizer and high Party official, Bella Dodd who revealed that the Catholic priesthood in the US and other western countries had been heavily infiltrated by communist agents whose mission it was, she said, “to destroy the Catholic Church from within.” Dodd predicted changes in the Church that would be so drastic that “you will not recognize the Catholic Church.”
Dr. von Hildebrand recalled in an interview with Latin Mass magazine in 2001, “Bella Dodd told my husband and me that when she was an active Party member, she had dealt with no fewer than four cardinals within the Vatican ‘who were working for us’.”
Dodd, who later became a Catholic and wrote a book about her experiences, said that she herself had placed as many as 1200 agents into Catholic seminaries in the 1920’s and ‘30’s under directives from Moscow. In a 2002 interview with International News Analysis, Von Hildebrand confirmed that Dodd had admitted that her own infiltrators would have reached their highest positions of power and influence in the early to mid-60’s, the same period that saw the near total collapse of Catholic discipline and the beginning of the sexual abuse scandals.
In his book, the Venona Secrets, Herbert Romerstein, former head of the Office to Counter Soviet Disinformation at the United States Information Agency, confirmed the existence of the Soviet plan to undermine the Catholic Church. He wrote that the archives of the former Soviet Union reveals that the Communist Party had infiltrated several influential Catholic organizations, including the Holy Name Society, which currently has chapters in many US parishes......
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/polish-catholics-call-on-priests-who-spied-for-communists-to-come-clean-and
____________________________
Dear Constance,
I agree that Yoga is incompatible with Christianity!
Yoga is a form of body meditation which is pagan at best - occult at worst.
And yet Christians blithely go about practicing Yoga thinking that it is compatible with Christianity and completely harmless. NOT!!!
One of the more disturbing things I am seeing is something called "Christian Yoga." There is even a "Christian Yoga" online magazine. In my opinion, this so-called "Christian Yoga" is analogous to pagan religions like the syncretic Afro-Caribbean religion known as Santeria in which pagan deities are tricked out as "Christian" saints..
Here are a couple of articles against the practice of Yoga by Christians - one by a Protestant pastor and one by the saintly late Catholic priest, Father John A. Hardon, S.J.:
Christian Yoga? It's a Stretch
http://pastormark.tv/2011/11/02/christian-yoga-its-a-stretch
_______________________
Why is Yoga incompatible with Catholicism?
FATHER JOHN HARDON, S.J.
http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0275.html
anon 5:14
I don't know what you mean by european vs. british american law code.
but you totally got it wrong. There is no yoga like special posturing. The issue was that Naaman, since his master leaned on his arm being aged to make bowing, Naaman had to bow or lower his body to some extent to help him bow down also.
2 Kings 5:17-19 "So Naaman said, “Then, if not, please let your servant be given two mule-loads of earth; for your servant will no longer offer either burnt offering or sacrifice to other gods, but to the Lord. 18 Yet in this thing may the Lord pardon your servant: when my master goes into the temple of Rimmon to worship there, and he leans on my hand, and I bow down in the temple of Rimmon—when I bow down in the temple of Rimmon, may the Lord please pardon your servant in this thing.”
Then he said to him, “Go in peace.” So he departed from him a short distance."
you are reading things into the text. bowing is almost universal gesture of obeisance, honor, veneration and worship also just respect, you will also see lowered body posture as submision signal in many animal species.
Yoga as practised in the West has far too much spiritual baggage for me as an evangelical to contemplate it, but I would ask a couple of questions:
1. How might a secular yoga session, ie one in which the practitioner or the leader of a group simply instructs breathing and stretching and non-thinking, be any different from the taking up of Eastern unarmed combat techniques ("martial arts") by Western soldiers simply as blocks and movements feeding into counterstrikes and jointlocks, without any of the spiritual stuff?
2. If a Christian does yogic breathing and stretching and non-thinking, exactly how is this dangerous and why?
I wish to live in the freedom of the Spirit and not be frightened of my own shadow.
Christine, you live with a man you call your fiance and insist that you are not married. And you are a confessing (Orthodox) Christian. What impression does that give to the world of Christian morality - especially if you are doing it for the money, as you say?
anon 9:41
"you are doing it for the money, as you say?" I never said anything resembling that.
I was going to keep quiet till the end of the month but your slanderous LIE needs answering.
when did I say I did it for the money? I AM NOT SUPPORTED BY HIM. I get SSI (Supplemental Security Income, a glorified welfare) disability which I would LOSE if I married or claimed marriage. The latter probably an issue because SSI is a federal program out of DC which recognizes common law marriage.
“posts of yours Christine prove you live an arrangement that is not the biblical description of a godly home. (and where is your trust in God to care for you without this 'arrangement'? because He can--I have been there myself).”
Well, glory to God for taking care of you BUT WHAT MAKES YOU THINK I HAVE THIS ARRANGEMENT BECAUSE OF ANY NEED OF MINE FOR BEING TAKEN CARE OF? Didn't I say Mike can barely support himself? I have my own money. This is not mercenary. There is thing called love and COMMITMENT.
A few hundred miles difference is the only reason we are not legally married by virtue of having lived together for seven years or more. Surprised?
if we were living like this in the states of NV, CO, KS, RI, SC, MT, UT, TX or Washington DC, NH for probate only UT wants court validation of existence, we'd be legally married long ago by living together and presenting as man and wife.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common-law_marriage_in_the_United_States
This is not some degenerate New Age new development, it used to be in far more states and is based on British law many centuries old. ALL states recognize common law marriages contracted in those states that still allow such.
Puerto Rico is Spanish law tradition and doesn't recognize it though such arrangements are commonplace, it is federal territorial jurisdiction, so perhaps the non recognition could be challenged as per DC law.
I don't insist we are not married I merely set the record straight. And I don't need someone reporting me as married to SSI and I get kicked off. This is why I prefer to say "fiance."
Christine, when I wrote "What impression does that give to the world of Christian morality - especially if you are doing it for the money, as you say?" the "you" will be understood to refer to you and him together.
"A few hundred miles difference is the only reason we are not legally married by virtue of having lived together for seven years or more. Surprised?"
It is not for me to play a part in setting the law in other lands. But the authorities must know who is and is not married, so that they can enforce laws about inheritance and (in some places) adultery. If you haven't told them then your relationship does not meet the criteria for marriage. And in that case you are causing public scandal to the body of Christ by cohabiting. I don't think you can have it both ways.
So, a simpler question: What impression does you and your fiance's cohabitation give to the world, about Christian morality?
what impression is given by those who break up after some years living together and legally marry someone else on technicality of local law?
There are no states left where adultery is illegal as far as I know. It is a grounds for divorce, but in no fault divorce states you might as well not have marriage in the sense you are used to.
I agree the state has a right to know, and probably that is the reason that the common law marriage states require (different) amounts of years together to qualify, by that time common knowledge and such paperwork generated while presenting as man and wife fill that gap.
