A Western Rite ROCOR Disagrees with My Writing and Defends Putin

Aristibule C Adams

21 décembre, 07:19

"The laws of every society reflect its culture and morals. Ours bear the imprint of liberalism and its hyper-individualist focus. In such a setting, even the most spirited efforts to preserve traditions must fall by the wayside of an ugly, vacuous culture of narcissistic indulgence. Libertarians say that it’s the responsibility of parents, not the state, to protect children from accessing porn, but in a declining and ugly culture, parents can only shelter their children from the world for so long, and even that is no formula for a healthy or happy life.

Libertarians may privately sympathize with the conservative desire for cultural renewal, but in practice their fear of public power makes such a renewal impossible. If conservatives are not willing to embrace political solutions to public problems, then the Left will gladly fill the void. Would conservatives rather live in a culture that reflects their understanding of the good, or as aliens within an enemy regime that regards them with hostility and suspicion?"

American Greatness : If the Right Doesn’t Stand Against Porn, What Will It Stand For?
Matthew Boose - December 19th, 2019
https://amgreatness.com/2019/12/19/if-the-right-doesnt-stand-against-porn-what-will-it-stand-for/

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I can live with a government banning porn, if it also bans abortions.

Putin might want to "ban porn" in order to get a cyberwall and then use that cyberwall in order to block other things as well, which shouldn't be blocked. He's had nearly 20 years and hasn't banned abortions.

The one law that banned promoting information on abortion also banned promoting homoeopathic or herbal cures ...

G. K.

This is a good point; how far do we trust the ones in charge, and if we trust the one we have now, what about the next one? Any information banned must be very narrowly and carefully defined. For example, people have been prosecuted in the US for "child porn" that involved no photos of children at all, or clothed photos that were intended for a high school yearbook that one over-zealous prosecutor wanting to insure reelection decided were 'too risque.' There is far too much danger in giving government free reign over information. I grew up during the Cold War, which was the age of lies on both sides, and, unlike now with the internet, virtually no citizen in either the US or USSR could get any information beyond what the government and media chose to tell them, and it was always the same well before that, through war after war.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

In Russia a historian was charged with "pedophilia" after refusing to correct the idea Cheka or UGP whatever killed some guys to Finns doing it during Continuation War.

Aristibule C Adams

It banned witchcraft and occultism.*

Again, he's not a dictator. He has to get the votes in parliament. A lot of damage was done in the Soviet and the Clintons suzerainty years. He's got the Church in his side in the Pro-Life side. Their outlook on ending that looks better. Us, not so much.

*[Later on it seems he confuses what the law is I am talking about, I am talking about one involving medical practises, he is talking of one involving religious ones./HGL]

Hans-Georg Lundahl

That law?

He didn't ban abortion and herbal medicine is not witchcraft.

"Their outlook on ending that looks better."

Indeed? After 20 years of saying one can't end abortion?

He has to gets votes in parliament? So did Mussolini ... under whom abortion was a criminal offense.

Seriously, he accepts heading a party which does not vote for banning abortion, says something about him, and it is not good.

Have you read what Mark Shea says about US Americans who still think Trump will end abortion?

Aristibule C Adams

Putin has no power to ban anything. Parliament makes the laws. And yes, that law was directed towards witches.

No, I don't read Mark Shea. No one should read him.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Whether the law was in intention directed to witches or not, the actual terms are such that herbal medicine even without witchcraft is targetted, if we are even speaking of the same law.

The one I speak of bans giving publically available information on abortion facilities and on herbal medicine.

Those terms may have some "sentimental" connexion with banning witchcraft, but banning Tea Tree Oil as treatment for scabies is not targetting witchcraft but a very licit medical practise, though other pharmacopy than modern treatments, and banning information on abortion but not abortion itself is not targetting the witches enough.

As for "no one should read Mark Shea" I disagree, he has some very valid points to make in defending Catholic Mariology, it's a pity he's modernist on a few issues, including in believing Old Age and some kind of Theistic Evolution.

So far he has been right and pro-lifers of the movement nearly only wrong about Trump being pro-life. Exception, the Alabama law which according to terms bans all abortions after week 5 or 6, which is much better than Russia did so far (perhaps other state laws have concurred).

The Russian law I speak of by banning information on abortion also bans (I suppose) pro-life tracts (except those discretely enough distributed by Orthos), and makes getting an abortion a privilege depending on the right connexions or the badwill of the doctor. At the same time, the banning of information on herbal medicine boosts modern synthetic phramacopy, which on top of that has in Russia had some scandals of very bad products.

And the uses of pharmacopy which constitute witchcraft (maleficium), like abortion, contraception, pushing an excitement of sexual type, inhibiting an excitement of sexual type, and making someone more pliable to orders from others (psychiatric pharmacopy) have not the least been targetted by the terms of that law, as long as the pharmacopy is modern and scientific.

Where do the Church Fathers say a witch is not a witch if the witch uses a certain type of lab?

Aristibule C Adams

The Pro-Life position of the Russian Orthodox Church is quite open, not 'discrete'.

I suppose you can imbibe at the fount of CIA propaganda - but it's diabolical (divisive) in origin.

Not sure who you're preaching to against Trump here. The only men I've voted for for President of the USA are Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul, and Bo Gritz (once). Gritz was a mistake - the other two are pro-Life.

I think of lot of your muddle and confusion would be solved if you could reconcile with the Orthodox clergy that you've thrown a fit at. Following the Devil's politics isn't going to get you far. Mark Shea you could do better without. You could do better without the whole self-promoting self-anointed Internet Apologist Blogger scene.

[My point was Mark Shea's point is better applied on Putin than on Trump. But his voting pro-life, fine./HGL]

Hans-Georg Lundahl

"The Pro-Life position of the Russian Orthodox Church is quite open, not 'discrete'."

• 1) Can they very openly distribute a pro-life tract outside the Church?
• 2) Can someone else, independently of them?

"if you could reconcile with the Orthodox clergy that you've thrown a fit at."

Are you drunk?

• 1) I haven't thrown a fit at anyone, I have expressed just indignation.
• 2) I am Roman Catholic.

"You could do better without the whole self-promoting self-anointed Internet Apologist Blogger scene."

NEITHER blogger NOR apologist is an anointed order of the sacrament of orders. St Justin was an apologist and he was a layman.

If the Orthodox do not agree with laymen taking initiatives to defend the faith, so much worse for them.

Plus this:

"I suppose you can imbibe at the fount of CIA propaganda - but it's diabolical (divisive) in origin."

• 1) Divisive and diabolical are not the same.
• 2) Nothing I said comes from the CIA.

Aristibule C Adams

Let's see - you *were* Orthodox or claim so - and have a litany of complaints to express about what you were directed to do by Orthodox clergy. You follow Pope Michael of Kansas, the Conclavist. But you do read Mark Shea.

It's all over the place - and none of it matters here. This is the wall of a Russian Orthodox priest of the Western rite. No KGB stuff. No CIA stuff. No Mossad stuff. No MI6 stuff.

You're not going to be repeating the lies here about the Russian church persecuting anyone, or being pro-abortion. So, Russia is still a modern republic working its way out of a messed up past. Bearing False Witness is still a violation of the Ten Commandments - doing so about clergy is even worse, or trying to lie to a priest's face.

Yes, a lot that you say are things that the CIA has first promoted in its instruments abroad to cause division among Orthodox, among Christians in general, and to politically contain Christians within the US (especially Orthodox.) You're shilling their story line on Russia word for word.

W. H.

Hans-Georg Lundahl Shea confuses intrinsic evils with non intrinsic evils and the Church's dogma with statements from the USCCB. He's wrong and it's dangerous to teach what he's teaching.

Aristibule C Adams

Diabolos literally means 'divides in twain'. That's what the diaboloical does: divides man from God and man alike.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Divisive means sth else.

My Pope has not banned reading Mark Shea. Nor recommen[d]ed all he writes (obviously not the pro-evolution stuff).

Diabolos means accuser. You are accusing me of repeating lies, so, you are playing a diabolos in the Greek sense. You are also accusing me of getting them from intelligence services. Again. However, diabolos also has a second meaning, namely calumniator and as both your accusations were calumnious, you are again playing diabolos in the Greek sense.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

W. H. I agree Mark Shea is confused on some things.

[I should have added that as a layman, he is not "teaching" and as a writer, not bishop, he can be read by people not agreeing with all of him. For instance, I think Aristobule may have quoted CSL somewhere, without agreeing with his evolutionism.]

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Aristibule C Adams one more:

"Let's see - you *were* Orthodox or claim so"

I was Neohimerite with Palaeohimerite leanings, hoping that way to hold one hand to both guys like you and one to guys like SSPX - it failed.

Aristibule C Adams "on Russia's laws against occult groups and dangerous cults"

You seem not to be getting what law I am talking of. [Indeed.]

It didn't mention occult groups as far as I can remember. [Or probably at all, since he's talking of one law and I of another.]

As for dangerous cults, Putin can use his old KGB criteria on what it applies to. [Note, now I am commenting on the law Aristobule mentioned.]

"I don't care what your Pope has said to you - he has no authority here."

Noting your schismatic intention publically expressed.

Aristibule C Adams

Well, you can stop right there then. I really don't care. You were asked Orthodox priests there, and they gave you spiritual direction - and you are in disobedience to those instructions. I'm not hearing it. You can go do your obedience, but pushing your vagante craziness here gets tiresome.

Putin doesn't use an old KGB criteria. If we're not forgetting - Putin fought the KGB in the early 1990s. He was of the Pro-Western party through then up to his election. His own party isn't all that different than the American Democrats before their present lunacy. His party's conservative turn is *so far* from KGB / Soviet / Bolshevism as for any claim to any present action of Russia, Putin, or the Church there to being 'KGB' is beyond ridiculous. Go do that craziness somewhere else.

Son - you're the schismatic. There is no pope elected by his mom and a couple of other people at the kitchen table.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I am not your son, as you are schismatic you do not exercise authority over me.

There is a minimum quota of voters for a valid election within a conclave, there is no minimum of voters overall.

Kitchen table or not is an adiaphoron. In Rome there were house churches, which is where the majority of cardinals' hats come from, up to Constantine.

By the way, your little half-idol Putin has considered house churches as "dangerous sects".

Women involved - they are involved in shouting "axios" to your bishops too.

None of your arguments hold, neither does your rebellion against the pope, neither does your so called authority.

If the man you consider as Patriarch of all Russia is a Christian, why hasn't he excommunicated politicians who refuse to vote for banning abortion?

A few years ago, he called that "Christian sharia".

And the priority for that was with Constantine and Theodosius. Constantine did not wait for banning non-Christian religions (except Judaism with less publicity) before banning abortion. But first Constantine banned abortion, and second Theodosius banned Pagan temples. Even he did not ban pagan "house churches".

Aristibule C Adams

No replies for you!

Then the following is not for that Schismatic priest. It's for all of my actual readers.

He claimed Putin is not using old KGB criteria. Proof? He fought KGB.

Well, not all the time. In 1989, he blocked a crowd (with an authority which could have been saintly or demonic, I don't know, but back then he could have been still in a state of grace) of Germans who wanted to storm KGB offices in Berlin and find out who KGB had collaborated with.

Well, how about false flag? When KGB is under attack, would he have openly defended them? Or could he better defend them by pretending to fight them?

