Our Lady Conceived Without Sin Pray For Us Who Have Recourse To You
ZE08013009 – 2008-01-30
Permalink: http://www.zenit.org/article-21659?l=english
Pope: Find God to Find One’s True Self
Comments on Faith and Reason in Life of St. Augustine
VATICAN CITY, JAN. 30, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Knowing God leads one to know his true self and identity, says Benedict XVI in his third general audience dedicated to the figure of St. Augustine, bishop of Hippo.
The Pope spoke today of relationship between faith and reason in Augustine’s life. In the last two reflections he commented on the life and last days of the philosopher and theologian.
Augustine, said the Holy Father, abandoned the Catholic faith at an early age, “because he could not see how it could be reasoned out, and did not want a religion that was not also for him an expression of reason — that is to say, truth.”
“His thirst for truth was radical and led him away from the Catholic faith,” the Pontiff added. “His radicality was such that he was not satisfied with philosophies that did not reach truth itself, and that did not reach God — not a God as a last cosmological hypothesis, but the true God, God who gives life and joins our very lives.”
Benedict XVI then brought to the forefront the consideration of the relationship between faith and reason: “These two dimensions, faith and reason, should not be separated nor opposed, but rather go forward together.
“As Augustine himself wrote after his conversion, faith and reason are ‘the two forces that lead us to knowledge.’”
Synthesis
Quoting two well-known phrases of Augustine — “I believe in order to understand” and “I understand in order to believe” — the Pope said the assertions “express the synthesis of this problem.”
He continued: “The harmony between faith and reason means above all that God is not far away; he is not far from our reasoning or from our lives; he is close to every human being, close to our hearts and close to our reason if we truly follow his path.
“It is precisely this closeness of God to man that Augustine experienced with extraordinary force.”
“The presence of God in man is deep and at the same time mysterious,” said the Holy Father. “Distance from God means distance from oneself.”
“Because Augustine personally experienced this intellectual and spiritual journey, he managed to convey it in his writings with immediacy, depth and wisdom,” said the Pontiff.
“A man who is distant from God is also distant from himself, estranged from himself, he can find himself only by meeting God,” said Benedict XVI. “This path leads to himself, to his true self and identity.”
The Pope added: “So Augustine found God and throughout his life experienced God to the point that this reality — which was above all an encounter with a person, Jesus Christ — changed his life, just as it changed the lives of so many men and women who have had the grace to meet him.”
http://www.zenit.org/article-21643?l=english
Benedict XVI: Almsgivers Shouldn’t Seek Applause
Pope’s Lenten Message Focuses on Assisting Poor
VATICAN CITY, JAN. 29, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Benedict XVI says that Lent is a perfect time for helping the poor, but urges Christians to give alms with the sole intention of seeking God’s glory.
The Pope encouraged almsgiving in his Lenten message, dated Oct. 30 and released today by the Vatican. The theme of the message is “Christ Made Himself Poor for You.”
The Holy Father said, “Lent […] stimulates us to rediscover the mercy of God so that we, in turn, become more merciful toward our brothers and sisters.”
He recalled the specific Lenten tasks proposed by the Church — prayer, fasting and almsgiving — and dedicated the message to a reflection on giving alms, “a specific way to assist those in need and, at the same time, an exercise in self-denial to free us from attachment to worldly goods.”
“The force of attraction to material riches and just how categorical our decision must be not to make of them an idol, Jesus confirms in a resolute way: ‘You cannot serve God and mammon,’” the Pontiff noted. “Almsgiving helps us to overcome this constant temptation, teaching us to respond to our neighbor’s needs and to share with others whatever we possess through divine goodness.
“This is the aim of the special collections in favor of the poor, which are promoted during Lent in many parts of the world. In this way, inward cleansing is accompanied by a gesture of ecclesial communion, mirroring what already took place in the early Church.”
Stewardship
Benedict XVI noted how the Gospel teaches that we are only administrators, not owners, of material goods.
They are “means through which the Lord calls each one of us to act as a steward of his providence for our neighbor,” he explained.
The Holy Father said the invitation to stewardship is even greater in predominantly Christian countries: “In those countries whose population is majority Christian, the call to share is even more urgent, since their responsibility toward the many who suffer poverty and abandonment is even greater. To come to their aid is a duty of justice even prior to being an act of charity.”
Hidden love
The Pope clarified, however, that Gospel charity should be hidden.
“Everything, then, must be done for God’s glory and not our own,” he said. “This understanding, dear brothers and sisters, must accompany every gesture of help to our neighbor, avoiding that it becomes a means to make ourselves the center of attention. If, in accomplishing a good deed, we do not have as our goal God’s glory and the real well-being of our brothers and sisters, looking rather for a return of personal interest or simply of applause, we place ourselves outside of the Gospel vision.
“In today’s world of images, attentive vigilance is required, since this temptation is great. Almsgiving, according to the Gospel, is not mere philanthropy: Rather it is a concrete expression of charity, a theological virtue that demands interior conversion to love of God and neighbor, in imitation of Jesus Christ, who, dying on the cross, gave his entire self for us.”
God’s joy
Benedict XVI considered the benefits of almsgiving for the one who gives.
He said: “In inviting us to consider almsgiving with a more profound gaze that transcends the purely material dimension, Scripture teaches us that there is more joy in giving than in receiving. When we do things out of love, we express the truth of our being; indeed, we have been created not for ourselves but for God and our brothers and sisters.
“Every time when, for love of God, we share our goods with our neighbor in need, we discover that the fullness of life comes from love and all is returned to us as a blessing in the form of peace, inner satisfaction and joy. Our Father in heaven rewards our almsgiving with his joy.”
“Lent, also through the practice of almsgiving, inspires us to follow [Christ's] example,” the Pope added. “In his school, we can learn to make of our lives a total gift; imitating him, we are able to make ourselves available, not so much in giving a part of what we possess, but our very selves. Cannot the entire Gospel be summarized perhaps in the one commandment of love?
“The Lenten practice of almsgiving thus becomes a means to deepen our Christian vocation. In gratuitously offering himself, the Christian bears witness that it is love and not material richness that determines the laws of his existence. Love, then, gives almsgiving its value.”