Meanwhile, if a couple lives together explicitly as being without commitment so they are free to cheat or can break up and rebond with others any time they want, they do not consider themselves permanent, they are doing a kind of fornication.
As far as most know, we are married, they assume it. Mike often calls me wife and I sometimes refer to him as my husband.
I have already explained the other issues. The priest I originally explained it all to did not have a problem.
"the world" doesn't know most of us as individuals anyway. seven billion people all looking at me and Mike? ridiculous.
the "you" did not refer to me AND Mike but me only since you said "What impression does that give to the world of Christian morality - ESPECIALLY IF YOU ARE DOING IT FOR THE MONEY, AS YOU SAY?" My emphasis.
P.S. I just wanted to add that if something is objectively evil or dangerous, that means it is evil or dangerous whether we think so or not.
Susanna,
I agree that there is something wrong with it. But what? At what point in a yoga session in which breathing and stretching are regulated and thought is suppressed, and in which pagan gods are nowhere mentioned, are demons given the right to enter someone or curses set up over someone?
Whenever I ask this, I get more detail but no answer to my very specific questions. I wish that some Christian ex-hindus were here to help.
OK Christine, you agree that the authorities have a right to know who is married and who isn't, but you haven't told them that you and your man consider yourselves married, just so that you (collectively) can keep the money coming in. That's what you said at 5.41am above. You have now stated this in a public forum; what sort of example do you think that gives to non-Christians reading this thread? That it's OK to shack up without the authorities knowing that you consider yourselves married so that you can keep riding the gravy train?
You replied by asking what sort of example is set in Christian marital break-ups and remarriages. You are responding to my question by asking a different one, and thereby avoiding answering. I ask again: What impression does you and your fiance's cohabitation give to people about Christian morality?
"Influence when it goes too far will be rejected by many, but it becomes more baggage to deal with better not have it at all."
May I commend the semi-colon to you?
"You replied by asking what sort of example is set in Christian marital break-ups and remarriages. You are responding to my question by asking a different one, and thereby avoiding answering."
No I did not. I answered
"what impression is given by those who break up after some years LIVING TOGETHER and legally marry someone else ON TECHNICALITY OF LOCAL LAW?" in other words after years of "I love you" and "I won't cheat on you" suddenly betray your companion of many years. A faithless lover is worse than a thief so goes an old song.
And I also answered that your question is silly because the whole world doesn't even know about us.
AND THE STATE WE LIVE IN DOES NOT ALLOW COMMON LAW MARRIAGE TO BE CONTRACTED BY STINT OF LIVING TOGETHER, though it recognizes such contracted by living together in the states that do allow marriage to be done this way, and we never resided together outside of CA.
Therefore whatever we consider we are doing, it has no bearing on the so called gravy train, which is not enough to make ends meet if you don't have an unusually low rent anyway. (I have an unusually low rent.) Just ask anyone on any kind of welfare or disability except for VA full disability payments. The reason they often look fat is because of high carbohydrate high fat cheap diets.
DC and Social Security Administration WOULD consider us married if we went
about saying we are married all the time, which we usually don't. Mike has old child support and other debts so was always scrimping even when working as a truck driver or a cab driver.
This conversation is going way over my daily one post limit, I suppose you will bring that up being anonymous you can provoke then complain and get away with it.
I deleted the post about yoga to add something so I would not add to my posts. here it is again.
Susanna the problem with yoga is probably more a tendril or influence since a door has been opened, and it doesn't matter if one knows what one is doing or not, rather than full on entry.
Influence going too far is rejected by many, but it is more baggage so better not to have it at all.
suspension of thought is the biggest problem, AND PRESENT IN RC CONTEMPLATIVE PRAYER AND LECTIO DIVINA, which is NOT the original way of the Desert Fathers, but developed by RC monastics in an overreaction to excessive rationalism of scholasticism in the Middle Ages.
The modern or medieval form is very New Age compatible and loved by heretical hyper charismatic New Apostolic Reformation and word of faith and purpose driven etc. types in evangelicalism.
Removal or suppression of specific thoughts interfering with concentrating on what you read in The Bible, or distracting you from thinking about Jesus while praying "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me a sinner" is not the same thing as suppression of thought per se.
"the world" doesn't know most of us as individuals anyway. seven billion people all looking at me and Mike?
What you miss entirely is that GOD sees and in His eyes--according to His standard of morality written in His Holy Word--you are not living in a godly relationship.
The Bible is clear that when we wear the Name of the Lord as our testimony then we are to rightly represent Him. That means even to the point of not even having the appearance of evil about our lives and lifestyles let alone in fornication which is sex (of any kind) outside of the marriage bond of one man and one woman. God established marriage, surely you know this. Since ancient times all peoples have known or at least acknowledged this. Rights in inheritances is only a small part of what God was after in bringing homes into His blessing through marriage. It is meant to be a spiritual picture of being related to Him so you are falling short of this in reality, as was already stated and explained in the 1 Corinthians 11 verses you so readily skipped over. (too convicting for you?)
So your fiance is like your charity case or something? And money is involved as part of your reasoning for doing this for the benefit of someone(s) because you admit this.
God can care for people (as a christian single with two children living on income just above minimum wage and was not taking welfare though could have) certainly well enough without stooping to arrangements such as you and your fiance engage in. And thankful that I did what was right and was blessed immensely being given a godly marriage, still mine today. Why call this man your fiance if you do not plan to marry? And why dishonor the Lord in going counter to what He blesses? You have opted to leave Him out of your arrangement. He does not fit there anyway....
In my 12:02 post-just to be clear-I was divorced by my former spouse who left for another and later remarried a true christian.
first off, marriage is defined in many ways and contracted many ways throughout history. In Eden there was no marriage ceremony they were a companionate marriage preprogrammed with a gut level bond that did not allow separation which God later had to get specific about.
Secondly, as I have said, legal marriage because of power issues that Mike's (semi?) satanic family are concerned about and drilled into him, would downgrade me to less of an authority making it harder to counter reversionists tendencies of his.
I don't have to be in a "relationship" with someone for them to be a charity case I have had people stay with me without any such things going on.
Our relationship is biblically at least betrothal, treated as seriously as marriage then, and actual penetration never occurred so are we one flesh as per I Cor. 6:16 ref. Gen. 2:18-20 or not? I dunno. But close enough I can use him to keep myself out of disastrous falling in love (bad taste in men) and keep him out of trouble also.
And I work on his morals and ethics and he works on my social presentability, which is close to the Puritan concept of the purpose of marriage.
"stooping to arrangements such as you and your fiance engage in"
Again you imply a financial reason like he is paying me off. there are TWO sets of reasons as I have outlined, one is financial, one is spiritual warfare pragmatic, and the financial one, well, if we lived separately and were engaged to get married whenever I could do without SSI you wouldn't be bitching about it would you? Only the proximity matters, yet in fact I could live separately from a pack of lovers and have sex with one each day of the week (not that I would do such a thing) the point is, that you are all about external appearances and not content.
