Test All Things Pt. 10 – Cultural Crusaders’ Manipulation

abolishabortion

Do not be deceived by the world.
Christ’s church was not commissioned to fight culture wars.
Christ’s church was commissioned to preach the gospel. The work of the gospel is Christ’s call to action to his church, and not culture wars. So let’s not add to his commands to the church.

“National responsibility” and “obedience to the gospel of Jesus Christ” are not one and the same, but two different duties, and must never be merged as one. Or else, Tim Keller’s false gospel of social justice is true. So when we stand against unjust laws, and try to reason with a wicked, and perverse culture, we must remember that these are civilian affairs, and not our high calling of God in Christ. Therefore, the world has no right to tell us that their culture wars are also our responsibility as a church. Don’t let them manipulate you with their extra-biblical commands and deceptive speeches (Romans 16:17-19).

Keep the work of the gospel pure, because a little leaven leavens the whole lump (Galatians 5:7-10).

Matthew 28

19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen.

Revelation 2

24 … I will put on you no other burden.

25 But hold fast what you have till I come.

26 And he who overcomes, and keeps My works until the end, to him I will give power over the nations —

27 ‘ He shall rule them with a rod of iron; They shall be dashed to pieces like the potter’s vessels’ — as I also have received from My Father;

28 and I will give him the morning star.

29 “He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.” ‘

Colossians 2

 

4 And this I say, lest any man should beguile you with enticing words.

 

8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

 

2Corinthians 10

3 For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:

4 (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;)

5 Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;

2Timothy 4

1 I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom:

2 Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching.

3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers;

4 and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables.

5 But you be watchful in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.

 

Romans 1

16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek.

1John 2

24 Therefore let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, you also will abide in the Son and in the Father.
25 And this is the promise that He has promised us — eternal life.
26 These things I have written to you concerning those who try to deceive you.
27 But the anointing which you have received from Him abides in you, and you do not need that anyone teach you; but as the same anointing teaches you concerning all things, and is true, and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you will abide in Him.
28 And now, little children, abide in Him, that when He appears, we may have confidence and not be ashamed before Him at His coming (Matthew 25:1-13).

Related articles are listed below:

  1. Test All Things Pt. 3 – Wimpy Christians & The Culture War
  2. The New Christianity Pt. 4 – Earth-Based & Works-Based Salvation
Advertisements

Crackdown on Liberty Pt. 15 – U.N.’s Approval of Global Arms Trade Treaty

global arms trade treaty

Reuters.Com

The 193-nation U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday overwhelmingly approved the first treaty on the global arms trade, which seeks to regulate the $70 billion business in conventional arms and keep weapons out of the hands of human rights abusers.

The National Rifle Association (NRA), a powerful U.S. pro-gun lobbying group that has opposed the treaty from the start, said it was a sad day for the United States, which joined the vast majority of U.N. member states by voting for the pact.

Iran, Syria and North Korea cast the sole votes against the treaty. The same three states last week prevented a treaty-drafting conference at U.N. headquarters from reaching the required consensus to adopt the pact.

The official U.N. tally showed 154 votes in favor, three against 23 abstentions, though diplomats and U.N. officials said the actual vote was 155-3-22. They said Angola was recorded as having abstained, though it had attempted to vote yes.

Iran, which is under a U.N. arms embargo over its nuclear program, is eager to ensure its arms imports and exports are not curtailed, while Syria’s government is embroiled in a two-year civil war and relies on arms from Russia and Iran, envoys said.

North Korea is also under a U.N. arms embargo due to its nuclear weapons and missile programs.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon welcomed the vote, saying the treaty “will help to keep warlords, pirates, terrorists, criminals and their like from acquiring deadly arms.”

The treaty will be open for signature on June 3 and will enter into force 90 days after the 50th signatory ratifies it. Mexican U.N. Ambassador Luis Alfonso de Alba told reporters it normally takes two to three years for a treaty to come into force, but said he hoped it would happen sooner in this case.

Major arms producers China and Russia joined Cuba, Bolivia, Nicaragua and other countries in abstaining. Although a significant number of countries abstained, putting the treaty to a General Assembly vote was the only way its supporters could get it adopted after the treaty conference collapsed last week.

NRA: ‘A SAD, YET TELLING, DAY’

Many of the countries that abstained, among them India, complained the treaty favored exporting over importing states. Russia said Moscow would take a hard look at the treaty before deciding whether to sign it.

Several delegates told Reuters the treaty’s effectiveness would be limited if major arms exporters refused to sign it.

The United States, the world’s No. 1 arms exporter, voted in favor of the treaty despite fierce opposition from the NRA, whose lobbying wing – the NRA Institute for Legislative Action – issued a statement condemning the U.N. vote.

“This treaty disregards the Second Amendment to our Constitution and threatens individual firearm ownership,” said Chris Cox, head of the NRA-ILA. “It is a sad, yet telling, day when the president of the United States and his administration refuse to defend America’s Constitution on the world stage.”

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said in a statement the U.N. adopted “a strong, effective and implementable Arms Trade Treaty that can strengthen global security while protecting the sovereign right of states to conduct legitimate arms trade.”

“Nothing in this treaty could ever infringe on the rights of American citizens under our domestic law or the Constitution, including the Second Amendment,” he added, referring to the U.S. Constitutional amendment that guarantees the right to bear arms.

The NRA has vowed to fight to prevent the treaty’s ratification by the U.S. Senate when it reaches Washington.

Syrian U.N. Ambassador Bashar Ja’afari repeated that his government opposes the arms trade treaty because it does not ban the sale of weapons to non-state actors and “terrorists” like those it says are active in Syria. The civil war there has claimed at least 70,000 lives, according to U.N. estimates.

Syria routinely refers to rebels trying to oust President Bashar al-Assad as “terrorists” backed by foreign governments.

The treaty does not ban transfers to armed groups, but says all arms transfers should be subjected to rigorous risk and human rights assessments first.

British Prime Minister David Cameron hailed the vote as a “landmark agreement that will save lives and ease the immense human suffering caused by armed conflict around the world.”

SCRUTINY ON HUMAN RIGHTS

Mexico issued a statement on behalf of 98 U.N. member states saying, “an effective implementation of this treaty will make a real difference for the people of the world.”

U.N. member states began meeting on March 18 in a final push to end years of discussions and hammer out a binding international treaty to end the lack of regulation over cross-border conventional arms sales.

Arms control activists and rights groups have said a treaty was needed to halt the uncontrolled flow of arms and ammunition that they say fuels wars, atrocities and rights abuses.

The Arms Trade Treaty aims to set standards for all cross-border transfers of conventional weapons. It would also create binding requirements for states to review all cross-border arms contracts to ensure that arms will not be used in human rights abuses, terrorism or violations of humanitarian law.

“The agreement of the Arms Trade Treaty sends a clear message to arms dealers who supply warlords and dictators that their time is up,” said Anna Macdonald of the global development group Oxfam.

The main reason the arms trade talks took place at all is that the United States, the world’s biggest arms trader, reversed U.S. policy on the issue after President Barack Obama was first elected and decided in 2009 to support a treaty.

Related articles are listed below:

  1. After Obama win, U.S. backs new U.N. arms treaty talks
  2. Crackdown on Liberty Pt. 12 – Gun Control
  3. Crackdown on Liberty Pt. 3 – Domestic Terrorists
  4. Radical Takeover Pt. 4 – Rome’s Extreme Liberal Stance on Gun Control

Radical Takeover Pt. 10 – The First Jesuit Pope & His Ruthless Jesuit Order

popefrancis

The media is making a big deal about the fact that the new pope is the first Jesuit pope ever to be elected. However, most people in the world are not understanding what they are being told, because most people are not familiar with the Jesuit order, and its history, which is entrenched in conspiracy, assassinations, deception, political, and religious, infiltration, bribery, and secret societies. The Jesuit order was started in 1540 by Ignatius of Loyola, and it has been the most feared, and, hated, Roman Catholic order of priests, because it is Rome’s military, central intelligence agency, inquisitors, theologians, and deceptive philosophers, to the world. The Jesuit’s goal is to bring the Protestant church, and the world, under the authority of Rome. The order’s means of accomplishing this goal is pure pragmatism, and ruthlessness, as stated below.