But whether or not his discarding of KGB loyalties was sincere, which maybe it was, it does not mean he need to have changed all the ways of thinking he learned from them back then.

Describing either an Evangelical Sect or criticism against himself as coming from CIA is precisely the kind of thing KGB was doing back then. Invoking consensus and opposing being "divisive" (in the colloquial sense, which as said is different from the one defended by Aristobule) is an old KGB criterium. Describing Evangelicals as dangerous sects is also the old KGB stuff. Or, if not KGB, then Russian psychiatry, politicised, and not opposed by the KGB - but arguably shared by lots of KGB-ers as well.

I was not new born in 1989 or 1990./HGL

One more : he is reconstructing what happened between me and priests, whether Orthodox between 2006 and early 2009 or SSPX from 2009 to when I ceased attending St. Nicolas. I was not given any explicit pastoral instruction to cease writing. I have obeyed the instructions I got explicitly.

If either of them should pretend to now give me an instruction not to write, I would count neither as an authority.

Pope Michael has also not given any instruction to cease writing, though he may have been put under pressure to do so. If he were to give such an instruction, I would at first charitably suppose it comes from pressure put on him. His observations on what is book market mores right now are not facts of moral theology and need not be obeyed if he were trying to push it as an order./HGL

Epilogue:

That schismatic unfriended and blocked (or at least blocked) me over my asking on his wall if he agreed with Soviet agression against Poland being defended by Putin because Poles were Antisemites.

I actually asked him if he believed mail dot com was misciting him on this news link:

mail dot com : Putin rebuffs Western criticism of 1939 Stalin-Hitler pact
https://www.mail.com/int/news/europe/9621270-putin-rebuffs-western-criticism-1939-stalin-hitler.html

PS to above:

mail dot com : Polish PM accuses Putin of lying about outbreak of WWII
https://www.mail.com/int/news/europe/9627916-polish-pm-accuses-putin-lying-outbreak-wwii.html

Epilogue 2:

Since Aristobule mentioned another law than the one I was speaking of (and it is possible I had the news from him), and that other law involved a ban on occultism, I checked:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Lodge_of_Russia

It seems, unlike under Franco, freemasonry is still perfectly legal in Russia. So, small witches can be caught if practising witchcraft in a small coven of 13, but big warlocks can remain scot free, if practising witchcraft in lodges under this grandlodge./HGL

Epilogue 3:

In 2018, the highest number of abortions per 1000 live births was Bulgaria, 380. Of those over 300, I think Sweden was the lowest or one of the lowest. Russia was one of the higher ones, as there was no European country with more than 400.

statista : Number of abortion procedures performed in European countries in 2018*
https://www.statista.com/statistics/866423/abortion-rate-europe/

The page opened up correctly once, then when I tried to reaccess, it needs a paid subscription./HGL

PS, there may even be a way of getting it for free .../HGL

El tiempo de Génesis 5 y 11 no es incalculable

Carlos Salazar es moderador o administrador del grupo defiende tu fe catolica y evangelica.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

13 décembre, 22:23

Por ciertos - nosotros católicos creemos la Vírgen sin pecados por causa de Génesis 3:15.

Me gustaría saber que los otros católicos aquí también creen un tiempo bien limitado y definido entre Adán y Abrahán ... como lo precisan los cabildos 5 y 11 ...

Carlos Salazar

MUY BUENO. INTERESANTE.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

LXX, entre la creación de Adán y el Diluvio, 2242 años.

Según una versión de LXX sin el secundo Cainán, 942 años entre el Diluvio y el nacimiento de Abrahán.

3184 años después la creación y el nacimiento de Abrahán, quien vió Egipto faraónico ... no hay problemas por creer Génesis 3 bien preservado, ya que es breve, fácil a memorizar, y ya que la gente vivieron muy longo.

Bueno, hay también ciertos católicos (no los de aquí, espero) que no creen solo 3184 años entre creación y Abrahán.

Carlos Salazar

Hans-Georg Lundahl @ COMPLICADO NO LO CREES?

EL TIEMPO DE DIOS ES INCALCULABLE.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Peró, con Génesis 5 y 11 hay questión del tiempo de los hombres ... no de la eternidad de Diós.

Y el tiempo de los hombres no es incalculable.

Karl Keating Disclaims Responsibility for Paris Archdiocese Having a Prejudice on YEC = Protestant, Claims he Never Said So

Spot the Moral Monster + Other Stuff · Karl Keating Disclaims Responsibility for Paris Archdiocese Having a Prejudice on YEC = Protestant, Claims he Never Said So

Summary : Karl Keating used Fundamentalist about very virulent Anti-Catholics, but involves the Chicago Statement which is shared by people not so, and he didn't claim Fundamentalist in this sense equals YEC or all YEC are Fundamentalists in this sense. He has not so far suggested that some people might be using the word a bit differently than he, and therefore that his words were inherently likely to give the said very unfortunate impression. When it comes to licitness of YEC within Catholicism, he places it, not on magisterium like Trent (which makes it obligatory, since none of the Church Fathers were Old Earthers, and several disagreed with longer timelines suggested by Pagans), nor is he satisfied that YEC was academically defended in the 19th C. bby Catholics and their faith is still relevant, even if technical solutions on more recent problems could be taken from Protestants. Oh, no. A Catholic must in defending YEC go on Catholic only expertise, and this one for academic intellectual property reasons cannot cite Protestant experts without actually naming them and their works. And somehow, some modern Catholics have no problem citing C. S. Lewis on the nature of damnation, while some other ones for strictly technical problems require the solutions to be presented by Catholics only - but this somehow doesn't apply against Atheists giving their solutions on why GC is supposed to be millions and over a billion years old./HGL

THE

status

YeeHAH! Cowboy steak: bone-in, high-fat rib eye. Angus. Seared then broiled under a gas flame on a cast iron grill pan. Marinade is Fines Herbes, onion and garlic powders, iodized sea salt, olive oil and then red wine added after sitting a bit. 7 minutes first side, 5 minutes second side. With a side of shredded cauliflower, salt, and a touch of cream and butter.

Skipping

some. Mostly praise of the cooking, well deserved, according to looks of it.

Karl Keating

Sounds wonderful, except for the execrable cauliflower, which should have remained classified as an inedible weed.

Skipping

some (including but not limited to banter).

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Karl Keating - you need education on two issues.

• 1) Cauliflower is good if you add cream, butter or olive oil (haven't tried the latter, but presume so);
• 2) You have Catholic YEC and Flood Geologists to read up on.

Which ones? I have a little list ...

Creation vs. Evolution : Protestants Not Citing Catholic Predecessors (Short Note)
https://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2019/11/protestants-not-citing-catholic.html

Karl Keating

Hans-Georg Lundahl Your comment prompted me to look at my book shelves. I have at least 19 books defending young-Earth creationism. I think all are by Protestants, but maybe one or two are by Catholics.

I collected these books because I'm planning to write one or two books on the subject, but I don't expect to start until at least the middle of next year--and likely later. (I have several other books that must take precedence.)

You not only are a YECist but a geocentrist. As you know, several years ago I wrote a book against geocentrism. If I get around to writing the books about YEC, they will be in refutation of it, not in support of it.

I say I might write one or two books. If I write two, one will be strictly on Grand Canyon, and the other will be a global look at YEC. I have considerable first-hand familiarity with Grand Canyon. I have hiked there many times. I will be backpacking there twice this year, in March (doing the New Hance Trail/Grandview Trail loop) and in October (doing a rim-to-rim).

Hans-Georg Lundahl

You have written one book, often cited in France, in which YEC is presented (at least some superficial readers got the impression, including a former Dominican of Paris, now laicised) like an outgrowth of the more conservative group of Calvinists in US at a certain time.

I have some fatigue at being suspected, due to your sloppy research in history of ideas, as a Protestant or as someone confused who doesn't know if he's Protestant or Catholic.

As to GC, I'm willing to discuss that anther time, first you look up Bosizio, Trissl, Veit, please, and give me my honour as a Catholic back!

Karl Keating

Hans-Georg Lundahl I didn't suggest you were Protestant. Don't pretend I did.

To date I have NOT written a book about YEC. At most I have mentioned the topic in passing elsewhere.

The only books I can find by Bosizio and Trissle are from the nineteenth century. (I can't find anything by Veit.) Aren't there any recent books by Catholics who defend YEC? The YEC argument has grown in sophistication over the last century and a half, and I see little reason to bother with books that no longer have much relevance.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Karl Keating "I didn't suggest you were Protestant."

No, I didn't say you did.

"Don't pretend I did."

I didn't pretend you did.

I do however recall a book by Jacques Arnould mentioned you. I cannot swear it was a book he mentioned. And it was about ten years ago that I read his work, part of it, or nine.

It concluded that Calvinists had divided on the matter. So that YEC starts out from a Calvinist schism.

"The only books I can find by Bosizio and Trissle [sic] are from the nineteenth century. (I can't find anything by Veit.)"

Veit is also 19th C.

It so happens, the arguments back then are still relevant.

This guy was a monsignore:

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Joseph_Lamy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Joseph_Lamy

His view on the flooding of Pyrenees was, this is a purely scientific question (he was cited in article Déluge in Dictionnaire Apologétique de la Foi catholique) and if scientists conclude there is no solution, he is very willing to say God multiplied the waters, like afterwards he multiplied the breads.

Now, note : to him, whether the area now Pyrenees can have been entirely flooded or not is a scientific question : ergo - he would have no qualms about taking a scientific hint from Tas Walker, despite him being Protestant - since the HOW about the universal flooding was a scientific question, and only the THAT was a theologic one.

The same article also mentioned (around 1880 - 1890's) that the advocates for a universal Flood were lots fewer then than "twenty years ago" - meaning it was after all the traditional position among Catholics.

The two books by Catholics you found, were they Baltimore Catechisms and Haydock Bible?

You know how Haydock accounted for our knowing of the Genesis 3 events?

// Concerning the transactions of these early times, parents would no doubt be careful to instruct their children, by word of mouth, before any of the Scriptures were written; and Moses might derive much information from the same source, as a very few persons formed the chain of tradition, when they lived so many hundred years. Adam would converse with Mathusalem, who knew Sem, as the latter lived in the days of Abram. Isaac, Joseph, and Amram, the father of Moses, were contemporaries: so that seven persons might keep up the memory of things which had happened 2500 years before. But to entitle these accounts to absolute authority, the inspiration of God intervenes; and thus we are convinced, that no word of sacred writers can be questioned. H. //

E-Catholic 2000 : Haydock : Genesis 3
https://www.ecatholic2000.com/haydock/untitled-05.shtml

Hans-Georg Lundahl

It is one of these two books, where I recall your being cited:

Amazon : Les Créationnistes (Français) Relié – 31 janvier 1996
de Jacques Arnould (Auteur)
https://www.amazon.fr/Créationnistes-Jacques-Arnould/dp/2204053236

FNAC : Dieu versus Darwin
Jacques Arnould (Auteur) Les créationnistes vont-ils triompher de la science ? Paru en janvier 2007 Essai (broché)
https://livre.fnac.com/a1905811/Jacques-Arnould-Dieu-versus-Darwin

Sure you mentioned nothing on the subject in this book?