God blessed you with a good marriage after you were a single parent. How did you get to be a single parent?
did your husband die?
were you abandoned by a husband or lover? or were you with a lover you decided was too nasty to have around your children? both are good reasons.
Or did you just decide to dump your faithful mate who did not abuse you or have evil inclinations, because someone made a biblical point about this, and, assuming he hadn't given up on you and mated with another, then you go and commit adultery against him by marrying someone else,
you already being one flesh with him by virtue of sex as per I Cor. 6:16 and no biblical grounds for divorce against him to validate abandoning him?
All diversion Christine. You live with your fiance and deliberately don't go through the marriage ceremony recognised by the authorities so that you can remain in receipt of taxpayers' money. Whether or not God (rather than the authorities) thinks you are married is not what I am asking. Here - rephrased - is one simple question Whether or not your reply involves asking other questions back, please include an answer to it: What impression does you and your fiance's cohabitation give to people about Christian morality?
When Paul wrote, there were three forms of marriage all legal in Roman law, which would have been default law unless you chose to follow local customs.
The form used mostly by the lowest classes was usus, which meant living together for a year and a day.
Even with the other two forms, you had to have lived together for a year and a day for the marriage to really kick in, meaning pater familias applied to you, so Roman women often would absent themselves one day a year from their husband's households to avoid coming fully under his law.
Paul did not denounce usus marriage, so it is biblically legitimate.
This non denunciation is relevant, given he had to address all kinds of behaviors in detail that were normative in pagan culture though not in Jewish culture, but he had to talk to people who didn't have the same ideas of sin as he grew up with, like when Jesus said "repent of your sins" He spoke to people who already knew homosexual acts were sin, that's why He didn't have to address this issue. But Paul had to address people who made a wrong distinction between the active and passive role player in homosexual acts, and Jesus had to address people who exploited the Mosaic allowance of divorce for all causes, and considered themselves innocent of adultery because of the Mosaic technicality allowing divorce and remarriage.
Obviously polygamy is also a tolerated adultery.
I don't care what impression, I have explained the Biblical grounds for it being legitimate if they don't buy it that's their problem not mine.
If the Social Security Administration rules (like welfare laws in general at least in the past) work against marriage that is their problem.
"This conversation is going way over my daily one post limit, I suppose you will bring that up being anonymous you can provoke then complain and get away with it."
Constance can check my IP address if she wishes and she has not asked me to limit myself to one post per day; she has asked YOU, because - in her own phrase - you have verbal diarrhea. The discipline of conforming would actually do you good.
Me: "What impression does you and your fiance's cohabitation give to people about Christian morality?"
Christine: "I don't care what impression, I have explained the Biblical grounds for it being legitimate if they don't buy it that's their problem not mine."
It is up to Christians to set an example, is it not? And you are setting an example of cohabiting with your fiance and thereby leading people astray.
"If the Social Security Administration rules (like welfare laws in general at least in the past) work against marriage that is their problem."
And, in your case, the taxpayers'!
the SSA and welfare have immoral standards, anti marriage standards apparently.
as for taxpayers, it is probably less than a cent out of each pocket into mine. And taxation is not theft, and welfare has a history way predating Marx. Christian King Alfred the Great of England mandated the plough tax, a penny (a lot more money then than now) per plough per year to go to the poor.
and as for public impression we don't hang a label on the house "we are not married."
LAST POST TO END OF THE MONTH.
So you justify taking taxpayers' money because there are a lot of taxpayers and only one of you? Great argument - except that there are a few million other people who use that same specious argument. By cohabiting with your fiance you are setting a bad example, and although you don't plaster your unmarried cohabitation on your windows news gets around, as it does that you are a Christian.
"Listen pastor, you tell me that if I come to Christ then I should marry the woman I am living with or separate from her? No way, the woman down the street says she's Christian and she lives with her fiance, so it must be OK!"
I have no idea whether this is or is not on your conscience, because I suspect you would not admit it here. But it should be.
"first off, marriage is defined in many ways and contracted many ways throughout history. In Eden there was no marriage ceremony"
Obviously GOD officiated at this wedding......Duh!
You never let God have the last word or even the first one! Who do you think you are???!!!!!!!!!!!???
My 12:17 post clarified for you.
Your example does not meet Biblical standard and that goes way above laws of men (but does work within that premise so we are accountable to one another down here on earth. (you are always somehow above these things in your circumstance--I suspect--in your mind). You make this up as you go in your world of no reliable absolutes, Christine, but you do and you will, answer to GOD someday. And yet you spout your brand of holier than thou around here...better go back to really read and believe and obey the Book
Anonymous 11:11 A.M.
Re:I agree that there is something wrong with it. But what? At what point in a yoga session
you ask,"What point?" I answer "At the point a person first decides to participate in Yoga exercises."
Actual demonic influence from that point is proportionate to the degree that the Yoga participant
knows what Yoga is all about.
Ultimately, Yoga is ordered to the worship of the "god" Brahman. All other Hindu deities are aspects of Brahman.
When all is said and done, either names of things have meaning or they do not. Yoga cannot simultaneously be and not-be a pagan system of body meditation.
And if a whole system of traditional Hindu body meditation involving stretching and breathing exercises goes by the name of "Yoga," why would one "point" be more - or less - problematic than any other?
Ordinarily, stretching and breathing and exercising are in and of themselves morally neutral. It is when they are put in a particular order/sequence and given the name "Yoga" that their moral neutrality ceases to exist......at all points.
A HINDU VIEW OF "CHRISTIAN YOGA"
While yoga is not a "religion" in the sense that the Abrahamic religions are, it is a well-established spiritual path. Its physical postures are only the tip of an iceberg, beneath which is a distinct metaphysics with profound depth and breadth. Its spiritual benefits are undoubtedly available to anyone regardless of religion. However, the assumptions and consequences of yoga do run counter to much of Christianity as understood today. This is why, as a Hindu yoga practitioner and scholar, I agree with the Southern Baptist Seminary President, Albert Mohler, when he speaks of the incompatibility between Christianity and yoga, arguing that "the idea that the body is a vehicle for reaching consciousness with the divine" is fundamentally at odds with Christian teaching. This incompatibility runs much deeper.
Yoga's metaphysics center around the quest to attain liberation from one's conditioning caused by past karma. Karma includes the baggage from prior lives, underscoring the importance of reincarnation. While it is fashionable for many Westerners to say they believe in karma and reincarnation, they have seldom worked out the contradictions with core Biblical doctrines. For instance, according to karma theory, Adam and Eve's deeds would produce effects only on their individual future lives, but not on all their progeny ad infinitum. Karma is not a sexually transmitted problem flowing from ancestors. This view obviates the doctrine of original sin and eternal damnation. An individual's karmic debts accrue by personal action alone, in a separate and self-contained account. The view of an individual having multiple births also contradicts Christian ideas of eternal heaven and hell seen as a system of rewards and punishments in an afterlife. Yogic liberation is here and now, in the bodily state referred to and celebrated as jivanmukti, a concept unavailable in Christianity and in an afterlife somewhere else. Ironically, the very same Christians who espouse reincarnation also long to have family reunions in heaven.