IanPaisley.Org

The Jesuit Oath Exposed

[The following is the text of the Jesuit Extreme Oath of Induction as recorded in the Journals of the 62nd Congress, 3rd Session, of the United States Congressional Record (House Calendar No. 397, Report No. 1523, 15 February, 1913, pp. 3215-3216), from which it was subsequently torn out. The Oath is also quoted by Charles Didier in his book Subterranean Rome (New York, 1843), translated from the French original. Dr. Alberto Rivera, who escaped from the Jesuit Order in 1967, confirms that the induction ceremony and the text of the Jesuit Oath which he took were identical to what we have cited below. – A. N.]

When a Jesuit of the minor rank is to be elevated to command, he is conducted into the Chapel of the Convent of the Order, where there are only three others present, the principal or Superior standing in front of the altar. On either side stands a monk, one of whom holds a banner of yellow and white, which are the Papal colours, and the other a black banner with a dagger and red cross above a skull and crossbones, with the word INRI, and below them the words IUSTUM NECAR REGES IMPIUS. The meaning of which is: It is just to exterminate or annihilate impious or heretical Kings, Governments, or Rulers.

Upon the floor is a red cross at which the postulant or candidate kneels. The Superior hands him a small black crucifix, which he takes in his left hand and presses to his heart, and the Superior at the same time presents to him a dagger, which he grasps by the blade and holds the point against his heart, the Superior still holding it by the hilt, and thus addresses the postulant:

(The Superior speaks:)

My son, heretofore you have been taught to act the dissembler: among Roman Catholics to be a Roman Catholic, and to be a spy even among your own brethren; to believe no man, to trust no man. Among the Reformers, to be a Reformer; among the Huguenots, to be a Huguenot; among the Calvinists, to be a Calvinist; among other Protestants, generally to be a Protestant; and obtaining their confidence, to seek even to preach from their pulpits, and to denounce with all the vehemence in your nature our Holy Religion and the Pope; and even to descend so low as to become a Jew among Jews, that you might be enabled to gather together all information for the benefit of your Order as a faithful soldier of the Pope. You have been taught to plant insidiously the seeds of jealousy and hatred between communities, provinces, states that were at peace, and to incite them to deeds of blood, involving them in war with each other, and to create revolutions and civil wars in countries that were independent and prosperous, cultivating the arts and the sciences and enjoying the blessings of peace; to take sides with the combatants and to act secretly with your brother Jesuit, who might be engaged on the other side, but openly opposed to that with which you might be connected, only that the Church might be the gainer in the end, in the conditions fixed in the treaties for peace and that the end justifies the means. You have been taught your duty as a spy, to gather all statistics, facts and information in your power from every source; to ingratiate yourself into the confidence of the family circle of Protestants and heretics of every class and character, as well as that of the merchant, the banker, the lawyer, among the schools and universities, in parliaments and legislatures, and the judiciaries and councils of state, and to be all things to all men, for the Pope’s sake, whose servants we are unto death. You have received all your instructions heretofore as a novice, a neophyte, and have served as co-adjurer, confessor and priest, but you have not yet been invested with all that is necessary to command in the Army of Loyola in the service of the Pope. You must serve the proper time as the instrument and executioner as directed by your superiors; for none can command here who has not consecrated his labours with the blood of the heretic; for “without the shedding of blood no man can be saved”. Therefore, to fit yourself for your work and make your own salvation sure, you will, in addition to your former oath of obedience to your order and allegiance to the Pope, repeat after me:

(Text of the Oath:)

I_______________ , now in the presence of Almighty God, the blessed Virgin Mary, the blessed St. John the Baptist, the Holy Apostles, St. Peter and St. Paul, and all the saints, sacred host of Heaven, and to you, my Ghostly Father, the superior general of the Society of Jesus, founded by St. Ignatius Loyola, in the pontification of Paul the Third, and continued to the present, do by the womb of the Virgin, the matrix of God, and the rod of Jesus Christ, declare and swear that His Holiness, the Pope, is Christ’s Vice-Regent and is the true and only head of the Catholic or Universal Church throughout the earth; and that by the virtue of the keys of binding and loosing given to His Holiness by my Saviour, Jesus Christ, he hath power to depose heretical Kings, Princes, States, Commonwealths, and Governments, and they may be safely destroyed. Therefore to the utmost of my power I will defend this doctrine and His Holiness’s right and custom against all usurpers of the heretical or Protestant authority whatever, especially the Lutheran Church of Germany, Holland, Denmark, Sweden and Norway, and the now pretended authority and Churches of England and Scotland, and the branches of same now established in Ireland and on the continent of America and elsewhere and all adherents in regard that they may be usurped and heretical, opposing the sacred Mother Church of Rome. I do now denounce and disown any allegiance as due to any heretical king, prince or State, named Protestant or Liberal, or obedience to any of their laws, magistrates or officers. I do further declare the doctrine of the Churches of England and Scotland of the Calvinists, Huguenots, and others of the name of Protestants or Masons to be damnable, and they themselves to be damned who will not forsake the same. I do further declare that I will help, assist, and advise all or any of His Holiness’s agents, in any place where I should be, in Switzerland, Germany, Holland, Ireland or America, or in any other kingdom or territory I shall come to, and do my utmost to extirpate the heretical Protestant or Masonic doctrines and to destroy all their pretended powers, legal or otherwise. I do further promise and declare that, notwithstanding, I am dispensed with to assume any religion heretical for the propagation of the Mother Church’s interest; to keep secret and private all her agents’ counsels from time to time, as they entrust me, and not to divulge, directly or indirectly, by word, writing or circumstances whatever; but to execute all that should be proposed, given in charge, or discovered unto me by you, my Ghostly Father, or any of this sacred order. I do further promise and declare that I will have no opinion or will of my own or any mental reservation whatever, even as a corpse or cadaver (perinde ac cadaver), but will unhesitatingly obey each and every command that I may receive from my superiors in the militia of the Pope and of Jesus Christ. That I will go to any part of the world whithersoever I may be sent, to the frozen regions north, jungles of India, to the centres of civilisation of Europe, or to the wild haunts of the barbarous savages of America without murmuring or repining, and will be submissive in all things, whatsoever is communicated to me. I do further promise and declare that I will, when opportunity presents, make and wage relentless war, secretly and openly, against all heretics, Protestants and Masons, as I am directed to do, to extirpate them from the face of the whole earth; and that I will spare neither age, sex nor condition, and that will hang, burn, waste, boil, flay, strangle, and bury alive these infamous heretics; rip up the stomachs and wombs of their women, and crush their infants’ heads against the walls in order to annihilate their execrable race. That when the same cannot be done openly I will secretly use the poisonous cup, the strangulation cord, the steel of the poniard, or the leaden bullet, regardless of the honour, rank, dignity or authority of the persons, whatever may be their condition in life, either public or private, as I at any time may be directed so to do by any agents of the Pope or Superior of the Brotherhood of the Holy Father of the Society of Jesus. In confirmation of which I hereby dedicate my life, soul, and all corporal powers, and with the dagger which I now receive I will subscribe my name written in my blood in testimony thereof; and should I prove false, or weaken in my determination, may my brethren and fellow soldiers of the militia of the Pope cut off my hands and feet and my throat from ear to ear, my belly be opened and sulphur burned therein with all the punishment that can be inflicted upon me on earth, and my soul shall be tortured by demons in eternal hell forever. That I will in voting always vote for a Knight of Columbus in preference to a Protestant, especially a Mason, and that I will leave my party so to do; that if two Catholics are on the ticket I will satisfy myself which is the better supporter of Mother Church and vote accordingly. That I will not deal with or employ a Protestant if in my power to deal with or employ a Catholic. That I will place Catholic girls in Protestant families that a weekly report may be made of the inner movements of the heretics. That I will provide myself with arms and ammunition that I may be in readiness when the word is passed, or I am commanded to defend the Church either as an individual or with the militia of the Pope. All of which I,_______________, do swear by the blessed Trinity and blessed sacrament which I am now to receive to perform and on part to keep this my oath. In testimony hereof, I take this most holy and blessed sacrament of the Eucharist and witness the same further with my name written with the point of this dagger dipped in my own blood and seal in the face of this holy sacrament.