Catholicism and Fundamentalism: The Attack on "Romanism" by "Bible Christians" Paperback – March 1, 1988
by Karl Keating (Author)
https://www.amazon.com/Catholicism-Fundamentalism-Attack-Romanism-Christians/dp/0898701775

Karl Keating

Hans-Georg Lundahl (1) I didn't discuss YEC in C&F. (2) I don't give much weight to Haydock's opinions. (3) You haven't been able to provide me with modern pro-YEC Catholic book titles, so maybe there aren't any.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

"(1) I didn't discuss YEC in C&F."

In that case, Jacques Arnould seems to have got the impression YEC was implied in "fandamentalist". [sic]

"(2) I don't give much weight to Haydock's opinions."

Too bad for you, doesn't change they are more standard Catholic (over the centuries) than yours.

"(3) You haven't been able to provide me with modern pro-YEC Catholic book titles, so maybe there aren't any."

I'll give one of my own : Neanderthals, Göbekli Tepe and what about Carbon 14. It's a homemade essay collection printed in perhaps 15 copies so far.

Now, the problem is, some seem to have got in their mind (perhaps through Jacques Arnould misunderstanding your use of the word Fundamentalist, which to many over here simply means Biblical literal inerrantist) that "fundamentalism" (in their view equal to things like Young Earth Creationism, literal Exodus from Egypt etc) arose as a split within US Calvinism around the time of Civil War or perhaps a bit earlier.

I think I have sufficiently documented that this is NOT the case.

I do not know exactly why you are so insistent on modern editions that are YEC from Catholics, if it is bc of technical problems not yet known to people (like human cave art with associated carbon dates of 20 000 BC) or if it is because you think the magisterium works according to most modern printed books.

If it's the latter, I disagree. If it's the former, the technical solutions are very much non-theological (except for the theologeme of literal inerrantism) and you should have no more qualms about taking technical hints from Tas Walker or Jonathan Sarfati than you apparently have about taking such from heretics like Cuvier, Lyell, Darwin and a few more. The last of these also in the end apostate.

I think Pope Michael may have a few old titles reprinted, at least he has one for papal decrees about Geocentrism.

And if your point is, "Pope Francis" doesn't endorse this reprinting, that's my point too about his not being a real Catholic, since not in the real continuity with the tradition of the Church.

Karl Keating I can add there is a part of a book which actually is:

// A new book “Saint Patrick After The Ancient Narrations” by Rev. Philip Lynch C.S.Sp. has just been published by his nephew James Lynch. //

A few decades of pages in this book were also dedicated to Rev. Philip Lynch's view of the Deluge.

Technically not very good, I would say, but certainly Roman Catholic and certainly published after 2000.

Baptists Considering RCC Guilty of Lincoln Assassination and of being Harlot - Answered

KA

27 novembre, 12:20

Why weren't they tied before well the official government investigation into the Lincoln assassination that the pope had him killed and when we broke off relations with the Vatican you should have returned the fire.

U.S. AND VATICAN RESTORE FULL TIES AFTER 117 YEARS
By Steven R. Weisman, Special To the New York Times Jan. 11, 1984
https://www.nytimes.com/1984/01/11/world/us-and-vatican-restore-full-ties-after-117-years.html

TDG

Under Reagan :-(

I

Hans-Georg Lundahl

"the official government investigation into the Lincoln assassination that the pope had him killed"

What official investigation?

Matt SIngleton

John Wilkes booth's "Team" were all parts of the "Surrat school" A Jesuit institution in D.C.

Conspirators used an escape route went to Canada and then said to Italy on their way to the Vatican. They were arrested by the Italian police.

Their was a large investigation of Lincoln's assassination.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

The best you can do is, Mary Surratt was a Catholic and she was hanged as part of the conspiracy.

I'm not sure about the exact numbers of Catholics in 1865 (when I converted in 1988 it was about 1 billion, half of all Christians), but it would have been a bit too unwieldy for Pope Pius IX to have directed all Catholics in all their doings.

As the farm of her late husband had had a fire through a runaway slave, back in 1851, she may have had lots of motives for supporting the Dixie side other than religious conviction.

And, here is the clou, the "Italian police" who arrested John Surrat Jr was in fact *Pontifical* Police:

// Surratt would later serve for a time in the Ninth Company of the Pontifical Zouaves, in the Papal States, under the name John Watson.[4][5]

An old friend, Henri Beaumont de Sainte-Marie, recognized Surratt and notified papal officials and the US minister in Rome, Rufus King.[6]

On November 7, 1866, Surratt was arrested and sent to the Velletri prison. He escaped and lived with the supporters of Garibaldi, who gave him safe passage. Surratt traveled to the Kingdom of Italy and posed as a Canadian citizen named Walters. He booked passage to Alexandria, Egypt, but was arrested there by US officials on November 23, 1866, still in his Pontifical Zouaves uniform.[7] He returned to the US on the USS Swatara to the Washington Navy Yard in early 1867. //

John Surratt - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Surratt

That Pionono had diplomatically recognised the Confederacy doesn't mean he was a friend of cutthroat methods post-bellum.

KA

From what I read it appeared the Vatican guard let him get away. Apparently the Pope was on the side of the confederacy. To the extent that when the Irish in the northern army found out they left, deserted en masse

Matt SIngleton

KA It is said that "The Knights of the golden circle" were conspiring with Hispanic slaveholding catholic nations mexico, cuba etc. to form a slave holding alliance. The south originally desired to make the Midwest territories like Kansas major agricultural centers.

Just like WWII the Jesuits were hedging their bets on both sides. They probably preferred if the nation would have collapsed entirely being of protestant origins.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

"Apparently the Pope was on the side of the confederacy."

While it lasted. When John Surratt came over, it was already finished.

"From what I read it appeared the Vatican guard let him get away."

He was a Vatican guard, a Papal Zouave, under a false name.

He was still arrested by police in the Papal States. And extradicted by it to US.

@ Matt SIngleton "Hispanic slaveholding catholic nations mexico, cuba etc."

Mexico was not a slave holding nation, Cuba was a rarity among Hispanic states in that respect.

The slaves in Texas were introduced with slave holding Calvinist settlers, in defiance of the agreement with Mexican president and Texas secceeded from Mexico partly over wanting to keep its slaves.

"Just like WWII the Jesuits were hedging their bets on both sides."

The Pope during the War recognised both US and Confederacy, with state limits as their frontier. This doesn't mean all Catholics were required to agree with this political statement.

"They probably preferred if the nation would have collapsed entirely being of protestant origins."

That is not how Catholicism (including Inquisition) deals with Heretical Roots Populations.

It is only heresies spreading within Catholic populations that were targetted. And for people born in Anabaptist sects, the Inquisition disclaimed jurisdiction, since not recognising the baptisms not intending to cause but only to testify regeneration.

An unbaptised fake "believer baptised" pagan is as much outside Inquisition's jurisdiction as an unbaptised Jew.

II

ME

Do we need close ties,with the whore of Revelation? And the ultra socialist /jesuit pope? The one square mile,not a nation state, but a ponsy scheme.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

"not a nation state,"

So?

"but a ponsy scheme."

Would you mind being precise as to what unites the Vatican with the schemes of Charles Ponzi?

"Do we need close ties,with the whore of Revelation?"

Well, how do you identify it?

KA

"By comparing Scriptude with scripture".

CHurch/states have not been the lover of liberty or the gospel.

ME

Not with him personally, but they do accrue wealth to the top of their pyramid, from some of the poorest people on earth, and live like royalty. The Catholic church, after 75 years of my family giving more than the 10% tithe called for in the old testament, couldnt get any help at all when my homicide detective father died on the job at 40 years old, not even a loan for food money for 10 days, until mom got his death benefit insurance. Yey 2 weeks later, they knocked on our door for block collection and expected the usual $50 my parents gave at least twice a year. Same priest that threw my mother out of the rectory , empty handed, wanted money to "help the parishes needy. " That my friend is The definitiin of a ponsey scheme. Take it for what it is!!,

revelation, Daniel, Ezekiel are good places,to start. Btw, when GOD speaks of whores/harlots in prophecy ,it is dealing with idolatrous religious practices.

And the folk lore and unbiblical tenets of catholicism fit that descriptiin in so many ways. I can enumerate many of them from off the top of my head, if you'd like

Hans-Georg Lundahl

What about revelation and Isaiah?

Isaiah told Israelites in advance to get out of a Babylon that had been in power for less than one century, when they got out.

Apocalypse very closely echoes the words of Isaiah and Jeremiah, and that means the end times whore needs to have been in power for only as much.

Any power (if itself) that has been around for most of 2000 years cannot be the harlot.

"folk lore" - as in OT Judaism and Primitive Christianity didn't have any?

"unbiblical tenets" - tenets not directly in the Bible (on your assessment after looking briefly) or tenets you suppose contradict it?

KA

Harlots have been around a long time . Babylon is mother of them.around before them

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Neo-Babylonic Empire had been around for 90 years and been keeping Jews captive for 70 years when Isaiah's and Jeremiah's proto-"get out of her" was applicable.

While many harlots have been around, they have usually not been longlived (goes for the literal ones you cross in the street too, they don't have the longest lifespans usually).

KA

Ah I get ya now. You are looking at this from the standpoint of amillenialism. That tribulation is past. That leaves about 1/4 of the Bible out of context or without its matchmeet. Nothing personal.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

No, I am counting "Church Age" = "Millennium".

Satan was bound on Good Friday. He's being released now.

Apocalypse 19 with prequels are a parallel to last verses in Apocalypse 20 which gives a broad panorama, like Genesis 1 gives a broad panorama and its ending verses have a parallel in Genesis 2.

The point is and remains : neither Antichrist nor Harlot will have a continuous long rule over many generations.

Apocalypse 18:[2] And he cried out with a strong voice, saying: Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen; and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every unclean spirit, and the hold of every unclean and hateful bird: [3] Because all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication; and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her; and the merchants of the earth have been made rich by the power of her delicacies. [4] And I heard another voice from heaven, saying: Go out from her, my people; that you be not partakers of her sins, and that you receive not of her plagues.

_________

Jeremiah 51:[44] And I will visit against Bel in Babylon, and I will bring forth out of his mouth that which he had swallowed down: and the nations shall no more flow together to him, for the wall also of Babylon shall fall. [45] Go out of the midst of her, my people: that every man may save his life from the fierce wrath of the Lord.

Babylon had not been ruling long in the day of when Babylon was taken by Cyrus, and end times harlot will not have been ruling long when she falls.

Initial Reaction to an Article on One Peter Five by Eric Sammons

His article:

Is Francis the Pope?
Eric Sammons | October 29, 2019
https://onepeterfive.com/is-francis-the-pope/

I start where he is discussing the positions of St. Robert Bellarmine on a heretical pope. Here is the enumeration of them:

• 1. The pope cannot be a heretic.
• 2. The pope who falls into heresy, even secret heresy, is ipso facto no longer the pope, which gives the Church authority over him to declare his deposition official since he’s no longer pope.
• 3. Even if a pope were a heretic, he cannot be deposed of his papacy by any means.
• 4. If a pope becomes a formal heretic, he is not automatically deposed, but the Church can indirectly depose him. This is done by legally separating the faithful from the pope, which makes him no longer the valid pope.
• 5. If the pope becomes a formal heretic, the Church can recognize that fact and declare him separated from his office.

Cited from De Romano Pontifice, Book II, Chapter 30.