Yogic liberation is therefore not contingent upon any unique historical event or intervention. Every individual's ultimate essence is sat-chit-ananda, originally divine and not originally sinful. All humans come equipped to recover their own innate divinity without recourse to any historical person's suffering on their behalf......read entire article
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rajiv-malhotra/hindu-view-of-christian-yoga_b_778501.html
What is up with this blog?
All this yoga garbage and back and forth about Christine's marriage status.
I understand that this blog is dedicated to exposing (supposedly) the new age movement but most of what is discussed here is not only completely foreign to the average person, but doesn't really help any of them either in the times we live.
It seems more like people interested in "impressing" and "dazzling" with their own knowledge of certain areas.
I know, if I don't like it, I can leave.
Right?
Right, I'm outta here!!
Dear 5.33pm, if you aren't interested in discussions of yoga in relation to the New Age then your time might indeed be better spent elsewhere; try Christine's blog...
What is the difference betwen clearing your mind in pagan practice and clearing your mind in Christian mystic practice? Clearly none. So is it OK or is it not? That is the question.
Yoga? My karma has run over my dogma.
Susanna, thanks for the link to Bella Dodd, did some extra reading on her, very interesting that Fulton Sheen was the person to eventually welcome her into the Church. Its no surprise to me the efforts that the Communists or any other anti Church types will go to to bring the Church down. If the keepers of the Word weren't so important none of these infiltrators even bother.
From Oz
"What is the difference betwen clearing your mind in pagan practice and clearing your mind in Christian mystic practice? Clearly none. So is it OK or is it not? That is the question."
Its not. The overtly pagan context of course is more dangerous. But while the Christian context may limit damage, the evil spirits will use what they can.
(I couldn't let this person hang.)
whoever thinks yoga is irrelevant to the average person knows nothing about the average person. New Age is partly politics and partly "spirituality" and the conveyorbelt to the former is often meditative states, yoga, and other things. the politics are pushed as the practical application of the spirituality, and the spirituality is pushed as a thing in itself, or, from the political perspective, as more compatible with the politics.
OZ 6:39 P.M.
You are SPOT ON!!!!!
Minutia both personal and non-personal, spirituality (name that religion or call it names), personal attacks and justifications, none of which matter to the larger picture of the New Age movement, intellectual presentations of the past with no connection given to the present, There is no doubt that high intellect individuals like the interaction. But come on, we are fiddling while Rome burns.
Let me ask those left here, What is the greatest impact New Age has had on Joe six-pack or Beauty Parlor Pattie here in the US? How does it affect him and her? Why should they be worried about what is going on? Can they do anything about it?
Is New Age only important in the air driven world of intellectuals?
There are answers to these kind of questions, answers people may disagree on, but nevertheless all acknowledge exist. There is no other website as valuable as this one can be, warning and effecting all who have heard the term New Age. Is there no one left who can see the bit picture and is willing to comment on it?
Anon. 1:09 A.M.
Re:"Is there no one left who can see the bit picture and is willing to comment on it?"
Nothing stopping you from commenting on what you see as the "big picture."
Today is DOROTHY MARGRAF'S birthday. Happy birthday, Dorothy, "AND MANY MORE" . . .
Constance
https://www.facebook.com/267962473371145/posts/321363438031048
Off this blog there are people who recognize how others are being affected. The NWO is one part of New Age.
Happy Birthday Dorothy! Glad for your input here of your many years searching out the new age scourge upon the world. God bless you today and everyday.
Just want to repeat this website to reiterate and emphasize the importance of it.
Please check out:
http://itccs.org/
Urgent Message:
http://itccs.org/urgent-message/
One Concerned Soul
Courageous of you to post that here of all places. Unfortunately, you probably won't get a response, and if you do, it will be some ridiculously long post that uses CATHOLIC sources as backup.
They fight the new age here? Ha!
They will never understand that Simon Magus was the first pope, not the apostle Peter. In Paul's letters and visits to Rome when issuing greetings, he NEVER mentioned Peter. Why? Because Peter was not in Rome.
Paul was entrusted to the Gentiles, not Peter. Paul even mentioned that he would not build on another man's foundation. So, when he wrote and went to Rome (which according to Catholics, Peter should have already been there) he again did not mention Peter. Why? Because he was not there!!
The way this has fooled the church for centuries is new age at its best!!!
To Anonymous @ 2:PM
Re: "Simon Magus was the first pope, not the apostle Peter."
Where are you getting your outrageously ridiculous information???
Documentation and evidence, please.
(We'll be waiting until uhhh maybe hell freezes over. LOL)
FYI: The complete history of all of the popes is well documented throughout world history.
2.17pm, nice wind-up re Simon Magus!
2.17pm, nice wind-up re Simon Magus!
It is difficult to ask people to question what they've been told is true; especially if the traditions are generations old. The deception is difficult to hear about. Peter was never recorded to have been in Rome,
and that is part of the deception.
Armchair believers want other people to do their research for them. They will only know something if they check it out for themselves. I am sad about all this, but it is evidence of God's Word.
----
If someone loves God, they deserve to know the truth. Catholic people in general are sincere, loving people. They have been deceived, but I cannot understand why they don't question it and leave the Satanic worshiping Vatican. Vatican, the word, means "divining serpent". Isn't that a clue?
----
If you want to really get upset, check out some of the lengthy documentaries on youtube about the Jesuits, and how they are the ones who performed the horrific counter-reformationistic inquisition.
Now the Papacy has infiltrated the protestant churches with all the "Emergent Church" doctrines, and Rick Warren's "Purpose Driven Church". Warren traces back to Robert Schuller, who traces back to the Catholic Vatican. These are methods to water down real Christianity that was given to us through The Reformation.
---
Last Days!
Don't let them take your King James Authorized Version away.
The Precious Word of God!
Worship the True Christ who will come AFTER the fake one who will seduce the whole world.
If you don't agree with me, we still have the protection of God in This Country to disagree. I hope we never lose this precious gift.
Thanks for reading this.
HAPPY BIRTHDAY DOROTHY!!!!!
And many more to come!!!
One concerned Soul 1:50
You should darn well be concerned - or rather embarrassed!!!
Re: Here is a major website:
http://itccs.org/
Just to let everyone know... the above link "One Concerned Soul" posted is to a one man blog hosted by
by Kevin D. Annett, a defrocked United Church of Canada minister.
INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL INTO CRIMES OF CHURCH AND STATE
The International Tribunal into Crimes of Church and State (or ITCCS) is a one-man blog that pretends to be a tribunal established to enforce common law. Despite claims of being based in Brussels, the whole thing is written in Canada by Kevin D. Annett, a defrocked United Church of Canada minister.