(He receives the wafer from the Superior and writes his name with the point of his dagger dipped in his own blood taken from over his heart.)

(Superior speaks:)

You will now rise to your feet and I will instruct you in the Catechism necessary to make yourself known to any member of the Society of Jesus belonging to this rank. In the first place, you, as a Brother Jesuit, will with another mutually make the ordinary sign of the cross as any ordinary Roman Catholic would; then one crosses his wrists, the palms of his hands open, and the other in answer crosses his feet, one above the other; the first points with forefinger of the right hand to the centre of the palm of the left, the other with the forefinger of the left hand points to the centre of the palm of the right; the first then with his right hand makes a circle around his head, touching it; the other then with the forefinger of his left hand touches the left side of his body just below his heart; the first then with his right hand draws it across the throat of the other, and the latter then with a dagger down the stomach and abdomen of the first. The first then says Iustum; and the other answers Necar; the first Reges; the other answers Impious. The first will then present a small piece of paper folded in a peculiar manner, four times, which the other will cut longitudinally and on opening the name Jesu will be found written upon the head and arms of a cross three times. You will then give and receive with him the following questions and answers:

From whither do you come? Answer: The Holy faith.

Whom do you serve? Answer: The Holy Father at Rome, the Pope, and the Roman Catholic Church Universal throughout the world.

Who commands you? Answer: The Successor of St. Ignatius Loyola, the founder of the Society of Jesus or the Soldiers of Jesus Christ.

Who received you? Answer: A venerable man in white hair.

How? Answer: With a naked dagger, I kneeling upon the cross beneath the banners of the Pope and of our sacred order.

Did you take an oath? Answer: I did, to destroy heretics and their governments and rulers, and to spare neither age, nor sex, nor condition; to be as a corpse without any opinion or will of my own, but to implicitly obey my Superiors in all things without hesitation or murmuring.

Will you do that? Answer: I will.

How do you travel? Answer: In the bark of Peter the fisherman.

Whither do you travel? Answer: To the four quarters of the globe.

For what purpose? Answer: To obey the orders of my General and Superiors and execute the will of the Pope and faithfully fulfil the conditions of my oaths.

Go ye, then, into all the world and take possession of all lands in the name of the Pope. He who will not accept him as the Vicar of Jesus and his Vice-Regent on earth, let him be accursed and exterminated.

The Jesuit oath provides a better understanding of the new pope, who was the head of the Jesuit order in Argentina. He was formerly known as  Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio, and has taken the name of Francis, after St. Francis of Assisi. The significance of this new name can be directly linked to the pope’s Jesuit oath, because the Franciscans were highly influential in the Great Inquisition of the 13th century, as stated below.

Wikipedia.Com

Inquisitions against non-Catholic movements

The Waldensians were mostly in Germany and North Italy. In contrast with the Cathars and in line with the Church, they believed in only one God, but they did not recognize a special class of priesthood, believing in the priesthood of all believers. They also objected to the veneration (not synonymous with worship) of saints and martyrs, which were part of the Church’s orthodoxy. The complaints of the two main preaching orders of the period, the Dominicans and the Franciscans, against the moral corruption of the Church, to some extent echoed those of the heretical movements, but they were doctrinally conventional, and were enlisted by Pope Innocent III in the fight against heresy. As a result, many Franciscans and Dominicans became inquisitors. For example, Robert le Bougre, the “Hammer of Heretics” (Malleus Haereticorum), was a Dominican friar who became an inquisitor known for his cruelty and violence. Another example was the case of the province of Venice, which was handed to the Franciscan inquisitors, who quickly became notorious for their frauds against the Church, by enriching themselves with confiscated property from the heretics and the selling of absolutions. Because of their corruption, they were eventually forced by the Pope to suspend their activities in 1302.

  What can be expected of the new pope is the carrying out of the social teachings of Rome, such as “social justice“, which is a form of liberation theology that was taught by a nineteenth century Jesuit, and cummanitarianism, which is a merging of socialism and big business with big government. This agenda fits perfectly with Alice Bailey’s world servers idea, as well as Reformed Theologians’ “Incarnational ministry“. All of which are consistent with Vatican II, and promotes the ideals of liberation theology, ecumenism, and humanitarianism, and are rooted in the social gospel’s promise of making a better world. This agenda can be expected of the new pope because it has been consistent with the teachings of the Jesuits for well over a hundred years, and the goal of the agenda is global governance.

Related articles are listed below:

  1. The New Christianity Pt. 7 – All Roads Lead to Rome
  2. First Jesuit pope brings new concerns, new style
  3. The New Jesuit Pope & His Dark Past

Radical Takeover Pt. 7 – Cult of Green: UNEP’s Sabbath & Global Ethic

Earth-Worship1-1024x819

Worldview Weekend

Cult of Green:

The United Nations Environmental Sabbath and

the New Global Ethic

By Carl Teichrib (www.forcingchange.org)

 NOTE: This essay was first published in Forcing Change back in 2007. It is being reprinted here as an informational/educational service. If you appreciate the depth of research and scope of this essay, please consider an annual subscription/membership to Forcing Change – for your subscription support is what enables this research to continue. Go to Apply For Membership and check out the many options available. As a member you will receive each monthly edition of Forcing Change and have access to six years of back issues and reports.

————————-

 “Christianity rescued the world from this lunacy. Today, Christian Churches may be in need of rescue.” – Robert A. Sirico.[1]

   Environmentalism and religion are indelibly linked. At times this connection is subtle, such as when it’s clothed in the often-bureaucratic language of sustainable development. Other times this marriage is openly acknowledged. The late actor James Coburn, in an Earth Day interview with Caryl Matrisciana at Malibu Beach, enthusiastically proclaimed,

james coburn

    “Mother Earth is the Mother. She’s the Mother Goddess. She’s the one we should be praising rather then raping.

   I mean, all of these people here today are here for one reason, because they are concerned about what’s happening to the Earth, what Mankind is doing to the Earth. I mean the negative emotion we carry around a lot of us is another contributor to it. It all feeds the Moon. What we have to do is be true to ourselves, if we are true to ourselves we’ll be true to Mother Earth.

Mother Earth is going to be bountiful. She’ll give us everything we need. She has for a long time.

We’ve lost our way. The pagans used to know how to do it. And the Indians, some of them still remember how to do it.

The Earth is a living organism. We’re killing the one we love the most, and she loves us. We’ve got to praise our Mother Goddess!”[2]

 

At the world’s political gathering place, the United Nations, eco-spirituality has been embraced in a variety of forms. One example is the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), a short document hardly amounting to twenty letter-sized pages. Taken at face value, the CBD appears benign in almost every respect, with little in the text that could be construed as religious-in-nature.