Before he (see my discussion later down) accepts position 3, while admitting it is most miserable and finding comfort in that since Catholicism is supposedly built on suffering, any and all of it ... he considers 2, 4 and 5 as essentially the same thing:

"But they all are struggling with a crucial issue: according to canon law and the perennial teaching of the Church, the “first see is judged by no one.” In other words, there is no court above the pope to judge him."

When Innocent III pronounced "prima sedes a nemine juidcatur" he added "nisi a fide deprehenditur devia".

The issue at hand was not if clearly heretical people could be judged as non-popes, the issue at hand was if Emperors could assemble synods to depose the Popes for things like treason or political schism with the empire.

"While these options are in the realm of theological opinion, it’s the infallible teaching of the Church that the pope has universal jurisdiction, which means no one has jurisdiction over him."

While a clear heretic has no jurisdiction.

Here he goes on to excuse position 3:

"The entire Catholic faith is founded upon suffering."

Not to the point : I have refused the most miserable position and avoided suffering of conscience, which is not the suffering Catholicism has at its heart, but I have suffered exclusion and censorship for doing so, meaning, his point is nil.

He's sitting in a comfy armchair and bragging of the suffering of a theologically most miserable position.

"We say we want suffering, but whenever suffering comes that isn’t exactly the type we desire, we flee from it."

Since when exactly should Catholics say they positively want suffering?

We should want to do our penances (prescribed for all like fasting in Lent or prescribed for self in confessional), this does not mean we should want our penances to be sufferings, and if they aren't does not mean we should go searching for more suffering.

Accepting a heretic as your spiritual guide has never been a recommended penance.

"While it might be comforting to assume that Francis is not really the pope and move along, that’s exactly what the Enemy wants."

I am not assuming JP-II, B-XVI and PF aren't popes and moving along, I am assuming they aren't popes, proving it and accepting as solution the emergency conclave held 4 years after Assisi 86.

Vivat Pope Michael.

Above (except bald) is my initial answer, since it is on the wall of a FB group, there will be replies which will give rise to separate posts on that debate./HGL

CSL Not Arian

Φιλολoγικά/Philologica : Were the Inklings a Forbidden Society? No. · HGL'S F.B. WRITINGS : Craig Crawford's view on Harry Potter (feat. réprise of his view on Tolkien and CSL, feat. Dan Brown) · CSL Not Arian · Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : Commenting on Schnoebelen's at al:s comments on HP

Hans-Georg Lundahl

2 octobre 2018

This is not a real or mis-conception, but an open question between two conceptions.

How close was C. S. Lewis to Milton and Newton on the issue of subordinationism?

Was he in a clear risk zone of Arianism, since George MacDonald whom he respected was Arian in Christology?

I

Alexander J. Wei

First I'd say the supposed Arianism of Milton and MacDonald is in dispute. I myself don't hold to that. As for Newton, something like that or Unitarianism at least, does seem to be true.

Furthermore, I'm not aware of any such with Lewis. Although he calls MacDonald his Master, his views are not identical.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Thank you.

Alexander J. Wei

I am returning to this question because I am making a detailed look at Lewis's A Preface to Paradise Lost. In Chapter XII, "The Theology of Paradise Lost" he talks about the whole question of how heretical the poem is, divided up analytically. This is in response to a Professor Saurat, who makes what Lewis thinks are unjustified attacks on the poem and poet.

He outlines four categories:

• 1) things that occur in the poem that are in fact not heretical.
• 2) heretical things that do not occur in Milton
• 3) heretical things that occur in Milton's De Doctrina
• 4) possibly heretical things that occur in Paradise Lost.

Lewis says for point 3, p. 85 in this edition, that only one thing qualifies here. He says outright that Milton was an Arian. I see no evidence that Lewis followed Milton here; I don't know his preface to Athanasius, but I suspect he was completely orthodox about Arianism.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Thank you very much.

As I have to do some clearing of CSL before some people unduly impressed by people listening to Fritz Springmeier who considered John Todd both honest and knowledgeable, it is good to hear this!

II

Dianne Mosley

What a great questions! I can’t wait to read the answers you are going to get.

David Jack

pretty certain that MacDonald wasn't an Arian...where did you see this suggested?

Michelle Harmon

He certainly never denied the divinity of Christ.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I thought George MacDonald was Unitarian?

Ken Howes

Universalist; the two groups were not identical at the time, though they eventually merged. I don't know whether his universalism was as a general belief or as a membership in a universalist association.

III

Paul Penfold

This article contains a lengthy purported quote from Lewis that robustly defends Trinitarianism and denounces Arianism:

//christianhistoryinstitute.org/magazine/article/how-arianism-almost-won

I've never seen anything other than full Trinitarian orthodoxy in Lewis's writings and have long had the impression that he regarded such a thing as being greatly important

Alexander J. Wei

Yes, now that I think of it, didn't he write a great foreword to Athanasius's Incarnation!

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Paul Penfold - thank you very much!

Paul Penfold

No worries :)

Blocages abusifs, encore

Vous êtes temporairement bloqué
Il semble que vous n’avez pas utilisé cette fonctionnalité correctement en allant trop vite. Vous n’êtes plus autorisé à l’utiliser.
Pour en savoir plus sur les blocages, consultez les Pages d’aide.
	Fermer

On peut noter le commentaire que j'étais en train de faire.

« Jones montre que la guerre culturelle qui se poursuit depuis un peu plus de quarante ans entre les catholiques et les Juifs se caractérise par une longue série de victoires pour le camp juif. Il signale que les Juifs avec qui « dialoguent » les prélats et intellectuels catholiques libéraux sont des créatures non pas de la Torah, qui est la Parole de Dieu, mais du Talmud, à savoir le système rabbinique mis en place ultérieurement dans le but, entre autres, d’empêcher les Juifs de se convertir au christianisme. » If even that much. You see, much of those dialoguing with Catholics or supposed such are "liberal theologians" and that dates more from Maimonides than from Talmud, even Talmud Babli. I know a Jew who at least is defending the historicity of the Torah.

Le passage cité en français est de l'endorsement par Robert Sungenis au livre d'Eugene Michael Jones, traduit en français.

L’ESPRIT RÉVOLUTIONNAIRE JUIF, et son impact sur l’histoire du monde
http://saint-remi.fr/fr/livres/1617-lesprit-revolutionnaire-juif-et-son-impact-sur-lhistoire-du-monde.html

FB Blocking

Kukoleck Adam is sharing this link:

Kenyan Doctors Say UNICEF Is Making Women Barren Through Polio Vaccine
MAY 27, 2019 LIBERTYWRITERSAFRICA NEWS
https://libertywritersafrica.com/kenyan-doctors-say-unicef-is-making-women-barren-through-polio-vaccine/

I try to share it. Publically on my wall.

This happens (click to enlarge):

Btw, I did succeed in sharing to my wall after all, since someone reacted to my share ...

A Certain Type of Over-Caution and Over-Suspicion

Zachary Miller

[status]

Will Greta Thunberg join an ecofascist gang when she learns how much her neoliberal groomers actually care about the environment?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Who the Hell says she is either neoliberal or has groomers?

She's probably more like social democrat, and with the ecofascism ambient in Sweden she needs no groomers for doing what she does.…

Zachary Miller

She seems to be working for the Pro-EU crowd. Neoliberals.

And the groomers are the gatekeepers to mainstream culture. She wouldn't even have gotten through the door, much less onstage with Donald Trump, unless she demonstrated the willingness to take direction from the neoliberals machine.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

That last sentence is very clearly defeatist when it comes to getting things done.

If Chesterton had had your attitude, he would perhaps not even have published Orthodoxy, much less the later ones.

I am writing, I am time after time saying to people who enjoy what I write "we can do it, we can get my things published in the end even large scale" and you are saying "no, we can't get anything done".

YOU become a gatekeeper by refusing to believe anyone except neoliberals can function as a gatekeeper.

As to her agenda, she is not taking directives, she is reacting on what she was taught in school.

An honest reaction, and if the result strikes you as "she is manipulated" that says something about how manipulated the swedish public in general is by certain agendas pushed in the schools (nearly no private schools, earlier very little now no allowances at all for homeschooling).

Zachary Miller

We can get things done on smaller scales. But access to the direct mainstream has a price.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

[started writing]

You mean direct access to the mainstream ... well, one price can be doing something which will get viral.

Illuminati are not all powerful and do not control everything.

Chesterton had a point when saying that the French Revolution bred people who were willing to be great (someone else has said, when you can get your head chopped off anyway, what's the point in being discreet).

While some other ages have people getting content to [here I saw a notification]

Per mail

Zachary Miller

I deleted the thread bc I realized it was uncharitable.
(Greta Thunberg)

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I think your initial one was not just uncharitable, but simply incorrect.

I believe your deletion of it is an act of gatekeeping and how some trads have been shooting me and perhaps themselves in the foot over and over again.

Get a father confessor who is not a pussy about "charitable" in words.

The deletion is a useless mending of a hurt you already did by a status given one hour ago, with 33 likes before you removed it.

You have basically already slandered her, and then hidden my correction. And whether I was charitable or not was not your responsibility.

Your act is worthy of a Talmudist, not a Catholic. And you can tell your father confessor so.

Zachary Miller

Thank you.

My intention was to remove the criticism of the young girl, not to silence your correction.

Hans Georg Lundahl

Well, then you can be glad that I saved all of the debate on the blog HGL'S F.B. WRITINGS (which FB is blocking) and had it under the heading A Certain Type of Over-Caution and Over-Suspicion.

But the reaction is prone to have the effect I mentioned. Someone else can have a similar meme later on and so on.

I don't think she is too young to be criticised, I just think the criticism was partly very wrong.

Zachary Miller

Even if the criticism is true, and I think it is, it still isnt a nice thing to say publicly about a young girl.

Hans Georg Lundahl

She is a public person.

FB en lui-même : la saga des blocages abusifs

Un petit résumé de ce qui est passé:

Votre commentaire ne respecte pas nos Standards de la communauté en matière de contenus indésirables.

Personne d’autre ne peut voir votre commentaire. Nous avons mis ces standards en place pour empêcher des infractions telles que la publicité mensongère, les fraudes et les atteintes à la sécurité.

Hans-Georg Lundahl https://hglsfbwritings.blogspot.com/2019/09/craig-crawfords-view-on-harry-potter.html
1 réponse · il y a 17 heures

Et, ce lien est au dernier article avant celui-ci, sur ce blog.

Je l'ai mis en bas du dialogue d'où j'avais tiré cet article, pour notifier l'autre dialogueur que notre contenu collaboratif se trouve sur mon blog.

Quand je clique pour avoir rectification, je vois ceci:

Nos standards en matière de contenu indésirable

Nous n’autorisons pas l’utilisation d’informations trompeuses ou incorrectes en vue de recueillir des mentions J’aime, des abonnés ou des partages.

Voici notre définition des contenus indésirables :

• La croissance artificielle de la distribution de contenu pour gagner de l’argent
• Exiger que les gens aiment, partagent ou recommandent un contenu avant de pouvoir le visionner
• L’usurpation d’identité

Je clique pour continuer, et devant deux choix, je prend celui-ci:

Demander un examen

Nous réexaminerons votre commentaire si vous pensez que nous nous sommes trompés.

