The Pope

[Dave B]

I have to confess that I start to progressively loose interest in Christianity after 450AD. And I suspect later manifestations of ‘communist’ ideologies, as with that Pope Urban thing, as being theological extortion, blackmail and proto indulgencies. It is difficult to work out the socio economic base for crypto and pseudo celibacy. It is also a Buddhist monk thing and I think there was a personal memoir work by some probably Christian missionary type doctor, but seemingly honest, in Tibet in the 19thcentury who observed the prevalence of syphilis in the monks. Apparently they claimed it was a disease contracted from sitting on ‘wet grass’. He was more inclined to believe, in his anthropological studies, the stories he had heard from the prostitutes in the small town next to the monastery. Much is made about misogyny, and homophobia, re Christianity a lot of which comes from Paul and to forgive him, which I am disinclined to do, that was probably part of the more general cultural milieu. I think that makes how women are portrayed ‘positively’ in the gospel material all the more exceptional. And if you read between the perhaps lines  of a hostile highy critical reporter; the 'free love' stuff as below is even more historically revolutionary.The same 'accusation' , denied, was made against the levellers/diggers. I had forgotten about these people; it is another one. "The ideas of Mine and Thine crept in through the laws which cause the earth, money, and even marriage no longer to bring forth fruit of common use. For God made vines for all to use in common, since they do not refuse the sparrow or the thief; and similarly wheat and other fruits. But outlawed sharing and the vestiges of equality generated the thief of domestic animals and fruits.For man God made all things to be common property. He brought the female to be with the male in common and in the same way united all the animals. He thus showed rightousnessto be a universal sharing along with equality. But those who have been born in this way have denied the sharing which is the corollary of their origin and say Let him who has taken one woman keep her, whereas all can share her, just as the other animals show us. With view to the permanence of the race, he has implanted in males a strong and ardent desire which neither law nor custom nor any other restraint is able to destroy. For it is God´s decree……"  http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/epiphanes.html    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpocrates  That ‘Mine and Thine’ thing just keeps cropping up everywhere in early Christianity through to the Taborites; so much so I have forgotten who said it first. The diggers also cropped up in a making history programme this week as well, they have dug some up in London whilst making a tunnel or something."Lost from history until the 'leftist' historians expressed an interst in them in the late 19th century". Eg Bernstien and Kautsky  that we did here last week. I accidentally landed on an old Taborite 'socialism or your money' back post of yours when googling it! On Homophobia. It probably sounds a bit weird for a Marxist to say that there is strange stuff in the gospels but when I first read it fairly late in life, and after a reasonable grounding in literary allegory, philosophical concepts, psychoanalysis/Jung, Buddhism I did think it had a kind of interconnected flow to it. I still believe that when I read it I sort of had made the same interpretation of it as Feuerbach did if that doesn’t sound too pompous. One of the weirdest passages was on the eunuch thing; I mean of all the things to discuss as regards the nature of the world why have something about eunuchs and its relevance to ‘working class’ Judean society? There was a another radio 4 ‘In Our Time’ programme last week I think on ‘eunuchs’, there were none that had any impact on the social and economic concerns of the backward peasant and artisan society that JC was mingling with. At that period they were very expensive ‘bling’ slaves in the very upper echelons of Roman society. It is speculative admittedly but I don’t think it going too far to say analysing the text that JC was expressing a tolerance to homosexuality which would have a liberalism gone too far later.  Now I am really rambling and moderator will appear soon like the holy ghost.

[alanjjohnstone]

We all have our favourite quotes from non-sociialists. One of mine is from an Archbishop from Brasil and you'll be familiar with it, too.“When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist.”  – Dom Helder Camara 

[ALB]

Dave B wrote:

Re; that early Christians were ‘proto Marxists’, as Bart Erhman briefly ‘considered’ in one of his best selling books.

The earliest christians were clearly proto Jehovah's Witnesses who wanted to have nothing to do with then existing society and were waiting for the end of the world in their lifetime.

[alanjjohnstone]

I think there is a well respected school of thought that considers Jesus himself to be part of the Jewish eschatological movement perhaps begun by John the Baptist, perhaps inspired by the Essenes but the End of the World was most definitely viewed as imminent …An echo of many feelings today?Would we have more success if we concentrated our message and mission upon saving the world…redeeming the soulless, giving new heart to the heartless"Socialists…the prophets against profits"……"Omnia Sunt Communia"…sounds good as a mantra chant No-more "comrade" but "brothers" and "sisters"…Printers union branches were "chapels" and branch secretaries "Fathers of the chapel"…Edinburgh Br already meets monthly in the Quakers meeting rooms…so no need even to re-locate But i jest….Or do i? 

[Dave B]