   Yet when the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) interpreted the CBD, resulting in an oversized United_Nations_Environment_Programme1100+page work titled the Global Biodiversity Assessment, eco-spirituality was included as a global asset. In fact, eco-spirituality was deemed so important that a second massive volume was published, aptly titled Cultural and Spiritual Values of Biodiversity: A Complementary Contribution to the Global Biodiversity Assessment (700+pages on oversized paper).

   So why would the CBD, a minuscule document with no real reference to religion foster such a huge interpretive response, including one text specifically on the spiritual aspects of biodiversity? UNEP published the answer,

“…the UN has turned increasing amounts of time and energy to articulating practical measures for meeting the global environmental crisis and to forming an international consensus around a global environmental ethic. Much of this effort came to fruition at the 1992 Earth Summit through the passage of Agenda 21, the Rio Declaration, and the Convention on Biological Diversity [CBD].”[3]

   In case you missed it the answer is found in the middle of the above quote; the formation of “a global environmental ethic.”

   Elaborating on this point, J. Baird Callicott, a UNEP contributor and Professor of Philosophy in the Department of Religion Studies at the University of North Texas, writes in Cultural and Spiritual Values of Biodiversity,

“With the current and more ominous global dimension of the twentieth century’s environmental crisis now at the forefront of attention, environmental philosophy must strive to facilitate the emergence of a global environmental consciousness that spans national and cultural boundaries…In part, this requires a more sophisticated cross-cultural comparison of traditional and contemporary concepts of the nature of nature, human nature, and the relationship between people and nature…a new paradigm is emerging that will sooner or later replace the obsolete mechanical world-view and its associated values and technological esprit.

   What I envision for the twenty-first century is the emergence of an international environmental ethic based on the theory of evolution, ecology and the new physics…Thus we may have one world-view and one associated environmental ethic corresponding to the contemporary reality that we inhabit one planet…”[4]

According to The Concise Oxford Dictionary, the term “ethic” means “a set of moral principles.” Ethics, and its twin sister, Morality, historically turn on the hinges of religion and philosophical thought. Hence, if a new set of global ethics is to arise, religion as a whole – and spiritual leadership in particular – must be included in this transformative process. But which religions and spiritual practices are deemed valid in creating a new global, Earth-centric morality?

   By seeing which religions are vilified in the United Nation’s system, and by examining which worldview the UN deems important, the answer avails itself. A glimpse of this exists in the two aforementioned CBD interpretive texts. In these volumes Christianity is castigated, while pagan practices and Eastern religions are upheld as positive models.

   According to the Global Biodiversity Assessment,

“…the Judaeo-Christian tradition, set humans not as part of a wider community of beings, but apart. It came to view nature as totally dedicated to the fulfilment of human wants, at the pleasure of people. Eastern cultures with religious traditions such as Buddhism, Jainism and Hinduism did not depart as dramatically from the perspective of humans as members of a Hinduismcommunity of beings including other living and non-living elements. So Hindus continue to protect primates…Buddhist shrines in southeast Asia have temple groves attached to them, as do Shinto shrines in Japan. This does not at all mean, however, that these Asian societies have not permitted large-scale erosion of their biological diversity, whether in India or Thailand.

Societies dominated by Islam, and especially by Christianity, have gone farthest in setting humans apart from nature and in embracing a value system that has converted the world into a warehouse of commodities for human enjoyment. In the process, not only has nature lost its sacred qualities, but most animal species that that have a positive symbolic value in other human cultures have acquired very negative connotations in the European culture. Conversion to Christianity has meant an abandonment of an affinity with the natural world for many forest dwellers, peasants, fishers all over the world.”[5]

   After laying basic blame for environmental problems at the feet of Christianity, the Assessment continued its chastisement by giving the negative example of sacred grove destruction.

   “The northeastern hill states of India bordering China and Myanmar supported small scale, largely autonomous shifting cultivator societies until the 1950s. These people followed their own religious traditions which included setting apart between 10 and 30% of the landscape as sacred groves and ponds. Most of these people were drawn into the larger market economy and converted to Christianity by the late 1950s. On so converting to a religious belief system that rejects assignment of sacred qualities to elements of nature, they began to cut down the sacred groves…”[6]

   The second UNEP interpretive volume, Cultural and Spiritual Values of Biodiversity, takes an even more challenging approach to Christianity and Western positions. It proposes that world religions, “especially those in the West,” redefine their ultimate purpose to align with a more radical Earth view; suggesting that Western religions compare their cosmology with the Assisi Declarations,[7] which propagates world unity and universal harmony as the answer to Mankind’s globally destructive tendencies.[8]

   Moreover, the “Christian philosophy of the white man” is referred to as “the ego-driven hegemony of Christian doctrine.”[9] Instead of these negative “white man” philosophies, other more harmonious world-views are to be encouraged, such as the sacredness of the soil: “The soil is our Goddess; it is our religion.”[10]

   Eco-feminism, antagonistic to Christianity and the image of “God as single, male and transcendent,”[11] is also brought to the forefront. The UNEP contributor on eco-feminism suggests a number of “interconnected transformations of our world-view.”

  1. “A shift from a conception of God as holding all sovereign power outside of and ruling over nature; to a conception MotherEarthof God who is under and around all things, sustaining and renewing nature and humanity together as one creational biotic community.”
  2. “A shift…to a view of the world as an organic living whole, manifesting energy, spirit, agency and creativity.”
  3. “A shift from an ethic that non-human entities on the earth, such as animals, plants, minerals, water, air and soil have only utilitarian use value…to a view of all things having intrinsic value to be respected and celebrated for their own being.”
  4. “A shift…to a holistic psychology that recognizes ourselves as psychospiritual-physical wholes in interrelation with the rest of nature as also psychospiritual-physical wholes who are to mutually interdepend in one community of life.”
  5. “A shift from a view that patriarchal dominance is the order of ‘nature’…to a recognition that patriarchal dominance is the root of distorted relations…”
  6. “A shift from the concept of one superior culture (white Western Christian) to be imposed on all other peoples to Eco-feminism‘save’ and civilize’ them; to a respect for the diversity of human cultures in dialogue and mutual learning, overcoming racist hierarchy and defending particularly the bioregional indigenous cultures which are on the verge of extinction.”
  7. “A shift from a politics of survival of the fittest that allocate resources and power to the most powerful; to a political community based on participatory democracy, community-based decision-making and representation of the welfare of the whole bio-region in making decisions.”[12]

Fitting with these alternative views, Cultural and Spiritual Values of Biodiversity presents the Gaia idea as a cornerstone paradigm. This “scientifically” favored hypothesis entwines various co-evolutionary and Mother Goddess concepts around a self-organizing Earth principle,[13] forming a united foundation to serve the call of planetary interdependence. Conversely, in reference to the Judeo-Christian order of nature as found in the first chapter of Genesis, the UNEP volume contends that “a culture built on ‘domination of the earth, and the animals therein’ is doomed to disappear.”

   So it’s no surprise to read,

  “…primitive religions and cultures, often conceived of as constituting one single and earliest form of religion, have constantly functioned as the positive or negative counterpart to Western civilization and life. In the period of environmentalism they have predominately functioned as positive, sometimes even paradisiacal, models for an ecologically sound world-view and society. The period of environmentalism coincides with a period of New Age thinking…”[14]

          Obviously the religious foundation for the coming global ethic, which is designed to save the planet from calamity, must be built on pagan/Eastern cosmologies. Christianity maligned – with its Western consumption and development patterns, it’s dominance over gender and nature, and its racially “superior” cultural mindset – must “disappear.”

   But “Christianity,” or a form of it, can have its place at the international table. In a metaphorical way a spot for it has been set, along with place mats for the other monotheistic faiths. However two unspoken, simple requirements first need to be met.