Et après ce choix, ceci:

Examen demandé

Votre commentaire est en cours d’examen.
Hans-Georg Lundahl https://hglsfbwritings.blogspot.com/2019/09/craig-crawfords-view-on-harry-potter.html
1 réponse · il y a 17 heures

Or, prenons un à un les prétendus critères selon lesquels mon contenu serait "indésirable".

Nous avons mis ces standards en place pour empêcher des infractions telles que la publicité mensongère,

Déclarer qu'on a utilisé un dialogue sur son blog n'est pas mensongère. En plus, ce n'est pas une publicité, c'est une notification.

les fraudes

Montrer ce qu'on vient de faire n'est pas une fraude.

et les atteintes à la sécurité.

Je ne considère pas que la sécurité du concerné serait atteint par le fait de savoir que j'ai utilisé notre dialogue.

Et les définitions?

La croissance artificielle de la distribution de contenu pour gagner de l’argent

La notification n'a rien d'artificielle. Elle découlait de mon devoir de notifier l'autre ayant droits.

Le blog n'est pas monétisé. La pratiquement seule chance que j'aurais d'avoir le contenu en soi monétisé, en dehors du blog, mais copié de celui-ci serait s'il consentait à une édition sur papier commerciale, avec droits d'auteurs répartis entre les contributeurs.

En plus, c'est un peu drôle si une distribution de contenu devient artificielle juste parce que je ne l'ai pas payé pour qu'un distributeur le fasse. Ça serait un peu "distribuer contenu par téléphone arabe, oublie ça". Ou "distribuer du contenu, ça se paye, pauv' con".

Exiger que les gens aiment, partagent ou recommandent un contenu avant de pouvoir le visionner

Je n'ai aucun dispositif pour ceci sur mon blog, cette infraction ne me serait techniquement même pas possible.

L’usurpation d’identité

Je n'ai ni usurpé ma propre identité pour les commentaires qui me concernent, elle est en bon droit la mienne, ni la sienne pour le début de l'article, ou les réponses qui le concernent.

Et j'espère que le fait de partager le lien vers le blog d'autrui ne devrait pas entrer dans ce que les algorithmes de FB comptent comme usurper l'identité du blogueur./HGL

Craig Crawford's view on Harry Potter (feat. réprise of his view on Tolkien and CSL, feat. Dan Brown)

Φιλολoγικά/Philologica : Were the Inklings a Forbidden Society? No. · HGL'S F.B. WRITINGS : Craig Crawford's view on Harry Potter (feat. réprise of his view on Tolkien and CSL, feat. Dan Brown) · CSL Not Arian · Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : Commenting on Schnoebelen's at al:s comments on HP

Craig Crawford

"est avec Timotheos Michelantoine KastrophilakasNikolaou et 5 autres personnes."

15 septembre, 01:18 ·

Hans-Georg, It's not that I disagree that debate is not sometimes useful in certain circumstances, however, I consider my time to be precious and valuable, and I have much important work to do that consumes a lot of my time. It takes a great deal of energy, and I simply do not choose to expend the energy required for lengthy debates with anyone. It's draining. You seem to me to be hardened and set in your Roman Catholicism, and I am doubtful that many hours of debate and disputation with you would bring forth much in the way of fruit.

Since you are the one who brought up 666...

Why do you think Harry has a mark on his forehead, which is also called a curse multiple times, in the shape of a lightning bolt?

Hagrid: "Never wondered how you got that mark on yer forehead? That was no ordinary cut. That’s what yeh get when a powerful, evil curse touches yeh — took care of yer mum an’ dad an’ yer house, even —"

So Harry Potter is marked in the forehead with a powerful evil curse in the shape of a lightning bolt.

And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven. (Luke 10:18)

Harry Potter is marked in the forehead and cursed with the sign of Satan, a lightning bolt. He is obviously the young Antichrist. I take it that both Timothy and yourself are not real familiar with the novels or films, or you could easily recognize this.

Why do you think that the first Potter book published in the name of J.K. Rowling states:

"There have been many reports of the Sorcerer’s Stone over the centuries, but the only Stone currently in existence belongs to Mr. Nicolas Flamel, the noted alchemist and opera lover. Mr. Flamel, who celebrated his six hundred and sixty-fifth birthday last year..."

If Nicholas Flamel celebrated his 665th birthday last year, this is just a cryptic way of saying he is 666 this year. Why would the supposed author of these novels deliberately put cryptic 666 references in the book? By the way, in case you are unfamiliar with the story, Harry Potter and his pals go on a quest and seek after this Sorcerer's Stone of Nicholas Flamel at the end of the novel, and Harry obtains it.

Let's not be so naive. The committee of occultists that actually wrote this series of books have purposefully woven all sorts of hidden and cryptic occult references, and a lengthy and thorough examination would be necessary to demonstrate that some simple-minded divorced soccer mom did not come up with this book series and supposedly become richer than the Queen of England all by her lonesome.

The Harry Potter books were deliberately written with the express purpose of undermining Christian doctrine. All the occult practices condemned by the Church have purposefully been woven into and promoted in these books by a committee of writers steeped in the occult.

That the secret society uses front-authors to manipulate and propagandize the unsuspecting public is even tacitly admitted. They even made an episode of the Simpsons demonstrating this, for example.

"The Book Job"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Book_Job

"In the episode, Lisa is shocked to discover that all popular young-adult novels are not each written by a single author with any inspiration, but are conceived by book publishing executives through use of market research and ghostwriters to make money."

"Actor Andy García, who appears in that series as a casino owner, guest starred in "The Book Job" as the book publishing executive. It also contains several references to and parodies of the Harry Potter and Twilight series, aimed at young adults."

As one can see, in this Simpsons episode from 2011, they are practically openly admitting what I said publicly years before, that J.K. Rowling is a merely front-author for the secret society preparing to enthrone Antichrist, and that committees of writers steeped in the occult, and employed by the secret society, compose all the popular books published today, and yes Tolkien and Lewis were also front-authors for this same secret society, and their works also promote magic and wizardry and pagan practices and heresies condemned by the Church.

I can assure you, the secret society which has long been preparing and laying the groundwork to enthrone the Antichrist has thoroughly controlled the mainstream book publishing industry long before Tolkien and Lewis were even born.

You say: "I think HP and Lord of the Rings are in fact two different leagues, since the books have been in print (all three volumes) since 1955. This is well before the Twin Towers were even built."

If you had the opportunity to read my work in the last few years, you would know that I have both asserted and demonstrated that the secret society planned the destruction of the WTC Twin Towers long before they were ever built and before Osama bin Laden was even born. They purposefully built the Towers with the intention of destroying them decades later.

In fact they purposefully began construction on the World Trade Center Towers in 1968, the same year that they introduced the 911 emergency call number. A few weeks after construction on the North Tower began in August 1968, they say Mohamed Atta, the purported lead-hijacker and ringleader of 9/11, who supposedly piloted Flight 11 into the North Tower (a fabrication), was born, September 1, 1968, in Egypt.

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone was released 1 September 1998 in the US, the 30th birthday of Mohamed Atta, the so-called ringleader of 9/11 and the mythological 19 hijackers.

Joanne Rowling's date of birth is reportedly 31 July 1965, and this was arranged by the secret society for one of the supposed hijackers supposedly accompanying Atta on Flight 11, Wail al-Shehri 31 July 1973. (never happened)

Her name Rowling is pronounced "Rolling" for the mythological story of "Let's Roll" and Flight 93 on September 11, 2001.

Flight 11 was supposedly the first flight to be hijacked (the mythology about the hijackings is not real but merely a fabrication), and the first to purportedly crash into the North Tower, 1WTC.

Of course September 11, 2001 was a Tuesday (dedicated by the pagans to Mars, the god of war), and that is why the first novel (and film) focuses on Harry Potter's 11th birthday, which falls on a Tuesday.

Harry's mean uncle takes him and the family (a total of 4 members for the 4 attacks of 9/11) out to an island on the eve of Harry's 11th birthday. Why an island? Because Manhattan is an island where the WTC Towers were located.

Hagrid shows up on Tuesday, Harry's 11th birthday (alluding to the 11th of September in 2001 which was a Tuesday) and he smashes into the wooden door and knocks it down. When he comes inside he picks up the heavy massive door and props it back up. Later he knocks the same door down again to allude to the second WTC tower being knocked down.

see for yourself, if you must:

A visit from Rubeus Hagrid | Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXvlqsSeJ7Q

Here is the second time he knocks the door down for the destruction of the second tower.
https://ok.ru/video/1165334809284?fromTime=1073

Hagrid delivers the letter to Harry:

"Dear Mr. Potter, We are pleased to inform you that you have been accepted at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. Please find enclosed a list of all necessary books and equipment. Term begins on September 1."

Right after Hagrid knocks down the door, a euphemism for the World Trade Center Tower, September 1 is mentioned, because as I said, this is the birthday of Mohamed Atta, the supposed ringleader of 9/11 and the supposed lead pilot who purportedly piloted (so they lie and tell us) the first plane, Flight 11 into the North Tower.

When Harry decides to leave the island with Hagrid and begin the journey of going off to a school of Witchcraft and Wizardry, he asks:

“How did you get here?” Harry asked, looking around for another boat. “Flew,” said Hagrid.

So you see, this Hagrid who knocks down the identical wooden door twice, to allude to the Twin Towers, is a euphemism for the airplanes striking the towers, because Hagrid says he "flew" to the island [of Manhattan].

The secret society deliberately arranged to publish the first four Potter novels prior to September 11, 2001, because each of the four books allude to each of the four separate attacks of 9/11.

So you see, the way one can know that the Harry Potter novels and films were the work of the secret society and not the lone work of some overly-imaginative soccer-mom, is because how could Rowling have known about the 9/11 attacks before hand and arranged the novels supposedly written in her name to allude to said attacks without being in on the conspiracy?

Once one familiarizes himself with the language, symbolism, numerology and allegories that the Illuminati employs, and spends many years and thousands of hours learning about hundreds of attacks and psy-ops as I have done, it is simply a matter of performing a careful analysis and investigation of the works published supposedly in the name of these authors, to find all the attacks hidden within them.

Why do you suppose that this cover I have attached to my post of the first novel, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone shows Harry Potter flying through the twin pillars? (i.e. the Twin Towers)

If one had read my multiple posts on the film Superman (1978), another Antichrist orphan, like Harry Potter, they would recognize that Superman flies Lois Lane right through the WTC Towers in NYC as well, and you would understand the allegory.

see this post of mine from September 27, 2018 for example showing Superman (a bird, a plane!) through the WTC Towers:

https://www.facebook.com/cyprian.crawford/posts/10216317128135849

The book Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, where Harry Potter is depicted flying through the twin pillars (Twin Towers) was published in the U.S. on the thirtieth birthday, 1 September 1998, of Mohamed Atta, the supposed lead hijacker and ringleader of the 19 mythological hijackers.

There were no Arabs/Muslims hijacking airplanes with boxcutters on 9/11. the story is a fabrication of the Jewish-Masonic Sanhedrin and the U.S. Government.

The third chapter of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone gives a hint as to what really happened with the planes and towers on 9/11:

"Dudley had already broken his new video camera, crashed his remote control airplane..."

There was no need for, and in fact there weren't any hijackers taking over planes with boxcutters, and piloting planes into the towers on 9/11. It is a fabricated story from the liars in the U.S. government and media. Planes (drones) were flown remotely into the World Trade Center towers.