Our Lady of The Snows (August 5)
The most important church in the city of Rome dedicated to Our Lady is the Basilica of Saint Mary Major, erected around the year 352, during the reign of Pope Liberius. ( 352-366 ) According to legend, a member of an aristocratic family, John and his wife were childless and prayed that the Blessed Mother might designate an heir to bequeath their wealth. They were favored with a dream in which Our Lady appeared to them on the night of August 4-5. She requested that they build a church in her honor on the Esquiline hill and the sign to accompany this dream is that the exact location would be marked out in snow
During that hot summer evening, a miraculous snowfall traced the form of the basilica on the hill. Our Lady also appeared to Pope Liberius in a dream that same night so that he too could arrive at the location to see the miraculous snowfall. Many people gathered to see the unusual event of snow glistening in the August sun. Upon awakening, John and his wife rushed to the site and Pope Liberius arrived in solemn procession
Realizing that the snow marked the exact location of the church, the people staked off the area before the snow melted. The basilica was completed within two years and consecrated by Pope Liberius
Cortes set out from Spain and was devout to the Blessed Virgin, just as Columbus was before him. In 1506, as he traveled through Mexico, images of Mary and of the saints replaced the pagan idols. Cortes followed the exhortations of Pope Gregory the Great, who in 601 advocated that the idol temples of a pagan race should not be destroyed. Pope Gregory ordered the sole destruction of the idols within the temples. Holy water was sprinkled within the pagan shrines, altars built and Catholic relics set in them. The idea was that the pagans would banish error from their hearts and on seeing that their places of worship were kept intact, would more readily come to worship the true God in their own temples. In the New World, Cortes adopted this strategy which worked successfully. Many Indios were thus baptized to the Faith and received salvation. In the Aztec City of ‘Tenochtitlan’ or ‘Mexico City,’ following a battle against the Totonacs, Cortes threw down the idols from their pyramids and instructed the tribe on the Blessed Virgin Mary, as being the Mother of Our Lord Jesus Christ, in whom the Spanish believed and paid reverence. Cortes replaced the pagan idols with images of the Blessed Virgin and instructed the blood soaked native priests, to put an end to their sacrificial human practices and rather burn incense and give honor to the Mother of God. He explained that in this manner they would save their souls from eternal perdition. If they accept her, she would also become their advocate. In Tenochtitlan, the native conversion was not quick in coming. Many revolts took place; Cortes himself escaped before the advance of angry natives. At the center of the city, at the summit of a pyramid 150 feet high, Cortes insisted on the removal of the Aztec idols and installed a cross and an image of the Virgin Mary. Eventually, the natives attempted to remove the image, however their attempts proved useless as the image resisted and refused to be removed. A battle ensued and according to the Indios, “…the woman of the altar”(1) cast powder and hail in their eyes and blinded many, while Saint James of Compostella appeared astride a white horse, both the steed and rider killed numerous Indios. The Aztecs claimed that, had Saint James and the Virgin not frightened them, the Spanish would have been cooked and eaten with chocolate. The Spanish thanked ‘Our Lady of the Snows,’ (Feast August 5), for having delivered them from the cannibalistic and chocolate eating Aztecs. The chocolate was consumed together with honey and amaranth during their pagan and magic rituals, practises which were later outlawed. However, an ancient prophecy of the Aztec civilization was regarding the return of the goddess Quetzacoatl, they had to respond and free themselves from her by performing magic rituals and repel the aggressors with showers of chocolate. The Blessed Virgin might have been mistaken for their Quetzacoatl. The Virgin who stamps out the snake underfoot shot water/snow/hail chrystals at them. Saint John the Baptist baptized with water. The Church today baptizes with water and the Holy Spirit to cleanse the child (neophyte) of Original sin. The fact that Our Lady, the Spouse of the Holy Spirit, guided Colombus through arduous adventures for the sake and salvation of the Indios, this mission to the Americas was a ‘baptizing’ mission. The dynamics of God’s Mercy and Justice which were manifest in Tenochtitlan can be studied. Our Lady symbolized the arrival of Christianity, of the christening with water and the Holy Spirit, manifest by God’s Mercy in baptism and God’s Justice in Our Lady’s supernatural attack. Our Lady of the Snows is radiant and pure, reflecting the Sun’s rays or God’s power.
Beijing (AFP) Jan 30, 2008
China dispatched the army Wednesday to help millions of people stranded by snowstorms that have caused transport gridlock, crippled power distribution and left many towns and villages short on supplies.
At least 460,000 troops from the People’s Liberation Army and paramilitary forces fanned out across parts of China where dozens of people have died amid the worst storms in 50 years, the government said.
“The People’s Liberation Army has ordered its troops to go all out to help those battling the heavy snow in the southern part of the country,” the state-run China Daily newspaper said.
“The troops were ordered to give whatever assistance local governments required.”
China is intensifying its efforts to deal with the punishing weather, which has caused chaos on the roads and railways just as millions of people swamp the transport system for the annual Lunar New Year holiday.
State news agency Xinhua said China was waging “all-out war” as weather forecasters predicted more blizzards and icy conditions into next week.
Army helicopters will try to reach those suffering from cold and lack of drinking water in areas cut off by the snow, state media reported.
One million police officers also have been deployed to maintain order on congested and icy highways where traffic has ground to a halt, while the health ministry sent out 14,000 medics to treat the sick and injured, reports said.
At least 50 deaths have been blamed on more than two weeks of icy weather and 78 million people across large parts of central, southern and eastern China have been affected, the government said.
It said more than 30 million of China’s 1.3 billion people had been hit by power outages as the big freeze has sharply raised demand for electricity while affecting distribution of coal, source of about three-fourths of China’s power.
Perhaps even more alarming for the government, sharp rises in food prices were adding to inflation that was already at 11-year highs, causing concern in Beijing as inflation has historically caused social unrest here.
Vegetable prices have surged in 11 provinces, more than doubling in some areas, as trucks have been unable to deliver their loads due to the weather, the government said.
In a reflection of mounting government alarm, Premier Wen Jiabao went on a public relations offensive rare for Chinese leaders, wading into crowds of marooned train passengers.
“This has been very hard on everyone. Currently every level of government is working on getting electricity restored, after that transport will resume,” he was quoted as telling the crowd at the main train station in the southern city of Guangzhou.
According to Xinhua, 217,000 passengers were stranded in Guangzhou on Wednesday, down from an estimated 500,000 reported on Monday.
Meanwhile, signs emerged that the gridlock is easing.
“The situation is improving,” Xinhua quoted police ministry spokesman Wu Heping as saying of the traffic snarls.
“One of the key tasks now is to reopen the expressway linking Beijing with Zhuhai city in Guangdong province.”
About 6,400 vehicles with 10,000 passengers remain stranded along the Hunan section of the road, he said.
More than a dozen major airports forced to close earlier in the week had all reopened by Wednesday, the civil affairs ministry said.
Long-distance bus traffic in regions hit hard by the storms also restarted services Wednesday, reports said.
But travel remained an exercise in anguish for millions, and police reinforcements were sent to many train stations as tense crowds waited for rail services to resume.
“I’m not sure if I’ll get back (home),” said Xiao Zhou, a factory worker waiting at the train station in Guangzhou, hoping to head to his home province of Jiangsu far to the north.
“I’ve worked in Guangzhou for 10 years and I go home every year. I haven’t seen such a mess before.”
The state China Daily warned in an editorial the transport snarls could leave many areas short of even the most basic necessities.
“With much of the transport web disrupted, it will be difficult to have relief materials delivered where they are most needed,” it said.
“We will have to prepare for a worst-case scenario.”
Separation of church and state
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Separation of church and state is the political and legal idea that government and religion should be separate, and not interfere in each other’s affairs. [1]
In the United States, separation of church and state is often identified with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” The phrase “building a wall of separation between church and state” was written by Thomas Jefferson in a January 1, 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptist Association. [2]
//
Overview
There are inherent entanglements between the institutions of church and state, inasmuch as religious institutions and their adherents are a part of civil society. [3] Moreover, private religious practices often come into conflict with broad legislation not intending to target any particular religious minority.
Beliefs about the proper relationship between religion and government cover a wide spectrum, from state atheism through secular government to varying degrees of theocracy. Perhaps the primary distinctions to be made between varying forms of government are the divisions between ideas of government secularization and church independence. [4]
History of the concept and term
Ancient
In most ancient cultures the political ruler was also the highest religious leader and sometimes considered divine.[citation needed] Under republican government religious officials were appointed just like political ones. Ancient Israel was different in as much as the King and the priesthood were separate and limited to their respective spheres of authority and responsibility, though interferences did happen as well. Later, under foreign supremacy, the high priest also held the highest civil authority in an autonomous theocracy. Biblically, Hezekiah destroyed a copper serpent, calling it Nehushtan, or a lump of brass. From this it was argued that the rulers in Church and State have authority to prohibit, in the public worship of God, the use of things that have been abused to Idolatry. [5]
Roman emperors were considered divine and also occupied the highest religious office. This was challenged by Christians and Jews who acknowledged the Emperor’s political authority but refused to participate in the state’s religion or to recognize the emperor’s divinity. While the Jews were exempted from this demand, Christians were considered enemies of the state and adherence to Christianity was punishable by death (e.g., Justin Martyr under Marcus Aurelius). At various times this resulted in violent persecutions until the Edict of Milan in 313. The Roman Empire formally became Christian by edict of Theodosius I in 380.