The ITCCS came to some notice in the social media sphere in February 2013, when Annett issued a claim that Pope Benedict XVI resigned for fear of arrest on an ITCCS warrant and the hard of thinking forwarded it around as if this actually made sense. The website did look fairly professional at the time, although it has since decayed heavily. If nothing else, it nicely illustrates how the Timecube Law and Haig's Law can go hand in hand.
Previously, Annett had made his money claiming to represent the interests of native Canadians. Until they told him to damn well stop it.
What Annett Does
At the heart of the "organization" is something Annett calls the International Common Law Court of Justice (ICLCJ), which is rather similar to those "common law courts" sometimes set up by freemen-on-the-land, right down to the "citizen jurors". This court exists only on Annett's blog.
With the ITCCS, Annett attempts to mimic genuine international organisations, and is actually good enough at this to have fooled a few normal people (and a lot of raving conspiracy-prone nutters) into thinking there's anything at all to this. He produces very nicely-formatted, official-looking documents and everything. However, an examination of the blog's actual content will quickly reveal that in legal terms, it's not even wrong even by pseudolaw standards. Annett has "convicted" two consecutive Popes of genocide and child trafficking, issuing "international arrest warrants" for them. He has also issued a proclamation dissolving Canada. And Great Britain, though that one was only on Twitter.
He is a fan of the freeman on the land movement. This has become more prominent in recent months, and the website now sports a prominent link to a so-called "Common Law Community Training Manual", which is basically a Sovereign citizen FAQ. They also have a collection of "Common Law Court Documents", in case you were looking for a pseudolaw starter kit.
Finally, it should be noted that most genuine international legal bodies are not "Proudly powered by WordPress", nor do they ask you to contact them via a GMail address.
Native Canadian Activism
Before his press releases about arresting popes, Annett was known for making extensive claims of exposing ritual murder of native children by government schools. He was active in native activist organisations in Canada — which he had a habit of using to raise money for himself, claiming their support and endorsement until forced to desist. Annett’s explanation for all this is to claim that all official representatives of native Canadians are corrupt and have agreed to keep the deaths of thousands of children secret.
About the author
He has his own page on whale.to. That said, even the conspiracy theorists aren't so enamoured of him.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/International_Tribunal_into_Crimes_of_Church_and_State
___________________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GnFo9t7YNUI&list=UUxshhzR907v2w6DjICyAgLQ&index=6
Very short snippet from 2 days ago. I hadn't realised Paul vi got so much flak from within the church re Humane Vitae (were these some of the implanted clergy). Either way, look at 'family' now. I wonder when it will be suggested that the Commandments are changed to "honour your father and your father". Oh that's right, the Commandments don't matter any more! And for allllllllll the discussion over the years on Vatican 2, why would Paul vi even bother with Humanae Vitae at that point in time if it weren't a very obvious issue of VITAL importance. Seems like he was right on this one.
From Oz
And, Kevin Annett is almost comedic.
From Oz
I had no idea this blog was such a rattlesnake den. Ouch!
Won't come 'round here no more..
Sorry Constance. The message was for you and not for the scum-suckers around your ankles.
Disrespect abounds. They must have a lot of respect for you!
A challenging question for readers -- Based on what you've learned about the New Age movement here, what do you tell others who know nothing about it? Today I faced a challenging situation. I was talking to a young woman who had been involved in the natural health movement and who felt her father had just passed away very accepting of the living will and the hospice movement. She had Christian kind of beliefs but didn't go to church. Generally she seemed to feel content with her beliefs, a common thing with indoctrinated individuals. She couldn't see a negative side to New Age beliefs even though I tried to point out the governmental control growing under Obama. I think she felt I was some kind of kook by telling her about the negative side. What would you have told her to look into based on what you've learned here?
One Concerned Soul
Do you see what I mean? It's sad and unfortunate. It was a given you were going to get some long post from Susanna blasting your post and Kevin Annett.
Now, I don't know much about Mr. Annett so I can't speak accurately about him, but, you could find MUCH more out there about recent and past popes and the church and post articles 30 times as long as Susanna's.
But your the one who should be ashamed?
Kinda funny, huh? But that's how it works here where they fight the new age. LOL.
Susanna
I know you are worshipped and praised around here, but you should be ashamed. You usually post only things that agree with YOUR view of the church.
Many of your articles of rebuttal are from pro-catholic sources. Hard to take seriously when that's the case.
Anyone can post MANY articles far longer than yours that show the truth about the church. Things that would make Mr. Annett look like a saint. But you always have an answer- usually from church fathers or catholic news or whatever.
I'm not fooled by your "research" because it is almost always SLANTED.
It looks as if what I wrote earlier fits the Kevin Annett promoters. The following tactic would work even here if there was no Susanna to catch the promoters. Go to a conservative site where people want to hear more from others who think as they do and promote New Age anti-Catholicism which has a long history. If caught, the the usual comments follow. Don't you want to know the truth? Or, I wasn't talking about all Catholics. Or, I don't agree with everything said by.....
Lesson from the Propaganda book. If you can't refute the exposure of your anti-Catholic message, attack the person providing the exposing information.
Now now little trolls. Susanna is a very intelligent individual. She has been following this blog for many years. She has written here on many topics, always doing extensive research before taking a for or against stand. You will get nowhere attacking Susanna because readers and posters here know her much better than we know you.
Easy guide to understanding Agenda 21. Viewed over 1.4 million times. Over 4,000 comments.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzEEgtOFFlM
Agenda 21 For Dummies
Under ten minutes
Susanna wrote: "Especially given the fact that socialism (whose goal, according to Vladimir Lenin, is Communism) is the political arm of the New Age Movement."
Dead right that socialism and communism have the same goals. They differ only on how to attain them: communism by violent revolution, and socialism by the ballot box and democracy because the working class outnumber everybody else. Thankfully the working class were not so easily fooled, for several generations at least.
I am less convinced by claims that communism and socialism were always allied to the New Age movement. They are allied now, but for a century they were associated with hardline atheist materialism that regarded NA as bullshit.
And a PS to the Anon who pointed out the rise of antisemitism in Europe: it's entirely because of the rise of Islam in Europe. The quran likens Jews to apes and pigs (Q5:60, 7:166).
RE: I am less convinced by claims that communism and socialism were always allied to the New Age Movement.
Communism and socialism may not have always been explicitly allied to the New Age Movement as we know it, but it has always been allied to the occult.
It was not really necessary for atheists to believe in a deity when involved in "magickal practices." They had merely to act as if they did.
The book Naturalistic Occultism by IAO 131 opens with a very interesting quote from Aleister Crowley:
“In this book it is spoken of the Sephiroth and the Paths; of Spirits and Conjurations; of Gods, Spheres, Planes, and many other things which may or may not exist. It is immaterial whether these exist or not. By doing certain things certain results will follow; students are most earnestly warned against attributing objective reality or philosophic validity to any of them.”