You brought up the Rockefeller connection to the September 11, 2001 attacks and thew WTC Twin Towers. I have explained in previous posts a couple of years ago (see my July 10, 2017 post for example)...

https://www.facebook.com/cyprian.crawford/posts/10212779194209712

...how the Rockefeller brothers allude to the Twin Towers, when I made a series of posts explaining in detail how the Rocky films of Sylvester Stallone are all about ritually publishing the Illuminati's plans to groom and install George W. Bush as president and execute the 9/11 attacks after he took office.

They say that Sylvester Stallone was born on the exact same day and year as George W. Bush, July 6, 1946, and I have written many posts demonstrating how all of Sylvester Stallone's films are about the Rhinestone (1984) "Cowboy" President George W. Bush.

See my posts from July 2017 for the Rocky films. I've been investigating the September 11 attacks for 18 years now.

The secret society even arranged for Bush to have twins (girls) to allude to the twin towers they planned to destroy in his presidency.

Of course the Harry Potter novels/films feature the toweringly-tall Weasley twin brothers for the same reason, for the destruction of the Twin Towers on 9/11, ever since 2002 commemorated as Patriot Day, and for the twin bombings at the Boston Marathon on Patriots' Day, April 15, 2013.

Of course, Harry Potter's gal pal (the whore of Babylon) Hermione is played by actress Emma Watson, whose birthday is April 15, the date of the Boston Marathon bombings on Patriots' Day, also the arson fire of the cathedral of Notre Dame, and of course Emma born on 15 April in Paris, for the Notre Dame arson on 15 April 2019, Patriots' Day (third Monday in April), the anniversary of the Boston Marathon twin bombings on the third Monday of April, 15 April 2013.

I have also composed multiple posts over the years explaining how the cathedral of Notre Dame has a North and South Twin Towers, and how it is associated to the attacks of September 11, commemorated every years as "Patriot Day".

In these posts I explained that Maurice de Sully oversaw the construction of Notre Dame Cathedral and that he reportedly died on September 11, and that Victor Hugo's birthday is 26 February, the date the secret society carefully chose to perpetrate the first World Trade Center bombing of the North Tower in 1993.

Maurice de Sully
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_de_Sully

Victor Hugo
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victor_Hugo

Emma Watson
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emma_Watson

As I said, there are many attack plans of the secret society deliberately woven and cryptically embedded within the Harry Potter novels and films, not only the 9/11 attacks.

The Notre Dame arson was only a preview of their plans to destroy the Vatican.



His post:
https://www.facebook.com/cyprian.crawford/posts/10219198955779739

Hans-Georg Lundahl

"Harry Potter is marked in the forehead and cursed with the sign of Satan, a lightning bolt. He is obviously the young Antichrist. I take it that both Timothy and yourself are not real familiar with the novels or films, or you could easily recognize this."

I think the reviewer who made me not read the books mentioned it and I read it a few years ago.

Does it mean Rowling is an Illuminata? Or is she just Stan Leeing? You know as Stan Lee in Hellboy explores very damning predicaments of main persons (Hellboy is, if I recall what I read about it, also not one I read, son of Satan).

As we talk of "young Antichrist" you are aware that Nimrod was a first Antichrist after the Flood and young Nimrod was a fairly decent guy according to Josephus, he went wrong later.

Also, the Antichrist figure of the Rowling saga is Voldemort. Take away the T (the letter shaped as a cross) and write it in upper case, in ASCII it is 616. Without the T it also reminds closely of Valdemar, the Nordic form of Vladimir. Back in 1996, I don't think she was in a position to dread and consciously spoof Putin as yet.

"If Nicholas Flamel celebrated his 665th birthday last year, this is just a cryptic way of saying he is 666 this year."

Not very cryptic, and if Rowling is somewhat Christian (not rightbelieving, but has allegiances closer to Jesus than to Antichrist) she might simply have had an aversion to saying it directly.

Nicholas Flamel ... wait ... "celebrated" ... funny. While 1996 is actually 666 years after he was born, I don't think dead men usually celebrate their birthdays. He also died in March 22, 1412. Ah, he acquired a reputation of the contrary:

// Nicolas Flamel (c. 1330 – 22 March 1418)[1] was a French scribe and manuscript-seller. After his death, Flamel developed a reputation as an alchemist believed to have discovered the philosopher's stone and to have thereby achieved immortality. These legendary accounts first appeared in the 17th century. //

Nicolas Flamel - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolas_Flamel

Obviously, the premiss of the book is built around the premiss he did achieve immortality (and was able to celebrate birthdays up to at least 1995). The other possible reason is, a 666th birthday party could have been missing as those words were said, since he was missing ... I don't know the plot of the book.

And obviously, the known facts of when he was born and what reputation he got 200 years or more after he died would have in 1996, when Rowling wrote the book added up to "he's 666 years old this year". Definitely one thing which could have inspired the book.

And that might be one reason for the badness of the books, I am not saying Rowling is morally good as writer.

"The committee of occultists that actually wrote this series of books have purposefully woven all sorts of hidden and cryptic occult references, and a lengthy and thorough examination would be necessary to demonstrate that some simple-minded divorced soccer mom did not come up with this book series and supposedly become richer than the Queen of England all by her lonesome."

The reference to Nicholas Flamel is accessible to anyone who has the curiosity to look it up.

That the references are occult is obviously part and parcel of the setting. That she chose such a setting doesn't mean she is an occultist.

And committees are not good at writing books, even divorced soccer-moms are better at that, since individual artists. That she is "simple minded" is not born out by the book she produced.

It seems to me, a certain type of proletarians who are Christians take having a culture that is not specifically Christian and which is also not commonplace proletarian as a sign of being in a conspiracy. Well, to a certain degree culture is a conspiracy, if you like, but not the kind of conspiracy you think of.

And yes, I think this cultural inferiority syndrome can persist in people who have been to seminary and who are priests. Alas, Pope Michael is somewhat of a case, though not the bitterest one, but then, the first Pope was a fisherman. Christ's choice is not always a compliment to culture.

"All the occult practices condemned by the Church have purposefully been woven into and promoted in these books by a committee of writers steeped in the occult."

Very probably by a lax half and half Christian who doesn't believe they work anyway ... so the Church of England she belonged to and Church of Scotland she belongs to do not take those bans seriously. THEN their presence is dictated by the setting.

If promotion it was - and I think it has been so with quite a few, very much more than on the part of books like Narnia or LotR - I don't think she planned it. Even less that someone else planned it, wrote the books and used her as a front. And even less than that that a committee wrote the books or any other novel. Beyond two or three equals, or one major writer outsourcing certain scenes, committee writing doesn't work. Two or three equals, I am thinking of how Goscinny and Uderzo both contributed to Astérix albums or Stan Lee and Jack Kirby. One main writer plus outsourcing certain scenes to someone specialising in it (like Hergé outsourced drawing of cars, or that could be a mismemory), that is the case for Alexandre Dumas the Elder. But ten people discussing a novel and succeeding in writing it, I don't believe that ever worked.

Case in point : Rob Skiba planned a kind of TV series, Seed, and planned on doing it along with a committee. That was quite a few years ago. I still haven't seen Seed, beyond his description of first chapter. Perhaps he was too much into sounding interest and didn't get enough repsonse, or - my hunch - the committee couldn't write a scenario together.

Plus, the charge is too much of an echo of a very clearly false charge against Tolkien. According to the "testimony" of John Todd (given the year when Tolkien was dying and next, and an Atlantic between them and also not in societies prone to contact Tolkien about what was being said, so JRR had no chance to answer), Occultists had been hiding the very occult rune alphabet from the public for centuries, basically since Nordic Paganism was outlawed in Scandinavia, probably, and then they authorised, in 1937, Tolkien to use runes in The Hobbit. In reality, anyone who is into language and Middle Ages of either Scandinavia or England has to come across runes, just like those interested in Byzantium have to come across the Greek alphabet and minuscules of the type used in 13th C. The Occultists had no power to forbid anyone to either study or artistically use runes, so no one needed their permission in 1937.

"As one can see, in this Simpsons episode from 2011, they are practically openly admitting what I said publicly years before, that J.K. Rowling is a merely front-author for the secret society ..."

More like spoofing the accusation with the ridicule it deserves. This argument is, per se, two edged : any thing the Secret Societies do can be spoofed with ridicule so one doesn't believe it (real case : Darwinists conspiring to silence Creationism spoof Creationist accusations of conspiracy into a conspiracy by believing Creationists who pose as Darwinists, a spoof which has gained in prevalence over the the time I have been debating the subject, since 2001). And on the other hand, any bona fide spoof of a ridiculous theory can be construed as an "admission" with the qualifier "practically". But in this case, my knowledge of writing in general leads me to say, no, committees don't write novels. Sometimes committees order novels that have to include certain ingredients, but there is one, two or three people actually writing them. Case in point : Simpsons are created by Matt Groening, developed by James L. Brooks, said Matt Groening and Sam Simon. AND they are not a serialised novel, they are a succession of "short stories" spanning one to three episodes.

"preparing to enthrone Antichrist"

Why, if so, does nothing in the novels imply Harry Potter is enthroned? Or does it?

"and yes Tolkien and Lewis were also front-authors for this same secret society, and their works also promote magic and wizardry and pagan practices and heresies condemned by the Church."

No. The John Todd accusation came when CSL had been dead for 10 years and JRRT was dying.

Parts of it are ridiculous, like the aforementioned allegation JRRT needed Occultists' permission to use runes, and parts of it are based on misconstruction of who are the bad and the good guys. Or good and bad things, as Tolkien is absolutely not promoting Frodo's using the ring. AND other parts are based on misconstruing nature of actors (an angelic being using angelic powers is obviously not the same as a human getting a lease on using such by a compact with Fallen angels).

"I can assure you, the secret society which has long been preparing and laying the groundwork to enthrone the Antichrist has thoroughly controlled the mainstream book publishing industry long before Tolkien and Lewis were even born."

There are different types of control, but making committees of occultists and using authors as mere names wouldn't work. Using only authors who agree to writing on the command of the secret societies would partly work, but as England had whistleblowers like Chesterton, not too much.

You are also missing that "mainstream book publishing industry" as we think of it today is actually younger than the death of Lewis and about contemporary to the death of Tolkien. Before that there were more and smaller publishing companies, therefore more independence overall and that means also more chances of independence from any given Secret Society.

Long list of coïncidences + "The secret society deliberately arranged to publish the first four Potter novels prior to September 11, 2001, because each of the four books allude to each of the four separate attacks of 9/11."

Easier explanation : whoever planned 911 was also planning on demonising pop culture. Deliberately copying fiction already published is one way, and the more known, the more effective. Secret Societies could have such goals. One which very clearly would have it is Islamic Brotherhood, as Islamism is very much about painting the West as extremely decadent.

"So you see, the way one can know that the Harry Potter novels and films were the work of the secret society and not the lone work of some overly-imaginative soccer-mom, is because how could Rowling have known about the 9/11 attacks before hand and arranged the novels supposedly written in her name to allude to said attacks without being in on the conspiracy?"

Easy, the conspirers could have known her work after it was published.