Medieval
-
See also: Church and state in medieval Europe
In the West, the issue of the separation of church and state during the medieval period centered on monarchs who ruled in the secular sphere but encroached on the Church’s rule of the spiritual sphere. This unresolved contradiction in ultimate control of the Church led to power struggles and crises of leadership, notably in the Investiture Controversy, that resulted in a number of important events in the development of the west.[6]
In the Eastern Roman Empire the Emperor had supreme power over the church and controlled its highest representative: the Patriarch of Constantinople. Eastern Orthodoxy was the state religion. When the Ottomans conquered Constantinople (now Istanbul) in 1453, the Emperor was killed. The position of head of the Orthodox Church was given to Gennadius II Scholarius by the conquering Caliph and the Ottoman ruler, Sultan Mehmed II, who continued to practice the right of the Roman Emperor to appoint the head of the Eastern Orthodox Church.
Modern
The idea of separating the church and state is often credited to the writings of the British philosopher John Locke, which deeply influenced the drafting of the United States Constitution.[7] According to his principle of the social contract, Locke argued that the government lacked authority in the realm of individual conscience, as this was something rational people could not cede to the government for it or others to control. For Locke, this created a natural right in the liberty of conscience, which he argued must therefore remain inviolable by any government authority. These views on religious tolerance and the importance of individual conscience, along with his social contract, became influential in the American colonies.[8]
The concept was implicit in the flight of Roger Williams from religious oppression in Massachusetts to found what became Rhode Island on the principle of state neutrality in matters of faith.[citation needed]
The phrase “separation of church and state” is derived from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson in 1802 to a group identifying themselves as the Danbury Baptists. In that letter, referencing the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, Jefferson writes:
“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.” [9]
Another early user of the term was James Madison, the principal drafter of the United States Bill of Rights, who often wrote of “total separation of the church from the state.” [10] “Strongly guarded . . . is the separation between religion and government in the Constitution of the United States,” Madison wrote, and he declared, “practical distinction between Religion and Civil Government is essential to the purity of both, and as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States.” [11] This attitude is further reflected in the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, originally authored by Thomas Jefferson, but championed by Madison, and guaranteeing that no one may be compelled to finance any religion or denomination.
… no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinion in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish enlarge, or affect their civil capacities. [12]
Under the United States Constitution, the treatment of religion by the government is broken into two clauses: the establishment clause and the free exercise clause. While both are discussed in the context of the separation of church and state, it is more often discussed in regard to whether certain state actions would amount to an impermissible government establishment of religion.
The phrase was also mentioned in an eloquent letter written by President John Tyler on July 10, 1843.[citation needed]
The United States Supreme Court has referenced the separation of church and state metaphor more than 25 times, first in 1878. In Reynolds, the Court denied the free exercise claims of Mormons in the Utah territory who claimed polygamy was an aspect of their religious freedom. The Court used the phrase again by Justice Hugo Black in 1947 in Everson. The term was used and defended heavily by the Court until the early 1970s. In Wallace v. Jaffree, Justice Rehnquist presented the view that the establishment clause was intended to protect local establishments of religion from federal interference– a view which diminished the strong separation views of the Court. Justice Scalia has criticized the metaphor as a bulldozer removing religion from American public life.[13]
The Edict of Toleration by Galerius of 311, published in Saint George’s city of martyrdom, Nicomedia, states: “…Wherefore, for this our indulgence, they (Christians) ought to pray to God for our safety for that of the republic, and for their own, that the republic may continue uninjured on every side, and that they may be able to live securely in their homes.”(2) Interestingly, Galerius invited the Christians to pray to their God, for their own protection and the whole Roman Empire, against the dangers which threatened its borders. Therefore, in ancient Roman politics a separation between Church and State was virtually impossible, the Roman culture of prayer to any powerful deity for protection, was performed publicly. In like manner, it is a false concept to believe that modern politics has successfully introduced a separation between the ‘prayers to deities’ and State. The engineers of the ‘enlightenment,’ the worshippers of the ‘god of reason,’ the ones who have for the past three hundred years, advocated and promoted a clear and distinct separation between Church and State, the secret fraternal societies, also pray to their deities, in particular to the ‘Grand Architect of the Universe’ or the ‘Prince of this world.’ The Edict of Tolerance by Galerius was published on the eve of May 1; the future month associated with Our Lady and her many feasts.The ‘Edict of Milan’ took place in 313, granting freedom of worship to all Christians in the Roman Empire. The translation of the Edict’s original Latin states: “When I, Constantine Augustus, as well as I, Licinius Augustus, fortunately (or fortuitously) met near Mediolanurn (Milan), and were considering everything that pertained to the public welfare and security, we thought, among other things which we saw would be for the good of many, those regulations pertaining to the reverence of the Divinity ought certainly to be made first, so that we might grant to the Christians and others full authority to observe that religion which each preferred; whence any Divinity whatsoever in the seat of the heavens may be propitious and kindly disposed to us and all who are placed under our rule. And thus by this wholesome counsel and most upright provision we thought to arrange that no one whatsoever should be denied the opportunity to give his heart to the observance of the Christian religion, of that religion which he should think best for himself, so that the Supreme Deity, to whose worship we freely yield our hearts, may show in all things His usual favor and benevolence. Therefore, your Worship should know that it has pleased us to remove all conditions whatsoever, which were in the rescripts formerly given to you officially, concerning the Christians and now any one of these who wishes to observe Christian religion may do so freely and openly, without molestation… Let this be done so that, as we have said above, Divine favor towards us, which, under the most important circumstances we have already experienced, may, for all time, preserve and prosper our successes together with the good of the state.”(3)Such edicts shed light over the birth of a relationship between Church and State and reveals the essential nature of the donation of Rome to the Catholic Pontiffs. Surely both verbally and evidenced by Constantine’s behavior, Rome was indeed donated to the Church, for if this donation had not occurred at least verbally, Constantine himself would not have moved the Roman senate, the legal courts and the capital city of the Empire to Constantinople. Constantine probably felt that the many thousand Christians martyred in Rome, was enough a price for the city to be donated to them, the Christians. The fact that the document on the ‘Donation of Rome’ was a forgery, does not preclude the hypothesis that such a document could have possibly existed in those days previous to the numerous sacks and destruction of Rome. Pepin the Mayor of the Gallic Palace, in 754 was crowned by the Roman Pontiff, securing the Carolingian Dynasty in France and probably pledging to return to the Pontiff the Lombard lands in Italy, which had previously belonged to Constantinople. In 756, regardless of the Byzantine opposition, who stated that the Italian Lombard territories belonged to the East, Pepin restored these lands to the Pope. The forged document on the ‘Donation of Rome,’ might have been created in these days to make the restoration by Pepin, justifiable and not appear as a second donation. The political maneuvering between the Roman Pontiff and the French progenitor of the Carolingian Dynasty seems suspicious by some. However, the approval of the Almighty, by the coronation of Charles the Great in the year 800 as ‘Holy Roman Emperor’ and his great success rivaling Emperor Constantine’s before him, should remove any doubts that the Pontiff’s maneuvering in the 750s was just sterile politics. The supporters of the Protestant Reformation delighted and gloated upon the fact that the document on the ‘Donation of Rome’ was indeed a forgery. During the past three hundred years, the main attacks against the Roman Church occurred in most part, by those who were influenced by the political movements and literary works produced by the instigators of the ‘age of Enlightenment.’ In the 1700s, throughout the 1800s and 1900s, these men worked assiduously to perform a concrete separation between Church and State, by attacking the temporal and political powers of the Church. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, by various means, the Christian Dynasties were dismembered, the Papal States were confiscated, both Emperor Constantine’s and Pepin’s true ‘Donations’ were undermined and the sacrifice and the blood shed by many thousand Christian martyrs, trampled underfoot.