   First, abandon the fundamentalist aspects of the Biblical faith, rife with its talk of sin and salvation, and reject the exclusiveness of Jesus Christ – which separates and divides. And secondly, join the world in re-forging society so that the Brotherhood of Man and the Fatherhood of God prevails. In other words, turn your back on the narrow, foundational tenants of the Bible and partner to create a unified world, recognizing that all religions are valid expressions of the Living Cosmos. And it doesn’t really matter what order this is done in, as long as the end result of a new global ethics is attained.

   And to make sure that the place at the table is filled, assistance from the international community is available.

   For almost forty years UNEP has sponsored the World Environment Day (WED). Each June 5th, a host city sponsors the WED with a specific environmental theme. This year (2007) the host city was Tromsø, Norway, with the theme: “Melting Ice – A Hot Topic?”

World Environment Day (WED)

   Other themes have included, “Give Earth a Chance” (2002), “We the Peoples: United for the Global Environment” (1995), and “Only One Earth, Care and Share” (1992). Cities that have hosted the event include San Francisco (2005), Moscow (1998), and Nairobi (1987), among others (see the sidebar “World Environment Day: Hosts and Themes” at the end of this article).

   It’s in this context of the World Environment Day that the UN Environmental Sabbath was launched, specifically designed to fall on the weekend closest to the WED. As one writer for the Earth Island Institute noted, “The approach of World Environment Day also signals the return of another unique UN-conceived event – the Earth Sabbath – a day of worship that transcends denominations and welcomes all faiths to participate in a day of global reverence for the Earth.”[15]

      Leigh Eric Schmidt, writing for The Harvard Theological Review in 1991, provides some of the historical details of this unique, annual Earth worship event.

 “The first Earth Day in 1970 provided an occasion within the churches for expressing concerns over the environmental crisis. Religious involvement in this ecological awakening was substantial. Both the president and the general secretary of the National Council of Churches endorsed Earth Day in mailings to church leaders in March 1970; they also encouraged the observance of an Environmental Sabbath the weekend before…

   …Despite the call in 1970 for an Environmental Sabbath, the idea did not develop until the United Nations Environment Programme appropriated it in 1986, linking it with World Environment Day…Interreligious in its construction, the Environmental Sabbath is intended to be a time ‘to contemplate our bond with nature’ and to cultivate ‘a more caring, knowing and responsible attitude toward our use of Earth’s gifts.’ With an estimated ‘25,000 groups of celebrants’ in 1990 – in churches, synagogues, colleges, and youth organizations – the Environmental Sabbath is explicitly liturgical and religious in its inspiration (in contrast to the more politically oriented activities of Earth Day)…”[16]

   Although UNEP adopted the Sabbath in 1986, it wasn’t until the following year that the program went public. According to John J. Kirk, co-founder of the Interfaith Partnership for the Environment, an organization established by UNEP in to work on the Sabbath, the target audience was initially North American churches.

   “It began in the fall of 1986 when a few of us met at UN headquarters in New York with leaders of several faith communities. With guidance and support from the United Nations Environment Programme, we began developing a project that would inform North American congregations about the serious environmental problems facing life on Earth, so we could work to protect this magnificent work of the Creator.

   In June of 1987, our first Environmental Sabbath kit went to congregations across the United States and Canada. The goal was to create a sabbatical for our beleaguered planet – an Earth Rest Day to be celebrated annually by faith communities…”[17]

   Noel J. Brown, the UNEP Director during the 1990 Earth Sabbath, presents us with deeper reasons then just informing North American congregations. In a letter dated March 28, 1990, Brown wrote,

   “Once again, the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) is pleased to invite you to join us in celebrating the ‘Environmental Sabbath/Earth Rest Day’ in your ceremonies, rituals and prayers…

   …The need for establishing a new spiritual and ethical basis for human activities on Earth has never been greater – as the deterioration of our Planetary Home makes the protection of the human environment a new global imperative.”[18]

   Less then six months before his letter went public, Brown was candidly seeking the complicity of religious leaders in his quest to create a new global ethic. Consider these statements made while the UNEP Director was visiting the Los Angeles Interfaith Council,

   “Now we need to work more closely with the religious and spiritual community. We need to create an ecumenical movement – I call it an ‘eco-menical’ movement – in the service of the Earth. It’s time for us to think again, and to think anew…

…We would also like to suggest other challenges that you in the religion and faith community might help us with. The first is a new vision, and supporting institutions, to help us move through this transition. We in the United Nations cannot hope to solve the problems of the future with only the institutions and the mentality of the past. We need a vision that encompasses all human rights to freedom, equality and conditions of life; and an environment that promises life, dignity and well-being. We need also a new legitimacy, a new ethic, and new metaphors.

…we must create a new vision and an institution that can help us to deal with these new realities.

   One of the new metaphors that I am eager to produce and promote is that of a covenant ­– a new covenant with the Earth. You in the religious communities can help us do that…

… That is the challenge facing all of us, and that is the challenge to which I ask you to work with us as allies. We can create a new order, and if we are to survive, indeed we must.”[19] [Italics in original]

 

At the time of the 1990 event, Christian denominations sitting on the Environmental Sabbath interfaith board included the American Baptist Church, the Protestant Episcopal Church, the United Methodist Church, and the United Church of Christ.[20] Moreover, a special Earth worship resource book was prepared by UNEP for the Sabbath, suitably titled Only One Earth.

   Focusing on changing the current religious paradigm towards a new ecological way of thinking, Only One Earth was a source book filled with meditative readings, prayers, and songs for congregational use. Even worship service suggestions were included, such as the excerpted recommendations listed below.

             The Sermon:

  • “Describe the crisis. Use scientific data. Highlight the urgency of the situation.”
  • “Speak of the essential earth-human relationship. What is it? What is our responsibility to it?”
  • “Point to various sources of inspiration: to scripture, to wisdom and spirituality; and to the Earth itself. Show how they are all important, and tied together.”

The Service:

smokeythebear

  • “Decorate your sanctuary with photographs of the Earth as seen from outer space, and with other Earth images.”
  • “Invite guest speakers or ‘representatives’ from other species, i.e. plants and animals.”

Go Further:

  • “In regular services, insert a portion that focuses on reverence and care for the Earth.”
  • “Organize an interfaith ceremony.”
  • “Organize an Environmental Sabbath concert or festival…”
  • “Write letters to the national and regional leaders of your faith, encouraging them to take action.”[21]

For religious leaders who were so inclined, churches could participate through a variety of listed meditations and reflections. Hindu, Buddhist, Judaic, North American Indian, Islamic, and Christian prayers were suggested; all with an Earth-centric and/or mystical tone. Topping it off, at the back of the UNEP Sabbath worship book was the Earth Covenant, a type of “citizens’ treaty” that could be copied and distributed to the worshipers (see “Earth Covenant” sidebar).

   The response to the Environmental Sabbath of 1990, the kick-off year of Only One Earth, was noteworthy. Not only did many churches and groups embark on this Earth-first journey, estimated at 25,000 by Leigh Eric Schmidt, it added real momentum towards acceptance of an environmental theology. And over the years, the program, according to John Kirk, has spawned “more than 130,000 religion and ecology projects…worldwide.”[22]

   Granted, the Environmental Sabbath never reached the tremendous general popularity held by the April 22nd Earth Day. But it wasn’t designed for the general public. Rather, the Environmental Sabbath program was target specific: religions and spiritual leaders, churches, and entire denominations.