"Of course, Harry Potter's gal pal (the whore of Babylon) Hermione is played by actress Emma Watson, whose birthday is April 15, the date of the Boston Marathon bombings on Patriots' Day, also the arson fire of the cathedral of Notre Dame, and of course Emma born on 15 April in Paris, for the Notre Dame arson on 15 April 2019, Patriots' Day (third Monday in April), the anniversary of the Boston Marathon twin bombings on the third Monday of April, 15 April 2013."

Two possibilities again : when Emma Watson was cast, they were planning Notre Dame arson (even if true, doesn't really mean Rowling was involved in planning it or aware of this aspect of casting Emma), but other possibility, Notre Dame arson if arson was done on April 15th in order to allude to her.

Baiting people like you to get off the hook about just one of the possibilities.

With Notre Dame, accident is not excluded. Whether accident or arson, I have another theory on why God allowed it to happen 2019 and 15 April. 2019 is 33 years after 1986. April 13th would have been exact anniversary of Antipope Wojtyla stepping criminally into a synagogue. It was a Saturday, then came Sunday, the fire was on Monday.

On Good Friday, the Vatican II sect was not allowed to use purple or scarlet in Notre Dame, and Notre Dame itself was black, as is usual on Good Friday, since the Church is born as a widow.

The Book Job:

// Freelance writer Dan Vebber, who is known for his work on the animated series Futurama, wrote "The Book Job" with contributions from the staff writers on The Simpsons.[1][2] Matt Selman, an executive producer and writer on The Simpsons, was the one who conceived of the idea behind the episode. He was inspired by an article in The New Yorker about the book packaging company Alloy Entertainment—the publisher of series such as Gossip Girl and Vampire Diaries—and the company's use of ghostwriters. According to Selman, the article "was all about how these executives take market research and come up with the ideas for these books and farms them out and slaps the name of fake writers on them and fabricates backgrounds for these authors who don’t exist. We took that trend and kind of blew it up and shoved it in the face of Lisa".[1] //

The Book Job - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Book_Job

Obviously, even so Alloy Entertainment uses one author, named or ghost for each plot and obviously the practise is very low brow, as Alloy Entertainment itself.

When people are pushed away from Tolkien, Lewis, even Rowling because they are supposedly ghost writers of the Conspiracy, guess where novel hungry teens get their novels? Well, places like Alloy Entertainment.

Your idea "so and so can't have written" reminds me of the idea of Connelly:

What put the seal on Donnelly’s extravagant ideas as far as most people were concerned, however, was the publication of a series of books in which Donnelly explained how Shakespeare’s plays were really written by Francis Bacon, and that the texts conveyed occult messages from Bacon to his disciples in the future. These were The Shakespeare Myth (1887), The Great Cryptogram: Francis Bacon’s Cipher in Shakespeare’s Plays (1888), and The Cipher in the Plays, and on the Tombstone (1899).

The Just Third Way : The Weird World of Ignatius Loyola Donnelly
https://just3rdway.blogspot.com/2019/08/the-weird-world-of-ignatius-loyola.html

Obviously Shakespear could write the works of Shakespear, because he did.

Authorship questions are decided, mainly, by tradition from earliest days a work is mentioned. Otherwise you open the door to the guys who want the Gospellers to be front writers or fictions as front for Calpur[n]ius Piso (yes, that theory exists, alas).

Craig Crawford answered twice

leading to two threads, which I shall here call A and B.

A

Craig Crawford

"I don't think she was in a position to dread and consciously spoof Putin as yet."

I have also noted the Voldemort / Vladimir connection (same consonants VLDMR in the same order), and Putin was groomed by the secret society from his birth for his future role as president of the Russian Federation. So was Donald Trump. There are many films and tell-a-vision shows showing their plans to groom Putin and Trump going back more than 50 years. Likewise for your apostate popes. I have written about several of them here on my FB, and could fritter away many more hours writing about more.

In the Orthodox Church, St. Donald and St. Vladimir are celebrated on the exact same day, July 28 (N.S.) / July 15 (O.S.). July 28 is the reported birthday of Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, the actor who is supposedly the leader of the Islamic State.

None of this is by accident, but it has all been arranged by the Jewish-Masonic secret society which Donald and Vladimir serve. This self-same secret society has installed every pope in your lifetime as well. The Da Vinci Code series of books and films are all about Benedict XVI and Francis, by the way.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

This is perhaps more to the point than the ideas about books being written by committees.

Vladimir in Scandinavian languages is Valdemar, and Voldemor would sound like a dialectal (perhaps Smaalandian) "mispronunciation" of Valdemar.

I noted this to a few Danes visiting Paris - who were not Christian - in connexion with noting VOLDEMOR in ASCII adds up to 616.

VOLDEMORT is 700, the T is a letter like a Cross in some ductuses of writing it, and it is 84 in ASCII.

700 - 84 = 616.

One 616 in Upper Case apart from VOLDEMOR is IULJANOV. Like, Iljitj Uljanov, giving the Swedish transscription of his name.

However, 666 seems to be the correct value. For the final Antichrist. And this would mean Tolkien is better at describing Antichrist than Rowling is, since Sauron would in Welsh be spelled Sawron and in lower case only "sawron" gives 666 (474 + 6*32, each lower case being 32 more than the upper case).

It is odd that Rowling, after I met those Danes, tweeted (a few months later or next year) that in Voldemort, the final t is not pronounced.

This is perhaps better evidence of some kind of collusion with some kind of network, not necessarily one which in her presence would plan flying airplanes into buildings.

"This self-same secret society has installed every pope in your lifetime as well."

Wait, all three versions of Gregory XVII as well? Palmar de Troya as well? Pope Michael and Cardinal Siri as well?

You perhaps mean the Antipope series Paul VI, JP-1, JP-2, B-16, F1?

Perhaps JP-1 wasn't and was killed when they saw they had made a slip in allowing him in.

"The Da Vinci Code series of books and films are all about Benedict XVI and Francis, by the way."

If you mean Herringrose cardinal is based on Ratzinger and the cardinal getting elected at Angels and Demons being a wishlist for the election which gave Bergoglio, I'd agree.

Not necessarily that Dan Brown knew Bergoglio, it could just be lots of "team Bergoglio" were Dan Brown fans. Secretly, since officially since at least B16, Catholics are discouraged from reading Dan Brown, though there is no more any Index to put his books on.

Angels and Demons show DB sympathising with at least a humane (presumedly original) version of Illuminati, and the novel could be the real hint much of conspiracy theories are based on.

If Illuminati have the mission to revenge Idolatrous Pagans and Scientist and Muslims on Catholics, in retribution for Crusades and Inquisition (misportrayed), no need for them to have a continuous existence, unlike the Church which must guard a heritage of truth, they can very well be a mystery of iniquity which at one time was, then was no more and now is or soon will be again.

I consider DB was saying "get us a Pope the nice Illuminati can respect, so there won't be any Illuminati unworthy baddies like the Hashisheen".

Speaking of "groomed for" I think I have been deliberately kept out of circulation in larger mediatic rooms precisely by people trying to groom me for sth else than I was writing.

I did not know Vladimir and Donald being same calendar day. I am not quite surprised. If CIA planted Putin as a "decent" (in their view) KGB agent and then KGB contributed to Trump, I'd not be very surprised.

Whether Trump is a KGB agent or he is really a salesman, and security services wanted a salesman's complent in ruling the world.

I am not fan of either. I'd have preferred Marco Rubio or Rick Santorum.

B

Craig Crawford

Hans-Georg, the committee of occult writers oriented the theme to the first Harry Potter book around Nicolas Flamel, for multiple reasons.

For one thing, I was under the impression that you were living in France, and as you are probably well aware, Nicholas Flamel is mentioned many times in Victor Hugo's The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1831). Rue Nicolas Flamel and Saint-Jacques Tower are only approx. 500-600 meters from Cathédrale Notre-Dame de Paris.

see for yourself:
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Saint-Jacques+Tower,+Square+de+la+Tour+Saint-Jacques,+75004+Paris,+France/Cath%C3%A9drale+Notre-Dame+de+Paris,+6+Parvis+Notre-Dame+-+Pl.+Jean-Paul+II,+75004+Paris,+France/@48.8555183,2.3471071,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x47e66e1e5e72161b:0xe085e8b2d3c0632e!2m2!1d2.3489072!2d48.8580685!1m5!1m1!1s0x47e671e19ff53a01:0x36401da7abfa068d!2m2!1d2.3499021!2d48.8529682!3e2

Victor Hugo's novel even makes reference to the philosopher's stone possibly being located inside Notre Dame:

Victor Hugo's The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1831):

"But, what every one might have noticed was the interminable hours which he [Archdeacon of Notre Dame Claude Frollo] often employed, seated upon the parapet of the area in front of the church, in contemplating the sculptures of the front; examining now the foolish virgins with their lamps reversed, now the wise virgins with their lamps upright; again, calculating the angle of vision of that raven which belongs to the left front, and which is looking at a mysterious point inside the church, where is concealed the philosopher’s stone, if it be not in the cellar of Nicolas Flamel."

Flamel means 'flame,' in Old French; hence the figure of Nicolas Flamel in Harry Potter was chosen to allude not only to the secret society's intentions to perpetrate the Notre Dame arson fire, but also to the destruction of St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church, which stood adjacent to the South Tower at the World Trade Center site.

St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Nicholas_Greek_Orthodox_Church

As I said, there are countless attacks hidden in all the Harry Potter novels and films, including 9/11, the multiple Paris attacks, and I even today wrote about the current flooding in Texas in Harris County ("Harry's county," i.e. for Harry Potter, who is Prince Harry) in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007).

The mason and heretic Archbishop Demetrios of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America (he recently retired) said this:

“Saint Nicholas Greek Orthodox National Shrine, although destroyed in the terrorist attack of September 11, 2001 is now, with the grace of God, being resurrected at the new World Trade Center and it will soon rise like a glorious phoenix as a National Shrine and a place of pilgrimage for our Nation. It will be a place of faith, a place of peace and a place of solace and hope,” Archbishop Demetrios of America has commented on the church’s reconstruction in the heart of New York’s financial district.

In the second Potter book, it is revealed that "I am Lord Voldemort" is an anagram of the character's birth name, "Tom Marvolo Riddle."

Obviously the name Tom Riddle means "Twin Riddle" since the name Tom/Thomas means 'twin'.

The "Twin Riddle" is alluding to the Twin Towers connection between the WTC Twin Towers (North and South) and the twin towers (North and South) of the Cathedral of Notre Dame in Paris.

The twin riddle of Nicolas Flamel and his Philosopher Stone (suggested to be concealed within the church of Notre Dame in Victor Hugo's novel) and the Church of St. Nicholas at the WTC in Manhattan, destroyed by the demolition and fiery debris of the South Tower falling on it.

There are of course other meanings as well.

As I said, the actress Emma Watson who plays Hermione, was born in Paris on April 15, and they deliberately chose her (even though hundreds or even thousands of young girls would have been thrilled to play the role), with the knowledge that they intended to light the spire and roof of Notre Dame on fire on her birthday 15 April 2019, in the city Paris where she was born.

Hermione is the character in the first novel/film who goes to the library and first learns about Nicolas Flamel in a book.

By the way, yesterday, 19 September, is said to be Hermione Granger's birthday in the Potter series.

Hermione was the daughter of King Menelaus of Sparta and his wife, Helen of Troy.