On October 13, the Miracle of the Sun, occurred irrespective of the fact that previous to the event, a Masonic mayor kept hostage the children for three whole days. Secret fraternal societies and occultic political forces, set themselves against the Blessed Virgin of Fatima. Freemasonry, was in its ascendancy in Portugal and by armed conflict gained power in 1910. During the month of October, the Masonic government expelled the Jesuit Order from the country and persecuted all other religious orders. Catholic Portugal had an enviable oath set by ancient Royalty upon the state, that is, to uphold the defense of the Immaculate Conception of Our Lady. The Portuguese Freemasonry abolished this practice, of the defense of Our Lady’s Immaculate Conception and the religious oath in the court system. Religious holidays became working days and divorce was legalized in Catholic Portugal. The union between a man and his wife in Holy Matrimony, was declared ‘a legal union,’ and all the religious were forced to wear lay clothing, putting aside their religious habits. This anti-clerical ultimatum had to be observed or the religious faced the penalty of suffering imprisonment. The Church and State separation was inaugurated with the confiscation of the Church’s property and the conversion of monasteries into prisons and government offices. These events, were Karl Marx’s ‘Ten Planks of the Communist Manifesto’ put into practice. The secret fraternal societies openly declared that the Faith would be soon abolished and no one in Portugal will remember what the Catholic Faith stood for, the Protestant Christians were invited into the country.
Quoting again Monsigneur Jouin in “The Masonic War” published previously to the Second World War: “It is from such a situation that there was issued the Masonic dogma of separation of Church and State; thence, issued also the anti-religious laws which Brother Bethmont, member of Parliament of the department of Charente Inferieure and former President of the Cour Des Comptes, in 1878 was explaining to Monseigneur Pie, Bishop of Poitiers. The prelate then said to him: “Sir, I believe you want to inaugurate anew the fight against the Church; have you any hope of succeeding there, where Nero, Julian the Apostate and your great ancestors of the 1793 French Revolution failed? He replied: “Your Eminence, at the risk of seeming too bold, I will say that those, you have mentioned did not quite know how to act. We shall do much better. Violence against the Church leads nowhere; we shall use other means. We shall organize a persecution which shall be both clever and legal; we shall surround the Church with a network of laws, decrees and ordinances which will stifle it without shedding one drop of blood.” Or as elsewhere stated: “The fight taking place between Catholicism and Freemasonry is a fight to the very death, ceaseless and merciless.”(8)
The Parable of Prodigal Europe
By George Neumayr
Celebrating its 50 th anniversary in March, the European Union held a party for itself in Berlin. “Europafest” featured among other activities “clubbing”—”100 DJs performing in 35 night clubs,” from “Hungarian techno to Luxembourg hip-hop,” reported the press. But the raucousness of the music couldn’t conceal the emptiness of the event.
The hollower the drum, the louder the noise it gives off. By straining to display at its anniversary an underlying culture, the European Union only reminded the world of its lack of one. The European Union remains a “Common Market” without a common philosophy of any coherence.
The secular press acknowledged the “aura of gloom” hanging over the anniversary, noting that it occasioned more confusion than celebration among the European public. In a Washington Post column titled “Europe’s Birthday Blahs,” writer Anne Applebaum reported that a “cross-continental 50 th-anniversary poll found that 56 percent of Europeans believe that ‘the European Union does not represent ordinary people,’” and only 25 percent of Europeans think “life has improved” since the European Union’s inception.
Such polls contain a hint of good news: that the elite’s secularist super-state leaves Europeans cold and ready for alternatives. Europe’s experiment against God is failing and a growing number of Europeans realize it.
Separated from its ancestral house of Christianity, secular Europe has behaved like the Prodigal Son, squandering its inheritance “on a life of dissipation” (Luke 15:11-32). And it now faces a “severe famine,” which takes the form of chronic cultural confusion and a fast approaching demographic crisis. As “dire need” awakened the Prodigal Son to reality, so social implosion may return Europeans to their “senses.”
Why, they may ask themselves, should we let our culture die under secularism when the substance of Europe’s Christian patrimony could bring it back to health? The European Union was intended to build upon this patrimony, not replace it (see story on page 26).
“Either Europe will return to the faith, or she will perish,” wrote Hilaire Belloc. Pope Benedict XVI speaks of Europe’s crisis in similar terms. It is moving “down a road that could lead to its disappearance from history,” he warned in a March 24 th speech in Rome before European cardinals, bishops, and politicians.
While the European Union issued a fatuous declaration about Europe as an “idea, a hope for freedom and understanding,” the Pope drew attention to the “dangerous individualism” that renders such talk meaningless. ” Is it not a cause for surprise that today’s Europe, while striving to position itself as a community of values, seems more often to contest the idea that there are universal and absolute values?” he said.
Europe, he said, is gravitating toward a “remarkable form of apostasy,” which entails not only a repudiation of God but of its own glorious past and tradition of reason. This “self-apostasy” explains Europe’s inability to form an identity and has exposed it to deadly ideologies.
As the Pope points out in Values In A Time Of Upheaval, Europe can’t escape these fundamental questions. Either Europe chooses to recover its historic cultural identity or it will receive a new identity from its enemies.
“Its life seems threatened by a crisis of circulation, and it almost seems to need a transfusion of blood—but that would destroy its own identity,” he wrote. He draws a parallel to the “Roman Empire in the days of its decline: it continued to function as a huge historical framework, but its own existential vigor was dead, and it already lived thanks only to those who in fact wanted to destroy it.”
If ordinary Europeans can’t grasp the “Idea of Europe,” that’s because there isn’t one anymore. If they don’t know what “values” the European Union represents, that’s because it has stripped away a divine basis for them.
The European elite’s modern rationalism, severed from the continent’s Christian roots, has proven irrational, and its much-touted pragmatism has proven impractical. Under this thinking, the common good has inevitably become, as the Pope puts it, a “shared ill,” since the good of man is never pursued in light of the intentions of the God who determined it.
” A community that constructs itself without respect for the authentic dignity of the human person, forgetting that every person is created in the image of God, ends up by not being good for anyone,” said the Pope in his March speech in Rome.
He continued: “This is why it appears increasingly more indispensable that Europe should guard itself against that pragmatic attitude, widespread today, which systematically justifies compromise on essential human values, as if the acceptance of a presumably lesser evil were inevitable. Such pragmatism, which is presented as balanced and realistic, is not that way deep down, precisely because it denies the dimension of values and ideas that is inherent in human nature.”
Pope John Paul II once asked France: “Eldest daughter of the Church, what have you done with your baptism?” Pope Benedict now asks the same question of all Europe. Until it answers that question—until Europe revives the traditions that made it great—its “Europafests” of fatted calf will resemble nothing more than dancing on a grave.