In other words, it is enough for the magickian to "wear the mark of the beast on his right hand," so to speak.....even if he won't wear it on his forehead.
You folks who are so down on Annett:
Be careful not to bite your tongues with all that wagging. Nobody can understand all you say as you vomit all over this blog.
Instead of trashing other people, go confess your own sins.
I know it is important to have the last word, so have at it.
Just keep your splash of vomit on your side of the street.
Your information is all biased and full of animosity. Don't you have something better to do?
Go Pewk!
I'm just catching up on some of the excellent comments -- stormy weather in Michigan and just about everywhere else on Sunday --- it's now 1:28 a.m. Monday morning, and I have yet to go to bed, but must get up early. Groan!
As regards Vatican II, the New Agers were doing plenty of boasting. An important book vis a vis the New Age infiltration was THE UTOPIA OF POPE JOHN XXIII by Giancarlo Zizola (Orbis Books, 1978).
Norman Cousins played no small role:
"This tight debate took place on a day between December 10 and 12,1962 in the Kremlin. During those same days, Norman Cousins, director of the
Saturday Review was in Rome; he was co-president of American-Soviet Peace Talks held both in Russia and in America. the last of which. held in October 1962 at Andover, had favored the appeal of Pope John for an end to the Cuban crisis. Cousins had talks with Cardinal Tisserant, with the head
of Protocol. lgino Cardinale, and with Angelo Dell' Acgua. The American
editor had an appointment with Khrushchev in Moscow in the days just following. He asked the Vatican prelates what gesture they were waiting for on the part of Khrushchev. In the name of President Kennedy, who was
seeking a thaw with the Soviet Union, Cousins said that he would relay any request the Pope might want him to make at the Kremlin. The Vatican prelates told him that what the Pope was expecting from Khrushchev was Slipyj's liberation. Cousins assured them that he would support that proposal . . ."
This is one of several references in that volume about Norman Cousins' role and it was perfectly known to all that Cousins was seeking Wrld federalism.
There was a Catholic priest mentioned in the book p. 6, by the name of Father Felix Morlion who was "fascinated by the thesis of Cousins . . ."
If you can get your hands on that book, it is MUST READING.
More in next post.
Costance
~
Susanna,
I would appreciate any further light you can shed on Morlion who appeared to be a BIG catalyst for what was to follow in the grand synthesis Cousins was playing no small part in weaving. Cousins and Donald Keys were partners in the Planetary Citizens/Planetary Initiative scheme which plainly hoped to usher in their New Age "Christ" in 1982. Keys had actively worked with Alice and Foster Bailey.
As regards the New Age boasting of their accomplishments from the pen of Donald Keys old friend, FOSTER BAILEY, we read in THINGS TO COME
Increasing numbers of religious leaders are recognising that the church must abandon useless dogmas and that it is out of step with the development of human intelligence today. There is a ferment arising in the religious field which is forcing reformation of churchianity. Amazing things are taking place in the Roman Catholic Church for example.
It may eventuate that the most crystallised, materialistic
and dogmatic church the Christian world will become the leader in a Christian religious revival.
For centuries the Roman Catholic Church has been dominated and controlled by the Curia, a body of ultraconservative doctrinaires who wielded undisputed power over all cardinals and bishops. Until this control was broken there was little hope for any spiritual change. Pope John XXIII
broke it in the first session of the Second Ecumenical Council.
Today the present Pope is largely freed from this shackling influence and a new Collegia is gaining power and great influence as to all Church affairs. This is a far-reaching change in the organisation itself, the fruits of which will be startling indeed.
In addition, the Second Session of the Ecumenical Council witnessed the promulgation of the doctrine that every man is free to worship God as he chooses without
condemnation of the Church. This new religious freedom in the Catholic Church, when implemented, will completely change the system . . ."
Also must reading, alongside Donald Keys & Norman Cousins' EARTH AT OMEGA: PASSAGE TO PLANETIZATION.
These quotes are from page 98 and 99 of Foster Bailey's 1974 book, THINGS TO COME.
Constance
Constance said to GOODBYE CONSTANCE.
I'm not leaving. Sorry about you!
Constance
Kevin Annett, IMHO, is one sick and disturbed man. I am praying for him.
Constance
As far as I am concerned Vatican II let the Holy Spirit into the Roman Catholic church but the risk is that a few unholy spirits also sneak in to try to harm the work of the Spirit. A generation older than mine speak of how exclusive Catholics were before Vatican II, and how willing they became after it to confess their oneness in Christ with them. That has to be a good thing, and it is reflected in the formal documents produced by that Council. (Of course they say that Rome is the best church - you wouldn't expect otherwise - but they acknowledge protestants as "separated brethren" after centuries of the counter-Reformational attitude.) And Rome's attitude to Israel also improved. For a protestant to grumble about Vatican II because Rome now needs to exercise vigilance against the New Age is surely a mistaken perspective.
John XXIII was from a humble family rather than the usual tedious Italian aristocrat-bureaucrat, and it showed. Reportedly he refused painkilling drugs in the last hours of his cancer in order to keep praying "Another Pentecost, Lord!"
Susanna, you wrote: "Communism and socialism may not have always been explicitly allied to the New Age Movement as we know it, but it has always been allied to the occult."
Tactically allied to, perhaps, but driven by? Throughout most of the 20th century socialists and communists were diehard secularist materialists; communism was also known as dialectical materialism.
In these movements you will also find occultists, sure. The question is: were the occultists or the materialists in the driving seat?
Anonymous 4:43 A.M.
Re:Tactically allied to, perhaps, but driven by? Throughout most of the 20th century socialists and communists were diehard secularist materialists; communism was also known as dialectical materialism.
Yes. Driven by! Whether they realize it or not. This includes "atheists."
Because the dialectic ( formulated by Hegel and later revised by Marx ) is itself the occult "reconciliation of opposites" - based on radical gnostic dualism - tricked out in "scientific" terminology.
Walter L. Wilmshurst ties the occult reconciliation of opposites in with the dialectic in his book "THE MEANING OF MASONRY" which you can read for free online. Here is the link.
The Meaning of Masonry
W. L. Wilmshurst
P.M. 275; PAST PROVINCIAL GRAND REGISTRAR (WEST YORKS.)
1922
LONDON
WILLIAM RIDER & SON, 8, PATERNOSTER ROW &
PERCY LUND, HUMPHRIES & CO., 3, AMEN CORNER
http://hermetic.com/wilmshurst/the-meaning-of-masonry/
______________________________
One example of the atheist double-speak is embodied in Mikhail Bakunin who is described as:
Mikhail Alexandrovich Bakunin (Russian: Михаил Александрович Бакунин) (May 30, 1814 – July 1, 1876) was a Russian political philosopher, anarchist, and noted atheist.