I have written previously of how Helen of Troy was considered the most beautiful woman in the world, and of her abduction by Paris, Prince of Troy, which brought about the Trojan War.

Christopher Marlowe's tragedy Doctor Faustus (1604) says of Helen of Troy:

"Was this the face that launch'd a thousand ships / And burnt the topless towers of Ilium?"

Christopher Marlowe was said to be baptized on 26 February, which is also the reported birthday of Victor Hugo.

As I have mentioned many times, the 1993 World Trade Center bombing was scheduled by the secret society and the U.S. authorities (FBI, etc.) for 26 February to tie into the birthday of Victor Hugo and the baptism of Christopher Marlowe.

1993 World Trade Center bombing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_World_Trade_Center_bombing

Of course 26.2 (26 February) also ties into the 26.2 miles of a marathon, and the bombing of the WTC Twin Towers to the twin bombings at the Boston Marathon.

George W. Bush signed a law making every September 11th Patriot Day.

Patriot Day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Day

The Boston Marathon bombings were scheduled for Patriots' Day, April 15, 2013 (third Monday in April), as well as the Virginia Tech fake shooting psy-op was also scheduled for Patriots' Day, April 16, 2007 (third Monday in April), in honor of the father and forerunner of Antichrist, Pope Benedict XVI, on his 80th birthday.
Patriots' Day
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriots'_Day

Virginia Tech shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Tech_shooting

Of course, the "actor" who played the Virginia Tech fake shooter was named Cho, and they say his birthday is January 18.

Seung-Hui Cho
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seung-Hui_Cho
That is why the Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007) film screenplay was written by Michael Goldenberg, who shares the same birthday 18 January, as the supposed Virginia Tech shooter.

Michael Goldenberg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Goldenberg

That is why the character Cho Chang in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007) film is portrayed as a traitor, a "Benedict Arnold," to allude to the fake shooting staged on Pope Benedict [Arnold's] 80th birthday, April 16, 2007, and the (supposed) shooter Cho.

Cho Chang
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumbledore%27s_Army#Cho_Chang

Of course they timed the hype for the release of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007) to coincide with the fake shooting psy-op. They wrapped up filming months before, of course, in 2006.

Hiereus Anaxios [tagged]

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I am very well aware of rue Nicolas Flamel and close on rue Pernelle - the name of his wife, having St. Petronilla (daughter of Simon Peter, I think) as patron.

I am therefore also very well aware that he is a historic figure. This means, he could easily have been known to la Rowling independently of any conspirators, and while wikipedia was perhaps not yet a thing in 1996, when the book was written, checking, no it is from 2001, internet forums arguably already were. Plus, if she was fascinated by witchcraft since childhood, she would arguably have made some at least superficial researches into the occult and known it from there, even from books she sought out.

This means, while she had the main characters from the train journey (yes, inspiration works that way), she would have made more researches into the occult after the train journey, on the way to completing the manuscript.

As said, societies like that could easily get inspiration for their deeds from an already published book.

Whether or not Notre Dame fire was planned long in advance, it came on a double year count, if not exact anniversary : 72 years, perhaps not on the day, or 71, after Cardinal Suhard applied for wider authorisations into believing Darwinism (a bit like bishops under Commie régimes would be doing in 70's, for similar reasons), and 33 years and third day after the visit JP-2 made to the Synagogue of Rome.

If they didn't plan all including the 1947 or 1948 plan to subvert Moses in Catholic teaching, God used their plans or an accident, whichever it was, to say what He thought about Darwinism as well as about Synagogue visit (also strategically 13 days before Chernobyl, the difference these two centuries between Gregorian and Julian, so Chernobyl came on same date in a different calendar).

If no secret societies planned Chernobyl and Notre Dame disasters, we have God's judgements. If not, God is telling us to look for secret societies a bit better.

But a committe writing a novel is a way where I won't look. A committee asking an author for a novel, giving a wishlist of things to include, commenting as it is written "no, do it like that instead" - well, possible, but would be harassing for an author in such a position.

But no, authors are in fact needed to write things with a given not just cumulative unity. One, two or three, like One God in Three Persons creating the Universe.

Collections of short stories (like Simpsons), or wikis, or Chronicles where the unity of event comes from God's providence, yes, but not novels.

Speaking of St Nicholas, how do things stand now as to rebuilding of St Nicholas and Ground Zero Mosque?

Both denied? Both granted? One but not other?

"As I have mentioned many times, the 1993 World Trade Center bombing was scheduled by the secret society and the U.S. authorities (FBI, etc.) for 26 February to tie into the birthday of Victor Hugo and the baptism of Christopher Marlowe."

Thanks for not saying Victor Hugo and Christopher Marlowe being chosen as front authors for having birth or baptismal days already planned in advance for 1993!

AND for saying such networks can plagiarise on items of interest which they did not produce. My point about coincidences not necessarily meaning the author was involved in planning the misdeed.

As to Emma Watson, some kind of Masonic network is somewhat involved in her carreer.

After Hermione Granger, she has featured in a film by Alejandro Amenábar, the guy who let Rachel Weisz play Hypatia in a totally unhistoric Agora.

Craig Crawford

No disrespect intended, but I am not interested in wasting precious time attempting to convince folks of realities which they are neither prepared nor willing to accept. You and others are free to believe as you wish, but I hope you understand that my purpose here is not to engage in endless debate with those who are unwilling to receive the truth. It is apparent that you really do not know all that much about Hollywood, the book publishing industry, the political sphere, and how the secret societies make use of these propaganda arms, which would be fine if you had the humility to learn from others who do know a bit about these things.

You and I have radically different worldviews, so it is not possible for our conversations to bear much in the way of fruit. You regard me as being in delusion for not recognizing papal pretensions to supremacy and infallibility, and the Orthodox saints tell us that the pope is the forerunner of Antichrist and the idol of Catholics, who are idolaters.

Rick Santorum and Marco Rubio are fanatical and rabid Zionists and Judaizers: preachers of Antichrist. They are merely agents representing the interests of global Jewry and Zionism, which are intensely preparing to enthrone the false Christ.

Forgive me, and I'm sorry to say, but that you would 'prefer' Rubio or Santorum over Trump testifies to your naïveté and ignorance with regards to the sphere of politics and the signs of the times. It reveals that you still have faith in the antichrist "democratic" or "republican" systems, which are thoroughly demonized and have been completely in the hands of the Masons since well before you and I were born.

France is not a Christian nation; rather it is a de-Christianized atheist state.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

"the book publishing industry"

I do know enough to know when it changed.

I know enough to know Methuen who published several of CSL's works prior to Narnia was a fairly small publisher, whose owners had no "wiki-visible" ties to Freemasonry. AND this started c. 20-30 years before the change in US book industry.

"and how the secret societies make use of these propaganda arms,"

It's not a question of not knowing they do so, it's a question of knowing some ways in which they do not do so.

"which would be fine if you had the humility to learn from others who do know a bit about these things."

Is your knowledge derived from the false witness of John Todd?

"You regard me as being in delusion for not recognizing papal pretensions"

No, I regard you as being in error for it. Delusion is something other than error.

"[T]he Orthodox saints tell us that the pope is the forerunner of Antichrist and the idol of Catholics, who are idolaters."

We do not any more idolise Popes than you idolise your Bishops or your Starets.

Since when are there Orthodox saints doing so?

Photius? Palamas? Mark of Ephesus? Later and indebted to Protestant fanatics. I'd say. I guess. But if you can find a passage in Mark of Ephesus saying so, or in Palamas even ... fine, show me. Then you were not copying the Protestant error, but they were copying yours.

This is also quite a bit outside the discussion at hand, namely whether one should, basically, trust John Todd's word or not.

Or, whether Tolkien promoted men learning magic arts.

It's not just in Silmarillion, it's already in appendices, Appendix B, skip all of Second Age and where it says Third Age it's second and third paragraph saying the Istari were sent from the West and they took human appearance. For mortals, real mortals, using magic, Tolkien's examples are The Witch-King of Angmar, fullblown demonic, not a role model, Gollum, Bilbo and Frodo, corrupted in diverse measures by use and even possession of the ring, so, also, not rolemodels.

If you think of Gandalf before the gate of Moria as using spells, I think it can be considered passwords. You use a password when you log in to an account, and in some houses, to get to your appartment, you go through a common entry hall, which has a door opening for one specific code.

There is no human learning magic in Tolkien. Those there are in Narniad are :

• Uncle Andrew (evil, not a role model)
• Prince Caspian learning only the theory (the practical part is not a study for princes)
• Professor Cornelius (half dwarf, half Telmarine), his tutor, and we don't see him using any magic powers beyond putting guards to sleep (drug or - if familiar with the guards - hypnosis would do)
• Lucy who under a death-threat takes on the duty to pronounce one spell and is reprehended severely for pronouncing another one first.

This is not how one promotes magic.

Harry Potter does, that is why I am not reading it, and Isaac Asimov portrays science and technology as a kind of magic, and I am allergic to him too.

I have been harrassed by the kind of network you study over their ambition to groom me for a future task. If in 2010 I had shouted out "oh, Isaac Asimov is so much better than Tolkien" I might already have been a rich man. Not indeed having just my name used for novels actually written by committees, writing doesn't work like that, and when Rob Skiba thought he did, he seems to have been deceived, since his Seed is still not available. But probably working out plans committees presented and getting my working out of them criticised in detail and modified over and over again by committees.

That would work, and I think Isaac Asimov and his circle were indeed functioning like that, unlike the Inklings.

Instead I wrote on my blog "I love Tolkien and I hate Isaac Asimov", and I am still poor. People like you who have pretended me a dupe or even willing tool of networks and at least if neither of these my work unusable for anything good as long as I don't agree with you on where the Orthodox Church is, and as long as I don't agree with you on how Illuminati work, you have contributed to their goal of marginalising me.

If you liked, we could have a discussion on how exactly Dan Brown is really serving them. Not as a front for a committee of authors, but probably an author subservient to a committee, and certainly sharing much of their world view - as does Rowling, perhaps rather less than Dan Brown.

I have even asked myself if the "tribe of Dan" which does not go to Heaven (or has no gate in Heaven, at least) could in these end times refer to Dan Brown fans.

If that is what you call being a dupe of modern media, you have ceased to attribute to words their usual meaning. Which would be a by product of learning Illuminati speak, as it is not a foreign language, but a break down of normal language use.

"Rick Santorum and Marco Rubio are fanatical and rabid Zionists and Judaizers: preachers of Antichrist."

Did not know.

"They are merely agents representing the interests of global Jewry and Zionism, which are intensely preparing to enthrone the false Christ."

Does not follow.

"It reveals that you still have faith in the antichrist "democratic" or "republican" systems, which are thoroughly demonized and have been completely in the hands of the Masons since well before you and I were born."

I most certainly do not.

I share the Chesterton aversion to The Party System.

"France is not a Christian nation; rather it is a de-Christianized atheist state."

There is some Christian nation left, but the state is mainly as you describe it.

So is Sweden, with much less of a Christian nation left.

Two additions:

On Asimov, I seem to have misrecalled (or the article has been changed, but I recall parts of it as it stands now) the function of the society:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_Door_Spiders

On Santorum and Rubio being Zionists, would that be simply because they are anti-Islamic?

We may see as time gets on, if he answers any more./HGL