—George Neumayr
Michael Sung at 9:57 AM ET
|
Lesbian wins French adoption case
<!–
–>
French law states that it is legal for single people to adopt a child, which implies that adoption is a possible option for single gay men and lesbians. Since adoption rights were denied to this woman, the European Court of Human Rights found France in direct violation of Article 9, which declares that individuals’ private family lives should be respected, as listed in the Human Rights Convention.
According to BBC News, this case came before Strasbourg courts in December 2002. The judges found in favor of the woman, 107, and demanded that France pay the woman 10,000 euros for damages and 14,528 euros in costs. (The Advocate)
Sarkozy on Religion. Whose Cause Does He Want to Advance?
One of the few times Nicolas Sarkozy really spoke like a French patriot was when he visited Rome last December, met the Pope, and was made honorary canon of Saint John Lateran. The speech he delivered there was an anomaly for Sarkozy, who customarily stresses intermingling of peoples, integration, and his pet project: the Islam of France.
Sarkozy told the Pope:
It is in the interests of the Republic that there exist also a moral reflection inspired by religious convictions. First because secular morality ["morale laïque"] always runs the risk of wearing itself out or changing into fanaticism when it isn’t backed up by hope that aspires to the infinite. And then because morality stripped of any ties to transcendence is more exposed to historic contingencies and eventually to facileness.
“What is this world in which you can no longer say the truth, no longer look history squarely in the face? If you are French, and if you recognize yourself in France, France has Christian roots and that has nothing to do with “laïcité” [the 1905 French law separating Church and State]. The history of France, the culture of France, French civilization, like European civilization itself, all have Christian roots. [...] It is as if you were blocking out eight centuries of French monarchy. It isn’t being a monarchist to say that France was made by the Capetians.”
Very true. But it has been so pounded into people that France began in 1789, that it’s good to hear.
One person so affected is Jean-Michel Quillardet, the grand master of the Grand Orient of France (GOF), considered to be the “first masonic lodge of France” with 50,000 members. The GOF recently expressed its concern in a communiqué, reproaching Nicolas Sarkozy for his “willingness to present religion as being a constituent element of political and citizen identity, an idea that could seriously impair the French republican example.”
Quillardet was interviewed by the left-leaning daily Libération:
What do you find shocking about Nicolas Sarkozy’s remarks?
This concept of “positive laïcité” that says that religions are to be considered as an advantage and that we must seek a dialogue with them and thus open a troubling breach in the secular republican pact. It’s the first time that a French president has advocated this new view of the relationship between the State and religion.
In a society as materialistic as ours, don’t people have a need for meaning that has to be taken into account?
The quest for meaning does not necessarily involve religion. It shocks me when Nicolas Sarkozy says that “laic morality always runs the risk of wearing itself out or of changing into fanaticism when it is not associated with an aspiration that satisfies the aspiration for the infinite.” Behind those words, there is a very American ideology.
The positions of Sarkozy are well-known, he had expressed them in his book The Republic, Religions and Hope (published in 2004)…
During the presidential campaign, Nicolas Sarkozy distanced himself more from talk about modifying the 1905 law on separation of Church and State and from the Machelon Report. But now, we have the feeling that something is in the works.
What makes you think so?
Michèle Alliot-Marie [the French Minister of the Interior] met with us on December 3. She told us that in the Machelon Report, there are “several interesting ideas.” She is wondering if it might be possible to turn religious associations, which cannot receive a government subsidy, into cultural associations, which can. Jean-Pierre Raffarin also stated in an interview with Le Figaro that “the 1905 law will have to be completed.” We have requested a meeting with the president. We’ll see if he agrees to see us.
You are opposed to any modification in the 1905 law, but then, how can we help the Muslims catch up with their long-standing need for houses of worship?
The first two articles: “The State neither recognizes nor subsidizes any religion” and “The exercise of religion is free”, are not subject to modification. But we are not hostile to long-term leases, nor to the creation of the Foundation for Charitable Works for Islam.
In the end, the only thing that shocked Jean-Michel Quillardet was the sight of the French president with the Pope. He certainly wasn’t shocked by the sight of the president attending the dinner at the end of the Ramadan fast with Dalil Boubakeur, rector of the Paris mosque.
The article from Libération closes:
Apart from the Grand Orient of France, few groups rebelled against the president’s remarks…
François Bayrou [who was defeated in the first round of the presidential election last May] and François Hollande [chairman of the French Socialist Party] both protested, the former stating that the concept of positive laïcité threatens the conception of republican “laïcité” and favors a return to religion as the “opiate of the people.”
My best guess is that Nicolas Sarkozy wants to reopen the debate on religion and “laïcité”, not to help the Catholics of France, but only to smooth the way for the further Islamization. If such a debate really materializes it will be interesting to see if the Catholics can turn it somehow to their advantage.
Nicolas Sarkozy’s ex attacks ’stingy’ husband
|
President Nicolas Sarkozy’s ex-wife Cécilia has branded him a “stingy philanderer” with a “behavioural problem” who is an “unworthy president” of France. Cécilia Sarkozy is reported to have made the comments before Mr Sarkozy hinted that he will marry the ex-supermodel Carla Bruni following a whirlwind affair of less than three months. As the Élysée palace soap opera descended to new depths of vitriol, Mrs Sarkozy alleged that her 52-year-old ex-husband was “a man who likes no-one, not even his children”. According to a new book, she even called the president’s other female friends “a bunch of slappers” and young female government ministers “boring wallflowers”. Mrs Sarkozy is also said to have launched a thinly veiled attack on the president’s 40-year-old fiancee, telling a friend: “Carla Bruni won’t make him forget me in a hurry!” Although Mr Sarkozy is expected to marry Miss Bruni, Mrs Sarkozy is unconvinced that her ex-husband of eleven years has got over her, and he is currently on the rebound. Many have commented on the extraordinary physical similarities between the two women, although at 50 Cecilia is 10 years older than Miss Bruni.
It has also already been revealed that Mr Sarkozy was rushed to hospital suffering from high fever and a throat abscess on Oct 21 – the day after he had announced his divorce from his second wife. Said to be depressed as well as ill, he called Mrs Sarkozy from hospital, who visited bedside to comfort him. A month after undergoing surgery on his throat he met Miss Bruni at a Paris dinner party, and the pair are now engaged to be married. Mrs Sarkozy has launched legal action to stop publication of the book in which she is quoted as calling him a philanderer, stingy and unworthy of being president. The book, Cécilia, was written by a French journalist Anna Biton, who has known the former First Lady of France for many years. It was scheduled to be distributed by the publisher Flammarion in time for the weekend. But Mrs Sarkozy instructed lawyers “to initiate all necessary actions for the protection of her rights in regard to statements attributed to her in extracts from the book”. The action targets the book rather than what she is reported to have said. Mrs Sarkozy’s lawyers have demanded an injunction on the book’s release and fines of £150,000 per copy that becomes public. Mrs Sarkozy was not present at the Paris civil court where the case was heard. A decision is due on Friday. In the book, Mrs Sarkozy is specifically quoted as saying of her ex-husband: “There is a ridiculous side to him. He is not dignified. He is an unworthy president of the Republic. He has a behavioural problem.” She also had harsh words for Mr Sarkozy’s aides and advisors, describing them as “young guys who found themselves puffed out with power and who took themselves for the princes of Paris”. The book is one of three works about Mrs Sarkozy scheduled to be published simultaneously. In Rupture, one of the other titles, the two authors Yves Derai and Michael Darmon, claim Mrs Sarkozy gave her husband’s advisers marks according to their loyalty to her, from “Untrustworthy” to “I’m not sure I can kiss you”. Mrs Sarkozy’s account in the book of her role in freeing six foreign medics from Libya last July is just as compelling. Sent by her husband allegedly in a final bid to save their marriage, she claims to have single-handedly put sufficient pressure on Colonel Muammar Gaddafi to releasing them. “I pulled off the greatest break-in of the century,” she is cited as exclaiming. “Gaddafi had no intention of freeing these girls. I led the negotiations – I took control of Gaddafi.” Mrs Sarkozy is even claimed to have boasted she had “the b….” for the job. In the third book, The Hidden Face of Cécilia Sarkozy, that Mr Sarkozy’s surgery is revealed. Mrs Sarkozy is now said to have been reunited with the public relations executive Richard Attias, whom she had an affair with in 2005 while still married to Mr Sarkozy. She has a 10-year-old son, Louis, with Mr Sarkozy, as well as two daughters from a previous marriage. Mr Sarkozy has two sons from his first marriage. Earlier this week Mr Sarkozy announced he was set to marry Miss Bruni, after giving her a Dior engagement ring at Christmas. They are expected to wed before Mr Sarkozy’s state visit to Britain in March, when he will be a guest of the Queen at Windsor Castle. |
After 30 years as a closet Catholic, Blair finally puts faith before politics
Friday June 22, 2007
The Guardian
He has been attending Catholic mass, often with his family but also occasionally alone, since long before he became prime minister. His wife, Cherie, is a lifelong and practising Catholic, and in accordance with church rules their children have been brought up as Catholics and were sent to church schools.