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mikhail_Bakunin
See also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Bakunin
______________________________
However, Bakunin was also a self-professed Satanist who was quoted as saying:
“But here steps in Satan, the eternal rebel, the first freethinker and the emancipator of worlds. He makes man ashamed of his bestial ignorance and obedience; he emancipates him, stamps upon his brow the seal of liberty and humanity, in urging him to disobey and eat of the fruit of knowledge.”
― Mikhail Bakunin
http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/204917-but-here-steps-in-satan-the-eternal-rebel-the-first
________________________________
"...The Devil is the rebel of the cosmos, the independent in the empire of a tyrant;...he is the individualizing tendency, the craving for originality, which bodily upsets the ordinances of God that enforce a definite kind of conduct; he overturns the monotony that would permeate the cosmic spheres if every atom in unconscious righteousness and with pious obedience slavishly followed a generally prescribed course."
Bakunin praised Satan openly. For him Satan wasn't just "the first freethinker", but an inner force that had to be called forth in people to give birth to a totally new kind of society of primitive vitality. These are not some exceptions. These were the very same people who wrote these "odes," but they were not romantics. They were hard-core anti-romantic, anti-idealistic people. It can't be overemphasized how hard-core their materialism was. Very revolutionary stuff, even ideologically. It's important to realize that back then Anarchism and Socialism revolved around each other even stronger than today. People like Bakunin were part of the "gang," and he had a somewhat important role on works such as the Internationales.
God and the State by Mikhail Bakunin 1814-1876,
The pamphlet is Michael Bakunin's,
"God and the State," 1916 New York:
http://www.satanicreds.org/satanicreds/revolut.html
_______________________________
cont...
cont...
Proudhon was similarly a Satanist.
Recollections on Marx and Engels
Written: 1869 - 71
Source: Bakunin on Anarchy, p. 25-6 (by James Guillaume)
Regarding Proudhon: Though he (Marx) did not originate it- it was to a greater or lesser extent formulated before him by many others- to Marx belongs the credit for solidly establishing it as the basis for an economic system. On the other hand, Proudhon understood and felt liberty much better than he. Proudhon, when not obsessed with metaphysical doctrine, was a revolutionary by instinct; he adored Satan and proclaimed Anarchy.
http://www.satanicreds.org/satanicreds/revolut.html
______________________________
The Satan/Lucifer of these "atheist" revolutionaries
is not your garden variety devil figure cum horns, pitchfork and tail. Their Satan is more in line with what Satan really is - i.e. a fallen angel - a bodiless spirit.
Dostoyevsky's novel THE DEVILS is based upon an actual murder committed by Bakunin's disciple Sergei Nechayev, author of CATECHISM OF A REVOLUTIONARY. - which was a precursor of Saul Alynsky's book RULES FOR RADICALS which Alynsky dedicated to Lucifer.
Regarding "dialectical materialism" I would like to know how the Marxists define their "antithesis" if materialism/matter is "the whole show?" What is the "antithesis" or "opposite" of the material world?
What do you think?
Constance 2:06 A,M.
I have to review my files. I will be back.
Some interesting information on Yoga which is found in an article in Apologia Report, July 10, 2014:
"The most succinct contradiction of this approach to reality [yoga] is
already found in the first sentence of the Hebrew Bible, about the God who created the universe (including the human self), and who cannot be discovered in the putative depths of that self.
"The year 1893 was pivotal for the arrival of yoga in America.
That was the date of the World Parliament of Religion, which met
within the program of the Chicago World Exhibition. A key figure
at this event was an Indian holy man, who had adopted the name
Swami Vivekananda (1863-1902) and who was probably first to
introduce yoga to America. He must have been a very scintillating
personality. He was born in Calcutta into a Bengali aristocratic family as Narendra Datta. Calcutta was at that time at the center of a Hindu revival movement, which sought to strip Hinduism of its 'superstitious' elements so as to make it an inspiration for a modern morality and a political project to free India from colonial
rule. ... [Vivekananda] saw the possibility of blending tradition and modernity in a version of Hinduism that would speak to the West.
... He was introduced as representing 'India, the Mother of
Religions'.
"He addressed the audience as “sisters and brothers of America”
and assured them he did not want to convert them to Hinduism,
only wanted them to become better Christians, Muslims and so forth. ... He founded the Vedanta Society, which provided a
philosophical rationale for the mental and physical exercises of
yoga. Thus yoga was understood as realizing in experience the
Vedanta proposition that 'each soul is potentially divine'. ...
"The British sociologist Colin Campbell has given a rather full
description of these developments in his book The Easternization
14AR19-21 - Apologia Archive
[https://sites.google.com/site/apologiarchive/Home/briefings/apologia-report/apologia-report-v19-2014/14ar19-21[7/28/2014 11:29:02 AM]
of the West [2]." Berger concludes that "yoga does bring with it
ideas and experiences that connect with the religious traditions
that came out of India (and which, mainly through Buddhism, decisively helped shape the cultures of eastern Asia). Campbell used the term 'metaphysical monism' to describe this - and that is indeed in tension with the religious traditions that came out of
western Asia." The American Interest, May 28 '14,
Interestingly, this article was quoting a secular economist, Peter Berger, who seems to have more discernment than Christians blindly running to Yoga and trying to "Christianize" something absolutely incompatible with the Faith.
Constance
Vatican II was undoubtedly a mixed bag and I'm sure the Holy Spirit brought much good out of what some of the instigators (Norman Cousins and company) may have intended for evil.
Constance
Susanna is just plain brilliant -- and thorough!
Constance
Re Kevin Annett, I was disturbed to see that the program following mine on Saturday morning's THEMICROEFFECT's lineup, Laura, featured him. She also featured Texe Marrs.
I respect Laura and her ability to live off the grid, but I think she needs a lot more information on these folks and their non-Christian, Jew bashing agendas.
Constance
"Regarding "dialectical materialism" I would like to know how the Marxists define their "antithesis" if materialism/matter is "the whole show?" What is the "antithesis" or "opposite" of the material world?"
Susanna, are you suggesting that Marxists reason logically, consistently and intelligently? If they did that then they wouldn't be Marxists, would they?
Apologia.org is an INTERESTING ISSUE in and of itself. It appears to be a coalition of many of the disinformation "experts" perhaps teamed up with the sincere but naive crowd. Here is a list of their AR Talk members (past and present) I found on line this morning:
Brooks Alexander, Spiritual Counterfeits Project
Eileen Barker, London School of Economics
Mark Bassett, United Pentecostal Church
Frank Beckwith, Baylor University
Cal Beisner, Knox Theological Seminary
James Beverley, Tyndale College and Seminary
Rob Bowman, Insitute for Religious Research
Craig Branch, Apologetics Resource Center
Chad Brand, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary
Steve Cannon, Personal Freedom Outreach
Paul Carden, The Centers for Apologetic Research
Steve Cowan, Apologetics Resource Center
Donald Dicks, Atlanta Christian Apologetics Project
Jerry Dodson, Ligonier Ministries
Jeff Downs, Resource Center for Theological Research
Ronald Enroth, Westmont College
John & Phyllis Farkas, Berean Christian Ministries
Doug Groothuis, Denver Seminary
Dean Halverson, International Students, Inc.
