1) New blog on the kid : King James and Mary Tudor, the cat, the dog, the cog, 2) Some of the Main Suspects, 3) So, am I a suspect, before I go on citing others?, 4) Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : ... on Hebrew Gematria for Harry - retort given and withdrawn
mail . com : UK judge: Putin 'probably approved' killing of ex-KGB agent
mail . com : Lawyer: Litvinenko poison may have harmed Londoners' health
mail . com : Tatars step up resistance to Russian rule over Crimea
Alert: Revelation 18:2 Just Happened
mail . com : Russia's stunt-loving Putin rides to bottom of Black Sea
MOSCOW (AP) — Another summer, another trip to the bottom of a sea for Russia's adventure-loving president.
August 18, 2015
Is he trying to show off a fulfilment of Apocalypse 11:7 and 17:8? Or does sea bottom not count as abyss to him?
Declaration of anathema on Francis Bergoglio
Byzantine Catholic Patriarchate
|a||01100001||97 or 65+32|
|b||01100010||98 or 66+32|
|c||01100011||99 or 67+32|
|z||01111010||122 or 90+32|
|Source : http://ascii-code.com/|
|δ||ε||ς [digamma -> stigma]|
|= 1 – 9|
|= 10 – 90|
|= 100 – 900|
Bergoglio and Kirill in the presence of R. Castro ...
5. Notwithstanding this shared Tradition of the first ten centuries, for nearly one thousand years Catholics and Orthodox have been deprived of communion in the Eucharist. We have been divided by wounds caused by old and recent conflicts, by differences inherited from our ancestors, in the understanding and expression of our faith in God, one in three Persons – Father, Son and Holy Spirit. We are pained by the loss of unity, the outcome of human weakness and of sin, which has occurred despite the priestly prayer of Christ the Saviour: “So that they may all be one, as you, Father, are in me and I in you … so that they may be one, as we are one” (Jn 17:21).
So they are pained by "the loss of unity, the outcome of human weakness and of sin, which has occurred despite the priestly prayer of Christ the Saviour: 'So that they may all be one, as you, Father, are in me and I in you … so that they may be one, as we are one' (Jn 17:21)," are they?
That is blasphemy. The priestly prayer of Christ Our Lord has NOT been inefficacious, and the Church has NOT lost its unity.
A Catholic can say that the unity persists on the Catholic side. An Orthodox can say the unity persists on both sides. An FSSPX-er can talk about "apparent-only schism" and say it persists on both sides (as Bishop Fellay did about Rome and Écône). But no Christian can say that the unity was lost.
12. We bow before the martyrdom of those who, at the cost of their own lives, have given witness to the truth of the Gospel, preferring death to the denial of Christ. We believe that these martyrs of our times, who belong to various Churches but who are united by their shared suffering, are a pledge of the unity of Christians. It is to you who suffer for Christ’s sake that the word of the Apostle is directed: “Beloved … rejoice to the extent that you share in the sufferings of Christ, so that when his glory is revealed you may also rejoice exultantly” (1 Pet 4:12–13).
At least possibly erroneous. Qui non est in Ecclesia non potest esse martyr. Those who of their own grave fault remained in illicit Churches are not true martyrs. If a Lutheran cobbler died with Catholic martyrs and was canonised, he was a cobbler and therefore less well read about the matters which make Lutheran theology false. If Cassie Bernall was a true martyr, she only had had a few months between converting to Christianity (of some sort, she had been in vampirism and gothdom before) and dying, and she spent those as a teen would, usually. But this does not mean her parents' congregation is a licit Christian Church.
13. Interreligious dialogue is indispensable in our disturbing times.
If dialogue is taken in normal sense, rather than Church officialese, it is rather in any disturbing time unavoidable.
Differences in the understanding of religious truths must not impede people of different faiths to live in peace and harmony.
But they do, more than anything else.
In our current context, religious leaders have the particular responsibility to educate their faithful in a spirit which is respectful of the convictions of those belonging to other religious traditions.