Since then he has regularly attended services conducted by Canon Timothy Russ, parish priest of the Immaculate Heart of Mary at Great Missenden, the nearest Catholic church to Chequers.
He is also known to have had discussions with priests such as Father Timothy Radcliffe, former head of the worldwide Dominican order, now at Oxford, and with Father Michael Seed, who has shephered a number of high-profile figures, including Ann Widdecome and, allegedly, Alan Clark, towards conversion. Fr Seed, an engaging if indiscreet figure, has claimed to have paid regular backdoor visits to Downing Street to talk religion, if not necessarily to advise the prime minister.
So why has it taken so long? Almost certainly because of Mr Blair’s sensitivity about the place of Catholicism in British public – and particularly its constitutional – life. The only positions specifically barred to Catholics are marriage to the sovereign or heir to the throne, or becoming sovereign themselves, a legacy of the Act of Settlement that followed the Glorious Revolution of 1688 and the deposition of the last Catholic monarch, James II; there has never been a Catholic prime minister.
In the last 40 years Catholics have entered many senior positions in British public life, generally without comment except among the wilder fringes of Protestant Calvinism: in the civil service, the Foreign Office and industry, as MPs and ministers in Conservative and Labour cabinets. The current director general of the BBC, Mark Thompson, is a Catholic and, briefly, four years ago, with Charles Kennedy, leader of the Liberal Democrats, and Iain Duncan Smith, leader of the Tories, so were the alternative prime ministers.
But the motives of Catholic politicians have traditionally been regarded with suspicion by non-Catholics, both here and in the US, based on the allegation that they take their orders from the Vatican rather than the electorate. Catholic political leaders have always denied it – but the recent antics of some bishops in the US during the 2004 presidential campaign when they threatened to deny John Kerry communion because of his support for abortion rights and, recently, Cardinal Keith O’Brien’s warning that he would do the same in Scotland, have tended to confirm old suspicions.
A number of potentially divisive moral issues would have been much more difficult if Mr Blair had been known to be a Catholic, even though his personal beliefs have not necessarily intruded into the government’s decisions.
Ministers have enacted civil partnerships for gay couples and this year faced down demands, particularly from the Catholic church, for exemption from equality provisions enabling gay couples to adopt children, even though the prime minister favoured compromise.
Equally, the government has not attempted to limit abortion rights – an issue regarded as long settled in Britain except by some mainly Catholic groups – or pushed for reduced time limits, even though the church regards abortion as a sin. And it has permitted stem cell research without conceding to Catholic opposition.
Mr Blair, like President George Bush, ignored the condemnations and warnings of the Pope and all other church leaders over the war in Iraq.
He has been keen to expand the number of faith schools and church-supported academies, in the face of strong opposition from secular groups, but here again seemingly not for reasons of religious indoctrination but because of their parental popularity.
The criticism of Ruth Kelly when she was education secretary because of her membership of the lay sect Opus Dei – at a time when the novel The Da Vinci Code had made the group more widely known – also showed that the old prejudice could still be deployed. Mr Blair probably thought he could do without the extra hassle.
He has kept his personal religious views largely out of his political life. Ostentatious religiosity does not go down well in Britain. He dropped his wish to end a prime ministerial broadcast on the eve of the Iraq invasion with the words: “God bless” on the advice of Alastair Campbell, who famously told him “We don’t do God”.
Explainer: Becoming a Catholic
The path to purification
Converting to Catholicism is not a straightforward or easy process, as Tony Blair will have realised. It takes time – though how long depends on the candidate’s readiness and aptitude – and is based on the church’s assessment of their sincerity and commitment. The process is described in a 44-page document called the Rite of Christian Initiation.
When there was a rush of conversions from Anglicanism in the early 1990s, after the Church of England’s decision to ordain women priests, there was considerable murmuring among lifelong Catholics that the conversion of defectors such as John Gummer and Ann Widdecombe had been too easily sanctioned by Cardinal Basil Hume, the leader of the Catholic church in England and Wales.
That is unlikely to be the case with Mr Blair since his conversion is clearly the result of a long period of consideration and is not due to a particular grievance.
Adults wishing to convert undergo a period of doctrinal and spiritual preparation with a priestly adviser to become catechumens, preparing for admission to the church. They are no longer required to make an abjuration of previous heresy but they do make a profession of faith and belief that they “consciously and freely seek the living God and enter the way of faith and conversion as the Holy Spirit opens their hearts.”
The rite says candidates are to receive help and attention, so that “with a purified and clearer intention they may cooperate with God’s grace.”
The process takes several stages of indeterminate duration: after the period of evangelisation there follows acceptance into the order of catechumens, then election, when the church ratifies candidates’ readiness. A “period of purification and enlightenment” follows, usually on the eve of Easter, followed by the sacraments of initiation and then catechesis as the candidates are allowed to participate fully in the sacraments, such as communion.
Although conversions usually take place during the Easter period and in public ceremonies, this need not necessarily be the case if there are special circumstances – which the church could probably find for a former prime minister.