Craig Hawkins, Apologetics Information Ministry
Craig Hazen, Biola University
Anton Hein, Apologetics Index
Irving Hexham, University of Calgary
Bill Honsberger, Haven Ministries
Ed Komoszewski, Josh McDowell Ministry
Gordon Lewis, Denver Seminary
Janice Lyons, Christians Investigating New Age Medicine
Elliot Miller, Christian Research Institute
Fred Miller, True Light Educational Ministry
John Morehead, Watchman Fellowship
Robert Morey, Callifornia Institute of Apologetics
Cathy Norman, Church of Scientology
Eric Pement, Cornerstone magazine
David Reed, Comments from the Friends
Ron Rhodes, Reasoning from the Scriptures
Bruce Robinson, Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance
John Stackhouse, Regent College
Jon Trott, Cornerstone magazine
Don Veinot, Midwest Christian Outreach
James Walker, Watchman Fellowship
James White, Alpha & Omega Ministries
http://www.apologia.org/htm/members.htm
or http://tinyurl.com/lhcwqff
With good cause, I suspect they have funding, direct or indirect from Paul N. Temple and company and hence their greated criticism of me and muted criticism, if not outright sympathy) for IONS (Institute of Noetic Sciences).
MOST INTERESTING. Just stumbled on to them online this morning!
Constance
Anonymous 1:38
Re:Susanna, are you suggesting that Marxists reason logically, consistently and intelligently? If they did that then they wouldn't be Marxists, would they?
BRILLIANT REPLY!!!!
That was exactly the point I was trying to make!
For the materialist, dialectical materialism is an oxymoron!!!
Dear Constance,
Here are some insights that you requested on Belgian Dominican priest Father Felix Morlion, O.P.
First.....a biography:
Rev Andrew Felix Morlion>
Birth: 1904
Death: Dec. 10, 1987
Scholar, theologian, diplomat and social reformer. Born in Belgium, Father Morlion was an avowed atheist until the age of 21, at which time he converted to Catholicism and later became a Dominican priest. After studying philosophy, theology and engineering at the University of Louvain and spending several years at the Dominican Institute of Ghent, he joined the Dominican Order. In 1932 he founded the International Pro Deo Union (also known as the “United People’s Movement”) as an independent association to promote world ecumenism among young political, educational, cultural and religious leaders from every faith and nation. Until his death, this group published a monthly newsletter, “United People,” that circulated in 152 countries. During the Second World War, he was active in the European underground, helping Jews escape from Nazi Germany. After the Gestapo put a price of a million dollars on his head, he escaped Europe through Spain to New York, where he published a monthly letter of underground news. In 1945, with the support of Pope Pius XII, he founded and headed the International University of Social Studies in Rome and served five popes as their private emissary. Several of Italy’s prime ministers and other leaders graduated from the university, which served as a Mecca where young political, educational, cultural and religious leaders representing virtually every faith and nation studied and learned about each other’s countries and religions in the spirit of world ecumenicalism. Fr. Morlion also developed an interest in film and directed motion picture documentaries, including a TV series in the United States, “The American Youth Movement.” He also wrote scripts for the great Italian filmmakers, Federico Fellini and Roberto Rossellini. On hearing of his death, author and editor Norman Cousins described Father Morlion as “a peace broker who helped to widen the opportunities for dialogue between western democracies and east European countries, and to reduce tension between East and West. He was a study in perpetual motion, bringing ideas and projects before political and religious leaders in every land.” In his book “The Improbable Triumvirate,” Mr. Cousins disclosed that Father Morlion’s diplomacy helped bring about the resolution of the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962. He was instrumental in the release of Joseph Cardinal Slipyi of the Ukraine and Joseph Cardinal Behan of Czechoslovakia, and helped pave the way for the Kennedy-Khrushchev Test Ban Treaty. He worked behind the scenes to improve relations between France and Germany as well as China and the United States. In 1976, Father Morlion began devoting himself to a new organization, the International Committee of Human Relations for Peace. In recognition of his devoted service to mankind, Father Morlion was invited to the First Yoko Civilization International Conference at Takayama, Japan where on October 31, 1986 he spoke on the subject “The Calling of Mahikari For The Coming Spiritual Civilization.” At the time of his death in New York City following a series of heart attacks, his obituary described him as a “diplomatic trouble-shooter among leaders of the world for 50 years.” (bio by: Warrick L. Barrett)
http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=8743424
___________________________
cont..
Not only was Father Felix at one time an atheist, but he was also a communist during the 1930's and when he converted to Christianity, he brought his entire "cell" with him.
See page 14 of the Dominican Newsletter "TRUTH BE TOLD" dated July, 2009.
laydominicanswest.org/newsletter/truth_be_told_-_july_2009.pdf
___________________________
Father Morlion, together with journalist Anna Brady was the founder of Pro Deo: They also established the Catholic International Press.
The Anna M. Brady Papers consist of correspondence, manuscripts, and photographs that document the career of Anna M. Brady, a Catholic journalist who for many years was the dean of the Vatican press corps, covering synods, papal conclaves, and the Second Vatican Council. There is much about those events and about the Catholic Intercontinental Press. Of note is an extensive run of correspondence of Felix Morlion, O.P. There are also some fine original photographs of Pope Paul VI, Pope John Paul I, Pope John Paul II, Mother Theresa, and others. The Anna Brady Papers are contained in 29 archival boxes (45.5 linear feet).
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH - Anna M. Brady was born Anna Caldwell Moss on March 7, 1901. She was the daughter of Mr. and Mrs. William Ward Moss of Norfolk, Virginia. In 1925, Anna married Frank Brady, a founder of the Catholic Evidence Guild in Baltimore. In 1928, Anna was received into the Catholic Church. Anna and Frank started the American branch of the Pro Deo Movement. After World War II, Anna Brady settled in Rome. In time, she earned the rank of Senior Vatican correspondent. She became an expert on Vatican issues and covered the conclaves which elected four popes and all sessions of Vatican II. In 1981, she moved to Albany, New York where she wrote for "CRUX of the News." Throughout her lifetime, she published articles in a wide array of publications, including the Baltimore "Sun" and the "Long Island Catholic." Anna M. Brady died on September 6, 1999. (Source: Obituary - Albany "Times Union" September 8, 1999.)
https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/bitstream/handle/10822/559110/GTM.GAMMS330.html?sequence=1
http://www.catholicresearch.net/data/ead/html/gtu-g01.html
http://www.library.georgetown.edu/dept/speccoll/wwcoll.htm
__________________________
Post a Comment