Here I have a few observations as well:
- 1) guarantee me that "my religious leaders" know better than I how to conjugate respect for those "belonging to other religious traditions" - when due to their human persons, not to their faulty views of God or the divine - with fidelity to truth!
- 2) what does it mean anyway for someone to "belong to" a false religious tradition, one outside the true Church?
- 3) how can we know a leader of a false sect, appreciated by Catholics for doing this, is not at the same time acquiring sufficient knowledge of the truth to have before God a duty to convert, and therefore gaining points of respectability before men agreeing with this declaration, while losing their eternal salvation?
- 4) how can we know a Catholic leader applying this is not overdoing it ... wait, if he's clearly overdoing it, perhaps he is not a Catholic. Does this say sth about Bergoglio? I think it does.
Attempts to justify criminal acts with religious slogans are altogether unacceptable. No crime may be committed in God’s name, “since God is not the God of disorder but of peace” (1 Cor 14:33).
And who "decides"* what is criminal? God. Under God, the Church, the true Church. Under the Church, the state. But on top of there being many Churches (all except one false ones), there are many states. And getting together into "one state" in order to avoid the problem will not avoid it. Who can guarantee that the adhesion of this or that state, for instance a Catholic one, to such a one state is not precisely a crime, to wit a crime of high treason?
Here I have taken four people whose names in one sense or another, with or without a twist, add up to 666. There are other suspects.
If all of these four save their souls, Hell will still get two persons thrown alive into it, one of whom or both of whom has a name or have names adding up to 666, one way or another. St John has shared God's foreknowledge of the event, not an unescapable doom forcing anyone to do the evil deeds of The False Prophet or The Beast. But the fact that whoever is one of these two has this theoretical liberty does not mean he will in fact so escape.
Pirandello wrote a play I have not read about "six characters seeking an author". But here we have "two roles seeking an actor".
My personal opinion is, Bergoglio is one of these two persons. He might be the false prophet and some more purely political figure (grant God it be not me) might be the beast. Or "Benedict XVI" might theoretically be the false prophet, because he ushered in Bergoglio is "politician pope", but I hope this be not the case.
However, Bergoglio and Putin may have hoped to make phoney fulfilments of Apocalypse by that show on the Vatican "Fiat Lux" or by deep sea diving, and they may have a motive which humanly speaking is hopeful and human ... but they would be forgetting that, since St John was a real prophet, such things are very dangerous.
Next question is how they deal with opponents in general, specifically those who think they are trying to light a sham fire, but really are lighting a real one. Putin (Poutine in French*) has shown evil in Syria and in Ukraine. Bergoglio has shown evil with Putin's man Kirill on Cuba, and of course I say this after reading only up to paragraph 13 of the joint declaration, in fact skimming parts which seemed fine or nearly fine.
Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre University Library
First Lord's Day in Lent
Update: Obviously, (V. POUTINE)=(712) and (R. CASTRO)=(620). It is if Putin "loses a point" or "does something pointless" (as I first thought) and Raúl Castro "gains a point" or "is too pointed" or "does something too pointed", that we get (V POUTINE)=(666), (R.. CASTRO)=(666). These things do depend on human freewill, on what they do, leave off, or others help or hinder them in. In the case of BERGOGLIO, he could change the name (as I suggested to his astronomer Guy Consolmagno S.J.) to BORGOGLIO (676). Bergoglio was an Italian town, from which the family probably comes, but it is now written Borgoglio. A minor change of spelling is usually allowed in divere legislations, Bergoglio is still an Argentinian citizen, he could apply for name change - and admit the very consequential act some three years ago, accepting "papacy" was an invalid act, so as to not keep that ominous name connected to a valid one. Benedict XVI could change his name from that to Joseph Benedict Ratzinger - and his status from "pope emeritus" to "priest". Also admitting invalidity of his original acceptation of "papacy".
* Since original spelling is in Cyrillic, Frnch and Enlish have diverse transcriptions, according to how their spelling correspond to original pronunication.