   In the year 2000, Only One Earth was revamped and re-released as Only One Earth: A Book of Reflection for Action. On page 3 of this new and enlarged edition, UN Under-Secretary-General Klaus Töpfer offered some words of eco-wisdom,

“We have entered a new age. An age where all of us will have to sign a new compact with our environment…and enter into the larger community of all living beings. A new sense of our communion with planet Earth must enter our minds.”[23]

   Today, New Age eco-spirituality is sweeping through the Christian community, influencing para-church organizations, local congregations, and up into the leadership of entire denominations. If one where to catalogue the situation only in North America, it would take an entire book to list all the ministries and churches that have adopted this ideology either by naivety or by consent.

   Seeing the handwriting on the wall, Robert A. Sirico, president of the Acton Institute, penned these words regarding the Earth Sabbath, paganism, and the embracement of these ideas by religious leaders.

   “Consider the ‘confession’ of environmental sins offered by the National Council of Churches (NCC): ‘We are responsible for massive pollution of earth, water and sky…We are killing the skies: as the global atmosphere heats up from chemical gases, as the ozone layer is destroyed.’

Scientists say most of these concerns are overblown. But let’s just say these assertions are true. At most, they are technical matters to be addressed by specialists in the public or private sector. They shouldn’t have far-reaching spiritual relevance. No one is in Hell for using aerosol hairspray.

Only if we jettison traditional teachings can we agree with the words of NCC’s eco-celebrant, who says in one proposed prayer: ‘We must say, do, and be everything possible to realize the goal of the Environmental Sabbath…We cannot let our mother die. We must love and replenish her.’

Describing the earth as our living mother either constitutes a pagan form of earth worship or comes dangerously close. An ‘Environmental Sabbath’ isn’t a Christian goal, even though the United Nations has a program to promote it. Neither should we attempt to create an ‘Eco-Church’…

The Genesis account of creation provides enough theological evidence to counter the greening of theology. After God created man and woman in His image, He said: ‘Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it. Have dominion over the fish and the sea, the birds of the air and all the living things that move on this earth’ (Gn 1:28).

The earth hasn’t been given dominion over people. We have souls which are in need of salvation; rocks, rivers, squirrels and salmon do not. We have been given the gifts of reason and revelation; plants and animals have not. There are right and wrong ways to have dominion over nature, which the well-formed conscience can discern.”[24]

   In closing this article, it would be wise to consider the words of Samantha Smith from her 1994 book Goddess Earth. A critic of eco-spirituality, she exposed the core of this issue and its disquieting implications for Christianity,

“Much of the social and environmental activism in the churches today is based on Socialist beliefs promoted in the name of ‘stewardship,’ which encompasses everything from social justice to passionate earth protection. Green theology overlooks God’s commands to fill the earth and subdue it, while caring for its beauty and resources. Instead, it would have Christians believe their noblest calling is to serve their ‘interconnected’ earth. In so doing, they play into the hands of the pagan Greens, who desire to have dominion over man.”[25] FC

earthday

Carl Teichrib edits Forcing Change, a monthly journal detailing the worldview changes now sweeping our Western culture, and the challenges and opportunities this presents to Christendom.

 

Related links are listed below:

  1. David Suzuki Foundation
  2. The New Christianity Pt. 12 – Alice Bailey & The Christian World Servers
  3. Evangelical Environmentalism
  4. Authors of Confusion Pt. 24 – Rick Warren & the ‘Seeker Sensitive, Purpose Driven, Emergent, World-Church’

Radical Takeover Pt. 6 – Rome’s Support of Occupy Wall Street & World Bank

worldbank

Rome’s engineering of communism, and social justice, over the last 300 years, reveals the hidden agenda within its campaign for global governance. The popes desire to offer the world a peace & prosperity plan that appears to be for the common good of mankind, when it has nothing to do with peace, and common good, and everything to do with deception and tyranny. Rome’s approach to winning the confidence of the world is the “Hegelian dialectic”, which creates opposition, and chaos, so that it can offer a solution that appeals to both sides of the opposition; thus producing a third way, in which everyone agrees on a compromise that works in favor of Rome, which manipulated the conflict from the beginning.

Rome’s participation within economic conflict can be seen below:

WashingtonPost.Com

Does the Vatican’s new document calling for a “central world bank” and a “supranational authority” to advance the common economic good mean that Pope Benedict supports the complaints behind the Occupy Wall Street movement?

“ ‘The basic sentiment’ behind the protests is in line with Catholic social teaching and the new document on pope_in_cope_2global finance issued Oct. 24 by the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace,” council President Cardinal Peter Turkson, said to the National Catholic Reporter.

But a debate over the authority of the document, and the requirement (or not) of Catholics to support it, is now being waged by some of America’s most prominent Catholic writers, scholars and activists.

You can read the full text of the document, Note on financial reform from the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, in the embed below. Among the findings are calls for:

The world’s peoples to adopt an ethic of solidarity as the animating core of their action

— A “world political authority” to manage “the growing interdependence between states and regions of the world becomes more and more obvious as well as the need for answers that are not just sectorial and isolated, but systematic and integrated, rich in solidarity and subsidiarity and geared to the universal common good”

— A “central world bank” that regulates the flow and system of monetary exchanges similar to the national central banks

NPR.Org

Thomas J. Reese is a senior fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University, and a former editor of America, the national Catholic weekly magazine.

The Vatican released a document on the world economy on Monday that will cause heartburn in the Tea Party, but will be cheered by the folks occupying Wall Street.

This will surprise most Americans who think the pope is a Republican because he opposes abortion and gaythomas reese jesuit marriage. But when it comes to economic justice, Pope Benedict XVI is to the left of President Obama. Heck, he is even to the left of Nancy Pelosi.Those who read the pope’s 2009 encyclical “Caritas in Veritate (Charity in Truth)” will not be surprised by this new document. In that encyclical, the pope decried “corruption and illegality” among economic and political elites in both rich and poor countries. He told financiers they must rediscover the ethical foundation of their activity and stop abusing savers. He wants a radical rethinking of economics so that it is guided not simply by profits but by “an ethics which is people-centered.”

Benedict notes that economic “inequalities are on the increase” across the globe. He does not accept the trickle-down theory, which says that all boats will rise with the economic tide. Benedict condemns the “scandal of glaring inequalities” and sees a role for government in the redistribution of wealth.

Yes, you heard that right. The pope favors the redistribution of wealth. When was the last time you heard a liberal Democrat use those words?

The pope also disagrees with those who believe that the economy should be free of government regulation. An unregulated economy “shielded from ‘influences’ of a moral character has led man to abuse the economic process in a thoroughly destructive way,” he writes. This has “led to economic, social and political systems that trample upon personal and social freedom, and are therefore unable to deliver the justice that they promise.”

Critics have complained that the Occupy Wall Street movement has no program. The people in the movement could do a lot worse than to study what the pope has said about the economy. Sadly, few Catholics know of the church’s teaching on economic justice, which has been called the church’s best-kept secret.

The pope does not have a magic plan to restore economic prosperity, but he does focus on the values that a political and economic system must support. The priority, he says, must be “access to steady employment for everyone.” And that means not just here in the United States, but also in the developing world, where we must rescue “peoples, first and foremost, from hunger, deprivation, endemic diseases and illiteracy.”

So if you are having a tea party, don’t bother inviting the pope; he won’t come. But if you see a white, solar-powered car heading toward Wall Street, it might just be the popemobile.

CatholicNews.Com

VATICAN CITY (CNS) — The world authority envisioned by two popes as a way to ensure global peace and justice would not be a superpower, but primarily a moral force with limited jurisdiction, Pope Benedict XVI said.

The pope made his remarks Dec. 3 to a plenary session of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, which was scheduled to meet for three days to discuss the theme of “political authority and global governance.”

In his address, Pope Benedict recalled that Blessed John XXIII had called for the “construction of a world Pope-620x395community, with a corresponding authority,” to serve the “common good of the human family.”