Tony Blair could enter EU presidency race
|
Tony Blair hinted on Friday that he might become president of the European Union. Taking questions following a speech at the National University of Singapore, Mr Blair was asked whether, when he next visits the city state, he might do so as European president. “In relation to [the] question about the presidency of the European Union we will move swiftly on,” he joked. “It’s a pity, but that’s the way it is. A shortage of time you know!” He then spoke for another five minutes about the Middle East peace process and “the challenges of global leadership”. French President Nicolas Sarkozy recently suggested that the job of EU president – a key element of the planned constitution – would be a “smart move” for Mr Blair. Diplomatic and political convention means that no one has formally declared themselves for the EU presidency, a plum, high-profile international job which looks set to be in place for June 2009. But jockeying for position has begun. Other candidates include the former Polish president Aleksander Kwasniewski, the Irish leader Bertie Ahern and the Danish prime minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen. Mr Blair arrived in Singapore on Thursday from China, where he was accused of “gold digging” and “money sucking” by the local media after charging £200,000 for a single address. It is thought that he might have earned as much as £1 million from several speeches given during his Asia tour. However, the Dean of the Singapore university faculty Prof Kishore Mahbubani said that Mr Blair was not paid for yesterday’s speech. In a country where protesting is illegal and the ruling party holds 97 per cent of the seats in parliament, several people said they were impressed by Mr Blair’s open manner. “He actually answers questions,” said one. |
On March 14, 1800, His Holiness Pope Pius VII was elected. Due to the potential Catholic support from the French peasantry, Napoleon decided to establish an agreement with the Pope. Notwithstanding the fact that he had no particular love for Christianity, he desired to restore the Church in France. Negotiations for an agreement were held in Paris between Napoleon’s representatives, Bernier and Talleyrand, and the Pope’s emissary, Archbishop Spina of Corinth. Following eight months of negotiations, a threatened military occupation of Rome and much bluff on Napoleon’s side, the agreement was signed on July 15, 1801. Napoleon Bonaparte recognized the Roman Catholic Faith as the religion of the majority of the French people. In return for the oath of loyalty to the French state, the clergy were to receive salaries. ‘The Concordat’ as the agreement came to be known, was considered by Pope Pius VII as a great triumph. The Concordat was ratified on August 15, 1801, Feast of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin and Napoleon’s birthday. The many diverse factions in France reacted terribly to Bonaparte’s Concordat. The royalist Joseph de Maistre wrote: “With all my heart I wish death to the Pope in the same way and for the same reason I would desire death to my father were he to dishonor me tomorrow.”(5) However, Napoleon wanted to pacify the people. The French Council of State, the Tribunate, the Senate and the Army, all voiced their disapproval to the Concordat. The Jacobins and their Masonic allies viewed the Concordat as the final betrayal of the Revolution. With the reopening of churches for public worship, the Jacobins reasserted themselves with Voltaire’s principle to: “…wipe out the infamy of religion!” Following the Mass on Easter Day April 18, 1802, General Delmas to General Bonaparte said: “Pretty monkish mummery…. The only thing missing were the million men who died to overthrow what you are now setting up again.”(6) Due to his newly found popularity with the masses, Napoleon managed to introduce a new tax, the imposition was accepted without much fuss and the economic situation in France began to recover. Napoleon clearly understood the political benefits of being recognized as Emperor, however he could not fathom the spiritual aspect of such a position, whereby the Emperor would be guided by God and the Mother Church. Indeed, he was not capable of being an Emperor such as Charles the Great had been. For how can a child of the enlightenment, a Freemason, be God’s chosen Holy Emperor (a claim which Napoleon evidently made when writing to His Holiness Pope Pius VII)? While a true and honest conversion is done in secret, such as Emperor Constantine’s Baptism by Pope Sylvester at the Lateran Baptistry, political public conversions to Catholicism, in order to politically lead Catholics, equates to a spiritual farce and is evident political maneuvering, doomed for failure from the outset. In 1806, Pope Pius VII was not playing ball with the French self-declared Emperor; he disregarded Napoleon’s orders and refused to submit his Church to Bonaparte’s whims. The Roman Pontiff particularly opposed the Napoleonic elected King Joseph of Naples. His Holiness refused to garrison Ancona and allowed British spies to roam unhindered, also opening Papal ports to the British Navy. Napoleon wrote angrily: “For the Pope I am Charlemagne…. I therefore expect to be treated from this point of view. I shall change nothing in appearance if they behave well; otherwise I shall reduce the Pope to be merely Bishop of Rome.”(7) Following letters to the Pope insisting that he is the Emperor and his enemies are the Papal enemies, the Pope replied: “There is no Emperor of Rome.”(8) The Napoleonic regime forced the Church in France to commit schism with Rome. The rewritten Catechism of the Catholic Church in France, read in the seventh lesson: “Why do we owe all these duties to Our Emperor? Firstly, because God…. Plentifully bestowed gifts upon our Emperor, whether for peace or for war, has made him the minister of his power and his image upon earth…”(9) The Pope remained undeterred and refused to implement the Continental Blockade in his territories. Napoleon’s next move was to order the take over of the administration in the Papal States, thereby the Pontiff responded by issuing a bill of excommunication against the ‘Emperor.’ The General ordered his troops to storm the Quirinal Palace, he attempted to force Pope Pius VII to renounce his temporal power, which the Pontiff adamantly refused. On July 5, 1808, on Napoleon’s orders, Pope Saint Pius VII was arrested and detained for three years, first at Savona Italy, then at Fontainbleau. Napoleon Bonaparte was not the first to have kept a Roman Pontiff in jail, Philip the Fair and Charles V had dared arrest Popes previous to these terrible days.
|
Profile: Al-Qaeda in North Africa
|
|||||
Al-Qaeda Organisation in the Land of the Islamic Maghreb, to give its full name in English, has its roots in the bitter Algerian civil war of the early 1990s, but has since evolved to take on a more modern Islamist agenda. It emerged in early 2007 as the feared militant group, the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC), aligned itself with Osama Bin Laden’s international network. Back in the 1990s, against a background of Islamist political groups testing their strength right across North Africa, the military-backed authorities in Algeria at first permitted the Islamists to play a full part in the nation’s political life. But then, when the Islamic Salvation Front was poised to sweep the board in a 1992 general election, they annulled the whole process and took power back. The political ferment immediately moved into the military field. Armed Islamists mounted attacks across Algeria; the security forces fought back; and sometimes it was hard to tell which group had carried out which atrocity. Other states in the region – Tunisia and Morocco, Mauritania to the west and Libya to the east – also battled Islamists. Rejected amnesty But the conflict in Algeria was particularly brutal, killing perhaps 150,000 people. It peaked in the 1990s, until an amnesty offer to Islamists in 1999 led to gradual improvements. Violence fell and the country’s economy recovered during the early years of the 21st Century. However, the most feared of the militants, the Armed Islamic Group, or GIA, rejected the promised amnesty and continued a violent campaign to establish an Islamic state. By then it had split, with the most extreme faction calling itself the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC) – a name which echoed an Islamist group in Morocco. The Arabic word “Salafist” means fundamentalist, in the sense of going back to the original texts of Islam. In September 2006 the GSPC said it had joined forces with al-Qaeda, and in January 2007 it announced that it had changed its name to reflect its new allegiance. News of its rebirth delighted al-Qaeda deputy leader Ayman al-Zawahiri, who described it as “a source of chagrin, frustration and sadness” for Algeria’s authorities. The following month seven bombs exploded in the eastern Kabylia region, killing six people, and in April 2007 at least 30 people were killed in bomb attacks on official buildings in Algiers. North African al-Qaeda said it planted the bombs. More attacks followed: on buses carrying foreign oil workers; on American diplomats; on soldiers; and in September, a suicide bomb attack in Batna, aimed at the motorcade of President Abdelaziz Bouteflika. The president was not injured, but 20 people were killed. Two days later, a car bomb killed more than 30 people at a coast-guard barracks in the town of Dellys. ‘Years of hardship’ The prime minister has warned the bombers want to take Algeria back to “the years of hardship”. But other incidents across the Maghreb point to the group’s possible regional ambitions.
