Vatican Satanic Paedophile Ring Investigation

[Wombaticus Rex]

and the labels of homophobia and anti-semitism would be directed at me for posting about Catholics?

And yet another thread comes around to the subject of you.

Please, stop. Stop doing this. I hugely regret responding to you today.

[seemslikeadream]

and the labels of homophobia and anti-semitism would be directed at me for posting about Catholics?

And yet another thread comes around to the subject of you.

Please, stop. Stop doing this. I hugely regret responding to you today.

I just want to know what I can post here and what I can not post here...without being personally attacked ...that is all


almost everything I post about is NOT about me but when standing personal insults are not addressed I have questions...I've tried private pms but to no avail so I have no other choice

unaddressed personal attacks by others made it about me not the other way around...


sorry I thought you were actually going to help me figure this out here

[compared2what?]

If you started a thread to discuss the Vatican’s history with exorcism in any detail, yes, the issues of homophobia and anti-semitism would both come up within the first page. Because we’d be discussing Catholics.

But maybe not really fair to put it that way, wrt the anti-Semitism. It might not have been a very rigorously and consistently enforced thing, but as far as it went, the official Vatican position was pro- until c. the sixteenth century. (Sicut Judaeis).

On the other hand, popular anti-Semitism was, um, popular and (in one form or another) widespread/common for most of the part of Christian-European history that came before that. It was explicitly Christian. And all Christians were then Catholics, very nearly. So a case could be made.

But I don't know. With reference to that era, I think it's probably more accurate to call it "Christian anti-Semitism" than "Catholic anti-Semitism" if/when a distinction of that kind is called for.

Because it was really the non-ecclesiastical PTBs of the day (Most Christian Majesties and so on) who benefited from promoting and perpetuating it. And in the grand scheme of things, they were actually in a power struggle with the Vatican, although they were quite frequently also allied with it.

But that was more or less non-optional for a really long time. It's literally how the European west became itself, in a big-picture sense. Without the church, it would just have been a bunch of Franks, Vandals, Goths, and Huns fighting with each other over the territory formerly occupied by the Roman empire until some other power with enough organizational scope to be a long-term continental force came along.

And that sure wouldn't have been the Jews. Very decentralized.

...

I'm not actually even sure how that part of the Eternal-Jew argument goes, precisely. Come to think of it. No banks to speak of until the 15th century. And no Jewish bankers to speak of until....Well. I suppose also the 15th century if you date it to the expulsion of the Jews from Spain and consequent arrival in not-yet-Italy where some of them took up banking. But arguably earlier, as in -- for example -- England. However, since there was an expulsion there, too, which happened prior to the one in Spain and didn't result in any banking trends (afaik), I'm calling it for the 15th century.

Summing up:

• * The Vatican was offficially pro-Semitic during the Middle Ages.
  * Judaism has no inherent natural power center.
  * Anti-Semitism leads to banking.
  * Christianity is a civilizing force. .
  * Jews and Judaism have been a reliable and popular proximate occasion for numerous, varied divide-and-conquer-type stratagems on the part of temporal powers in the Christian west virtually since there's been one.
  * There was no media until much, much later.

I'm not ignoring the homophobia. It's just difficult to quantify and qualify it prior to there having really been an alternative, culturally speaking.

Sorry that was dull. Medieval ecclesiastical history is actually mad interesting. Very political. I recommend it.

[8bitagent]

I was thinking, has there ever in the last one thousand years ever been an institution/group/etc so thoroughly infested with hardcore child sexual criminals?

It is interesting to note how the new Pope, for what it's worth, has shown himself to be the most progressive of any pope before him. So that's encouraging.

Also, an institution known for coverups(Im sure we all know the proximity of the Vatican/Vatican Bank to Gladio and P2), it's noteworthy they decided not to cover up the
fact Mother Teresa became and died an atheist
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-3199062.html

[0_0]

I was thinking, has there ever in the last one thousand years ever been an institution/group/etc so thoroughly infested with hardcore child sexual criminals?

I don't know about the last one thousand years, but from what i've understood from history noone thought twice about having sex with children, mostly young boys, until the arrival of christianity put a stop to all that. So to answer you question: probably no, but only because in other institutions/groups/etc it wasn't a crime.

[norton ash]

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/ ... 89769.html

02 JULY 2013

A paedophile priest told a distraught seven-year-old boy that he could get his dead grandfather into heaven if he performed a sex act on him, a court has heard.

Belfast Crown Court heard that the boy was quite distressed about his grandfather being in purgatory but that 55-year-old James Martin Donaghy told the child "he could get him into heaven if he helped him" and performed a sex act.

Last month just before his trial was due to begin Donaghy, originally from Lady Wallace Drive in Lisburn but now languishing in Magilligan prison, pleaded guilty to four charges of indecently assaulting the boy and one of common assault against the schoolboy on dates between January and May 1989.

Following a lengthy trial at the end of 2011, Donaghy was convicted of a total of 17 sex offences including indecent assault and committing acts of gross indecency against all three victims.

Those charges all happened on various dates between 1983 and 2000.

[compared2what?]

I was thinking, has there ever in the last one thousand years ever been an institution/group/etc so thoroughly infested with hardcore child sexual criminals?

I don't know about the last one thousand years, but from what i've understood from history noone thought twice about having sex with children, mostly young boys, until the arrival of christianity put a stop to all that. So to answer you question: probably no, but only because in other institutions/groups/etc it wasn't a crime.

Culturally sanctioned pederasty was an occasional feature of some ancient civilizations. But it wasn't like it was the rule until Christianity did away with it. For one thing, the prohibition on sodomy was a carry-over from Judaism, which had been around for quite some time by then.

In general, it initially did have much more of an anti-sex emphasis than what had gone immediately before it, though. Much more comprehensive, too. Anti-marriage, even. So there may have been an impact.