The pope also cited his own 2009 encyclical “Caritas in Veritate,” in which he called for a “true world political authority” to ensure international cooperation, peace and environmental protection.

The church offers “principles of reflection, criteria of judgment and practical guidelines” for such an organization, but no concrete legal or political recommendations, Pope Benedict said in his address.

Yet the pope stipulated that the proposed body would not be a “superpower, concentrated in the hands of a few, which would dominate all peoples, exploiting the weakest.” The authority in question, he said, “must be understood, first and foremost, as a moral force, a power to influence in accordance with reason, that is, a participatory authority, limited by law in its jurisdiction.”

The council’s president, Cardinal Peter Turkson, told Vatican Radio that the agenda for the plenary session would include the topic of global financial governance as a response to the world financial crisis.

In October 2011, the council called for establishment of a “central world bank” to regulate the global financial industry and the international money supply as a step toward the world authority envisioned by Blessed John and Pope Benedict.

Pope Benedict’s address also touched on threats to human dignity from different forms of materialism in contemporary culture.

“The man of today is considered primarily from a biological point of view, or as ‘human capital,’ a ‘resource,’ a cog in a productive and financial machine that dominates him,” the pope said.

“New ideologies — such as the hedonistic and egoistic one of sexual and reproductive rights, or that of a disorderly financial capitalism that transgresses politics and dismantles the real economy — contribute to make the employee and his work seem ‘minor’ goods and to undermine the natural foundations of society, especially the family,” he said.

END

The conflict is capitalism vs. communism, and the compromise/”third way”, which is Communitarianism, which is a merging of capitalism & communism. Communitarianism is consistent with “Rerum Novarum – Catholic Social Teaching“, because it takes away from the individualism of capitalism by stressing the importance of  individuals being within, and contributing to the common good of the, community. The community that Rome has in mind is “the world”.

Related articles are listed below:

  1. Radical Takerover Pt. 5 – Rome’s Social Justice & Communism
  2. The New Christianity Pt. 7 – All Roads Lead to Rome
  3. Obama’s Communitarianism

Radical Takeover Pt. 5 – Rome’s Social Justice & Communism

SocialJustice-300x199

The oldest report of communism can be found in the writings of the Greek philosopher, Plato, and has been both implemented and perfected by the Jesuit order of the Roman Catholic church. The resurrection of communism took place in Paraguay of South America in the 17th, and 18th, century, in what is known as the Jesuit Reductions of Paraguay. The Jesuit Reductions were brought about because of Romes interest in making Catholicism the dominate religion of the indigenous region. At the same time, the Spanish colonies were enslaving the natives, and no conversions to Catholicism were taking place, nor were their any clergymen who spoke the language of the natives. To solve this problem, the Jesuits decided to employ radical conversion tactics to win over the natives to the religion of Rome, such as promising freedom from slavery, and equal status with Spaniard colonists, if they would agree to convert to Catholicism.

Within a short time, the number of converts numbered in the tens of thousands, and continued to grew exponentially. These converts lived in colonies controlled by Jesuits, who enforced communism as their form of governance. This fact is also affirmed by Roman Catholic history, as stated below:

NewAdvent.Org

The economic system of the Reductions

The economic basis was a sort of communism, which, however differed materially from the modern system which bears the same name, and was essentially theocratic. “The Jesuits”, writes Gelpi y Ferro, “realized in reduccionestheir Christian commonwealth all that is good and nothing that is bad in the plans of modern Socialists and Communists.” The land and all that stood upon it was the property of the community. The land was apportioned among the caciques, who allotted it to the families under them. Agricultural instruments and draught-cattle were loaned from the common supply. No one was permitted to sell his plot of land or his house, called abamba, i.e. “own possession.”

The communist regime of the Jesuits has also been affirmed by the following author:

The Revolutionary Movement – A Diagnosis of World Disorders by J. Findlater (1933)

jesuitcommunism1jesuitcommunism2jesuitcommunism3

Giovanni Battista Nicolini’s History of the Jesuits (1854) P. 303

When once the Jesuits had raised up a generation so devoted and obedient, they then brought into operation their system of government, and made a successful attempt to realise that republic preconceived of old by Plato, and which, with perhaps more interested views is held out to us by the Socialists of our own day. In fact, their form of a republic was nothing else than that Communism which the famous Cabet is now trying to establish in nearly the same regions; the only difference being, that the Jesuits substituted themselves for the state or community.

In the 19th century, the Jesuit philosopher, Luigi Taparelli, who coined the term “social justice”, implemented the philosophy of Thomas Aquinas to be the voice of Rome in regards to the social changes that were taking place. Taparelli’s writings heavily influenced Pope Leo XIII’s 1891 encyclical, Rerum Novarum, which was an open letter that addressed the condition of the working classes, and amounted to the affirmation of socialism, as opposed to the traditional approach to communism, wherein private property is excluded.  Out of this Catholic Socialist’s philosophy has come a theology of work, which is currently being taught to Roman Catholics in the West. For more information on Rerum Novarum, click on the link entitled “Rerum Novarum – Catholic Social Teaching“.

This teaching on social justice can also be seen in the 20th century with the rise of “Liberation Theology“, which was started by the Dominican Priest, Gustavo Gutiérrez Merino., who attempted to reinvent the gospel of salvation into a more earth-based, works based, salvation, which is not centered on salvation from the bandage to sin, and the wrath of God, but, instead, is centered in the troubles, and injustices, of the poor, wherein converts must work to save the world from the plight of poverty, and oppression.

Aspects of the “social justice” philosophy can be seen today, such as “The Collective Salvation of the Superior Group” mentality, which can be seen in fanatical religious groups, such as the New Apostolic Reformation, who have a strong emphasis on liberation theology, and even dominionism. Another would be IB’s “World Peace” Indoctrination, wherein student around the world are being taught how to be world citizens, who work together for world peace. Alice Bailey & The Christian World Servers are yet another example of this due to the fact that they claim to be working together for the good of mankind. In this way, All Roads Lead to Rome for the good of mankind, because all religions, and even Protestant leaders, are coming into union with Rome for this very purpose, and is building a dominate world church, which author, Brannon Hows calls a “Religious Trojan Horse“.

These radical views of communism, and “social justice” are rooted in Roman Catholic philosophers for the intentions of advancing the kingdom of Rome, and not the good of mankind. Though Rome promises peace, its goals are deception, and enslavement for the world, just as it enslaved the Holy Roman Empire. Those who are seducing, and deceived by its teachings, and false hope for world peace, will be greatly disappointed.

1Thessalonians 5

1    But concerning the times and the seasons, brethren, you have no need that I should write to you.
2    For you yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so comes as a thief in the night.
3    For when they say, “Peace and safety!” then sudden destruction comes upon them, as labor pains upon a pregnant woman. And they shall not escape.

Daniel 9

27     Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate.”

Revelation 17

1    Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and talked with me, saying to me, “Come, I will show you the judgment of the great harlot who sits on many waters,
2    with whom the kings of the earth committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth were made drunk with the wine of her fornication.”
3    So he carried me away in the Spirit into the wilderness. And I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast which was full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.
4    The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and precious stones and pearls, having in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the filthiness of her fornication.
5    And on her forehead a name was written: MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.
6    I saw the woman, drunk with the blood of the saints and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. And when I saw her, I marveled with great amazement.
7    But the angel said to me, “Why did you marvel? I will tell you the mystery of the woman and of the beast that carries her, which has the seven heads and the ten horns.
8    The beast that you saw was, and is not, and will ascend out of the bottomless pit and go to perdition. And those who dwell on the earth will marvel, whose names are not written in the Book of Life from the foundation of the world, when they see the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.
9    “Here is the mind which has wisdom: The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits.
10    There are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, and the other has not yet come. And when he comes, he must continue a short time.
11    The beast that was, and is not, is himself also the eighth, and is of the seven, and is going to perdition.
12    “The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have received no kingdom as yet, but they receive authority for one hour as kings with the beast.
13    These are of one mind, and they will give their power and authority to the beast.
14    These will make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, for He is Lord of lords and King of kings; and those who are with Him are called, chosen, and faithful.”
15    Then he said to me, “The waters which you saw, where the harlot sits, are peoples, multitudes, nations, and tongues.
16    And the ten horns which you saw on the beast, these will hate the harlot, make her desolate and naked, eat her flesh and burn her with fire.
17    For God has put it into their hearts to fulfill His purpose, to be of one mind, and to give their kingdom to the beast, until the words of God are fulfilled.
18    And the woman whom you saw is that great city which reigns over the kings of the earth.”