In January 2007, 12 people were shot dead by the security forces in Tunisia near the small town of Solimane south of the capital Tunis. The authorities initially described their adversaries as criminals but later admitted that the men were Islamic militants with connections to the GSPC. Meanwhile, in Morocco, the security forces are on high alert after four incidents blamed on al-Qaeda-inspired groups this year. The security forces are said to be on the lookout for militants who are believed to be crossing into Morocco from Algeria. And of course the Madrid train bombs, which killed almost 200 people in 2004, were the work of a Moroccan gang. Maghreb analyst Mohamed Ben-Madani says the militants have also been active in Mauritania, which has angered Islamists because of its links with Israel. “This group trained in Algeria and have learned their techniques from Iraq as well as in Afghanistan. It’s very hard to contain this group which has become more and more violent,” he says. There has been much debate in intelligence circles about the significance of the move. Some officials have dismissed it as an act of desperation by a group on its last legs, seeking to attract new recruits by aligning with Osama bin Laden. Others consider it a far more worrying development, showing that al-Qaeda has succeeded in persuading North Africa’s Islamic extremists to take a more global view. Leaders The group is thought to have between 600 to 800 fighters spread throughout Algeria and Europe. The leader is thought to be Abou Mossab Abdelwadoud, a former university science student and famous bomb maker in his thirties. He took over in 2004, though there are unconfirmed reports that he has since been toppled by internal rivals.
Another leading member is Mokhtar Belmokhtar, known as the “one-eyed”, a former soldier who followed the familiar route for radical young Muslims and went to fight in Afghanistan. He leads the Saharan faction of the group and has organised the importing of arms for the underground network from Niger and Mali. Two years ago, deputy GSPC leader Amari Saifi was sentenced to life in prison for kidnapping 32 European tourists in 2003. The former paratrooper was captured by Chadian rebels in mysterious circumstances and passed on to Libya before standing trial in Algeria. |
|||||
A SON of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi is behind a group of foreign and Iraqi fighters responsible for explosions in northern Iraq, says a security chief for Sunni tribesmen who rose up against al-Qa’ida.
At least 38 people were killed and 225 wounded last Wednesday when a huge blast destroyed about 50 buildings in a Mosul slum. The next day, a suicide bomber killed the provincial police chief and two other officers as they surveyed the blast site.
Colonel Jubair Rashid Naief, a police official in Anbar province, said the attacks were carried out by the Seifaddin Regiment, made up of about 150 foreign and Iraqi fighters who slipped into the country several months ago from Syria. He said the regiment, which is working with al-Qa’ida in Iraq, was supported by Seif al-Islam Gaddafi, 36, eldest son of the Libyan leader.
“I am sure of what I am talking about, and it is documented,” Colonel Naief said, adding he was “100per cent sure” of the younger Gaddafi’s role in the terror group.
A man who answered the phone at Mr Gaddafi’s office in Tripoli said he was unavailable for comment.
Colonel Naief said his information about the Seifaddin Regiment and the younger Gaddafi’s purported role came from “reliable sources” maintained by his Anbar Awakening Council within the ranks of al-Qa’ida in Mosul and elsewhere. He said the information was passed to the US military two or three months ago.
“They crossed the Syrian border nearest to Mosul within the last two to three months,” Colonel Naief said of the Seifaddin Regiment. “Since then, they have taken up positions in the city and begun blowing up cars and launching other terror operations.” The AAC is an alliance of Sunni tribes in the western province that turned against al-Qa’ida and began working with US forces. The council is credited with the sharp drop in violence in Anbar, once the main base for the insurgents.
Many of the council’s fighters are believed to have been insurgents until they began receiving money from the US to turn their guns on their former extremist allies.
The US military did not comment on Colonel Naief’s claim.
Last Monday, however, The Washington Post reported that US military commanders believed they had underestimated the role of North Africans in the ranks of foreign fighters and suicide bombers in Iraq.
The newspaper quoted US military officials as saying that 19per cent of the foreign fighters came from Libya. Overall, North Africans accounted for 40per cent of the foreign fighter ranks, the paper said.
Seif al-Islam, however, seems an unlikely figure as a sponsor of terrorism. Touted as a reformer, the younger Gaddafi has been reaching out to the West to soften Libya’s image and return it to the international mainstream. Known in Libya as “The Engineer”, he won praise last year for helping release five Bulgarian nurses and a Palestinian doctor who were jailed in Libya for allegedly infecting Libyan children with HIV.
Educated at a British university and fluent in English, German and French, he has gained exposure as head of the Gaddafi International Association for Charitable Organisations, a non-governmental network concerned with education and human rights.
Colonel Naief did not explain why the younger Gaddafi would be sponsoring the group of fighters. Seif Gaddafi, however, was quoted last year as warning Europeans against more attacks by radical Islamists.
“The only solution to contain radicalism is the rapid departure of Western troops from Iraq as well as Afghanistan, and a solution to the Palestinian question,” he was quoted as saying.
AP
Albert Pike received a vision, which he described in a letter that he wrote to Mazzini, dated August 15, 1871. This letter graphically outlined plans for three world wars that were seen as necessary to bring about the One World Order, and we can marvel at how accurately it has predicted events that have already taken place.
Pike’s Letter to Mazzini
It is a commonly believed fallacy that for a short time, the Pike letter to Mazzini was on display in the British Museum Library in London, and it was copied by William Guy Carr, former Intelligence Officer in the Royal Canadian Navy. The British Library has confirmed in writing to me that such a document has never been in their possession. Furthermore, in Carr’s book, Satan, Prince of this World, Carr includes the following footnote: “The Keeper of Manuscripts recently informed the author that this letter is NOT catalogued in the British Museum Library. It seems strange that a man of Cardinal Rodriguez’s knowledge should have said that it WAS in 1925″.It appears that Carr learned about this letter from Cardinal Caro y Rodriguez of Santiago, Chile, who wrote The Mystery of Freemasonry Unveiled. To date, no conclusive proof exists to show that this letter was ever written. Nevertheless, the letter is widely quoted and the topic of much discussion.Following are apparently extracts of the letter, showing how Three World Wars have been planned for many generations.“The First World War must be brought about in order to permit the Illuminati to overthrow the power of the Czars in Russia and of making that country a fortress of atheistic Communism. The divergences caused by the “agentur” (agents) of the Illuminati between the British and Germanic Empires will be used to foment this war. At the end of the war, Communism will be built and used in order to destroy the other governments and in order to weaken the religions.” 2Students of history will recognize that the political alliances of England on one side and Germany on the other, forged between 1871 and 1898 by Otto von Bismarck, co-conspirator of Albert Pike, were instrumental in bringing about the First World War. “The Second World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences between the Fascists and the political Zionists. This war must be brought about so that Nazism is destroyed and that the political Zionism be strong enough to institute a sovereign state of Israel in Palestine. During the Second World War, International Communism must become strong enough in order to balance Christendom, which would be then restrained and held in check until the time when we would need it for the final social cataclysm.” 3 After this Second World War, Communism was made strong enough to begin taking over weaker governments. In 1945, at the Potsdam Conference between Truman, Churchill, and Stalin, a large portion of Europe was simply handed over to Russia, and on the other side of the world, the aftermath of the war with Japan helped to sweep the tide of Communism into China. (Readers who argue that the terms Nazism and Zionism were not known in 1871 should remember that the Illuminati invented both these movements. In addition, Communism as an ideology, and as a coined phrase, originates in France during the Revolution. In 1785, Restif coined the phrase four years before revolution broke out. Restif and Babeuf, in turn, were influenced by Rousseau – as was the most famous conspirator of them all, Adam Weishaupt.)“The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the “agentur” of the “Illuminati” between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion…We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view. This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time.” 4 Since the terrorist attacks of Sept 11, 2001, world events, and in particular in the Middle East, show a growing unrest and instability between Modern Zionism and the Arabic World. This is completely in line with the call for a Third World War to be fought between the two, and their allies on both sides. This Third World War is still to come, and recent events show us that it is not far off.