2Thessalonians 2

1    Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you,
2    not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come.
3    Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition,
4    who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.
5    Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things?
6    And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time.
7    For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way.
8    And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming.
9    The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders,
10    and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11    And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie,
12    that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Radical Takeover Pt. 3 – Rome’s Extreme Liberal Stance on Gun Control

Pope-620x395

Rome presents itself to the world as representing the views of conservatives, yet there is an extreme liberal side to Rome that should be noted. One extreme liberal view of Rome is its stance on gun control, as stated below.

TheBlaze.Com

VATICAN CITY (AP) — The Vatican praised President Barack Obama’s proposals for curbing gun violence, saying they are a “step in the right direction.”

The Vatican’s chief spokesman the Rev. Federico Lombardi, said Saturday that 47 religious leaders have appealed to members of the U.S. Congress “to limit firearms that are making society pay an unacceptable price in terms of massacres and senseless deaths.”

“I am with them,” Lombardi said, in an editorial carried on Vatican Radio, lining up the Vatican’s moral Rev. Federico Lombardisupport in favor of firearm limits.

`’The initiatives announced by the American administration for limiting and controlling the spread and use of weapons are certainly a step in the right direction,” Lombardi said.

Lombardi renewed Vatican appeals for disarmament and encouragement for measures to fight “the production, commerce and contraband of all types of arms,” an industry fueled by `’enormous economic and power interests.”

Continue Reading…

USCatholic.Org

VATICAN CITY (CNS) — The Catholic Church’s position on gun control is not easy to find; there are dozens of speeches and talks and a few documents that call for much tighter regulation of the global arms trade, but what about private gun ownership?

The answer is resoundingly clear: Firearms in the hands of civilians should be strictly limited and eventually completely eliminated.

But you won’t find that statement in a headline or a document subheading. It’s almost hidden in a footnote in a document on crime by the U.S. bishops’ conference and it’s mentioned in passing in dozens of official Vatican texts on the global arms trade.

The most direct statement comes in the bishops’ “Responsibility, Rehabilitation and Restoration: A Catholic Perspective on Crime and Criminal Justice” from November 2000.

“As bishops, we support measures that control the sale and use of firearms and make them safer — especially efforts that prevent their unsupervised use by children or anyone other than the owner — and we reiterate our call for sensible regulation of handguns.”

That’s followed by a footnote that states: “However, we believe that in the long run and with few exceptions — i.e. police officers, military use — handguns should be eliminated from our society.”

That in turn reiterates a line in the bishops’ 1990 pastoral statement on substance abuse, which called “for effective and courageous action to control handguns, leading to their eventual elimination from our society.”

On the world stage, the Vatican has been pushing for decades for limitations not just on conventional weapons of warfare, such as tanks and missiles, but also for stricter limitations on the illegal and legal sale, trade and use of small firearms and weapons, said Tommaso Di Ruzza, the expert on disarmament and arms Tommaso Di Ruzzacontrol at the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace.

Di Ruzza told Catholic News Service that the Vatican is one of just a handful of states that would like to see small arms and weapons included in the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty, which would better regulate the flow of conventional arms.

He said while many countries are open to limits on larger weapons systems, most nations aren’t interested in regulating small arms even though they “cause more deaths than all other arms (conventional and non-conventional) together.”

The Vatican’s justice and peace council is working to update its 1994 document, “The International Arms Trade,” to further emphasize the importance of enacting concrete controls on handguns and light weapons, he said.

The current document calls on every nation and state “to impose a strict control on the sale of handguns and small arms. Limiting the purchase of such arms would certainly not infringe on the rights of anyone.”

The more weapons there are in circulation, the more likely terrorists and criminals will get their hands on them, the document said.

The Catholic Church recognizes that “states will need to be armed for reason of legitimate defense,” as Pope Benedict XVI said in a message to a Vatican-sponsored disarmament conference in April 2008.

However, armed defense is something appropriate for nations, not for all individual citizens in a state where rule of law is effective, said Di Ruzza.

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, individuals have a right and a duty to protect their own lives when in danger, and someone who “defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow.”

How that “lethal blow” could be licitly wielded is unclear, but the catechism clarifies that repelling the aggressor must be done “with moderation” in order to be “lawful” in the eyes of the church; using “more than necessary violence” would be unlawful, it says.

According to the catechism, the right to use firearms to “repel aggressors” or render them harmless is specifically sanctioned for “those who legitimately hold authority” and have been given the duty of protecting the community.

Di Ruzza said that in “a democracy, where there is respect for institutions (of law), the citizen relinquishes his right to revenge onto the state,” which, through its law enforcement and courts system, aims to mete out a fair and just punishment.

“There is a sort of natural right to defend the common interest and the common good, and in 1791 (when the United States passed the Second Amendment), my right to have a weapon served the common good because there wasn’t an army; the democratic institutions were young and a little fragile, and I could have been useful in a time of war as a soldier,” said Di Ruzza.

But once a nation has a functioning army, police force and court system, “do I still serve the common good with my gun or do I put it at even greater danger?” and promote a lawless kind of “street justice where if you steal my car, I shoot you,” he asked.

The Vatican’s justice and peace council’s 1994 document said, “In a world marked by evil and sin, the right of legitimate defense by armed means exists,” but, Di Ruzza said, it wasn’t lauding the potential of weaponry as much as it was lamenting the existence of arms in an imperfect world.

Nations have a duty, the document said, to reduce if not eliminate the causes of violence.

And as Pope Benedict wrote in his message to the disarmament conference, no reduction or elimination of arms can happen without eliminating violence at its root.

Every person “is called to disarm his own heart and be a peacemaker everywhere,” the pope said.

 

AmericaMagazine.Org

Why Gun Control is a Religious Issue by James Martin, SJ

These shootings would not have happened if the shooter did not have such easy access to firearms and ammunition.  So religious people need to be invited to meditate on the connection between the more traditional “life issues” and the overdue need for stricter gun control.  The oft-cited argument, “Guns don’t kill people, people do,” seems unconvincing.  Of course people kill people; as people also procure abortions,martin_j_1 decide on euthanasia and administer the death penalty.  Human beings are agents in all these matters.  The question is not so much how lives are ended, but how to make it more difficult to end lives.

Pro-life religious people need to consider how it might be made more difficult for people to procure weapons that are not designed for sport or hunting or self-defense.  Why would anyone be opposed to firmer gun control, or, to put it more plainly, laws that would make it more difficult for mass murders to occur?  If one protests against abortions clinics because they facilitate the taking of human life, why not protest against largely unregulated suppliers of firearms because they facilitate the taking of human life as well?

This stance will most likely be unpopular politically.  Some on the political right will object my stance on firmer gun control.  Some of the political left will object to my stance on abortion.  But that doesn’t bother me, because I am not political.  I am religious.  And so I am for the sanctity of life.  Therefore, I am for stricter gun-control laws that will protect lives, not end them.

Continue Reading…