There is some stuff on the ‘communist’ Essenes i think from Philo via the Christian Eusebius below. CHAPTER XI [PHILO] 'And their mode of life is an evidence of this liberty: none ventures to acquire any private property at all, no house, nor slave, nor farm, nor cattle, nor any of the other things which procure or minister to wealth; but they deposit them all in public together, and enjoy the benefit of all in common. 'And they who live together and share the same table are content with the same things every day, being lovers of frugality, and abhorring prodigality as a disease of soul and body.'Not only have they a common table, but also common raiment: for there are set out in winter thick cloaks, and in summer cheap tunics, so that any one who will may easily take'whichever he likes, since what belongs to one is considered to belong to all, and the property of all to be on the other hand the property of each one.http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/eusebius_pe_08_book8.htm#13 I think it is big mistake to assume that the ‘early Christians’ say AD50?-200 were in  anyway a ‘monolithic’ religion as they had many radically different fundamental positions. A point that Bart Erhman makes; I am not a slavish fan of his by any means but he is a good place to start with. He makes that point totally convincingly against the more common position taken by modern Christians. The imminent end of the world thing depended on the JC prophesy Matthew 24;34  thing about the end of the world happening before all the people now living are dead. Repeated in Mark and Luke. The date had clearly passed by say 70-130AD?.It is 'of this generation' in the grreek which was generally accepted as 40 years; something that has been poured over in great forensic detailAlthough modern Christians tend to avoid that part like the plague despite what should be the obvious implications as to the approximate date before which the text was written.I myself suspect that in fact that paragraph may have been later just dropped down the page a bit, perhaps deliberately to include a time frame for the second coming and keep moral up?[that would also resolve another major internal pardox in the text.]Then the ‘prophesy’ would have just been that within 40 years or so things were going kick off ie a Jewish revolt and the Romans in standard fashion would do what they always did smash the place up and destroy temples etc. Not much of a prophesy really given the socio economic tensions etc.The gnostics who were another major currernt in early christianity had a completely different world view. 

[alanjjohnstone]

Somebody else asking if the Pope is a commie at hearthttp://dissidentvoice.org/2015/03/marxist-praxis-catholic-solidarity-and-human-dignity/

[alanjjohnstone]

A third of catholics  would go green if the Pope instructed http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/a-third-of-catholics-would-go-green-if-pope-francis-makes-statement-on-climate-change-10222800.htmlSad in a way that so many require a religious edict to do the obvious. But to relate to the Rssell Brand thread on celebrity endorsement I wonder what would happen if the Pope suggested his "flock" join the SPGB All those Forms 'A' being rejected….

[Dave B]

I think the catholic church after it entered into the ‘marble halls of power’ after about 500AD say, revised its former ideological base in the same way as Bolshevik ‘communism’ did.Eg from non other than Uncle Joe in 1906; Where there are no classes, where there are neither rich nor poor, there is no need for a state, there is no need either for political power, which oppresses the poor and protects the rich. Consequently, in socialist society there will be no need for the existence of political power.http://www.marx2mao.com/Stalin/AS07.html#c3 Thus to criticise Christianity just in terms of its later revised historical form is like criticising communism and ‘Marxism’ in terms of the form it took under Stalin and the Bolsheviks in general. Which is what most Christians still do. I think it is clear (for what it matters) from nearly all the early Christian material that the Pope’s so called crypto Marxists position is in fact very close to the early Christian ideological position. And thus he is returning to and rediscovering that position which originated, in a very materialist way, out of an economic and political reaction by the poor and dispossessed to the oppression of the ruling class. By over emphasising the metaphysical content of early Christianity one fails to see the wood for the trees and economic base/superstructure, I think. And actually early Christianity ideology was, for its time, very materialistic in terms of its political and economic focus rooted in a class analysis. One of the most authentic early Christian documents is the Epistle of Barnabas. It can be precisely dated from internal incidental dating material to circa 130AD. As well as being referenced to and thus reliably provenanced by several 2ndcentury documents. Fairly early on it rejects the economic status quo and power relationships; you could argue that this is just a matter of another political group being in power and we are not etc, as in retrospect the Bolsheviks. The ‘personification’ of the power of the ruling class as 'Satanic', whilst for these guys taken literally. isn’t I think politically that different, once one ‘abstracts’ it, from even Karl’s analysis of capitalism which ‘vampire like’ sucks the blood of the working class.Thus; ….Since, therefore, the days are evil, and Satan possesses the power of this world…. Then a bit later we have a more proactive interesting analysis? ….untie the fastenings of harsh agreements, restore to liberty them that are bruised, tear in pieces every unjust engagement, feed the hungry with thy bread, clothe the naked when thou seest him, bring the homeless into thy house, not despise the humble if thou behold him..  The attack on; ‘harsh agreements’ and ‘unjust engagements’ I think looks like a rejection of the exploitative economic relations of the time? And following from the economic context? ………. that we should not rush forward as rash acceptors of their laws… And; …..Do not, by retiring apart, live a solitary life, as if you were already [fully] justified; but coming together in one place, make common inquiry concerning what tends to your general welfare…  ……….to such men as know not how to procure food for themselves by labour and sweat, but seize on that of others in their iniquity, and although wearing an aspect of simplicity, are on the watch to plunder others………..  ……..Thou shalt communicate [share] in all things with thy neighbour; thou shalt not call things thine own; for if ye are partakers in common of things which are incorruptible, how much more [should you be] of those things which are corruptible… It is interesting how these Christian translators hate to use the ‘share’ interpretation of this ‘communicate’ word, the dual meaning in Greek itself being interesting I think. …. who turn away him that is in want, who oppress the afflicted, who are advocates of the rich, who are unjust judges of the poor, and who are in every respect transgressors… Do we care? Well maybe not but perhaps early Christianity is closer to the ‘Marxist political heritage’ than modern Christianity is?

[alanjjohnstone]

The rise of Christianity and the power of the Vatican and the enforced celibacy of the priesthood :-

Quote:

"…It began in AD 313, when the Roman emperor Constantine legalized Christianity within the Roman Empire. With his legislation, the early Church evolved from a persecuted group of small communities to become the official faith of a world power under Emperor Theodosius in AD 380.Constantine’s intentions in adopting Christianity were not entirely spiritual. His position was being challenged by political groups; he needed to display his power. Forcing other politicians to become Christians was a test of their loyalty.Constantine used the new religion as an effective tool to weed out his enemies. It strengthened his political power. Constantine also was faced with unifying the many peoples his armies had vanquished. Christianity was the key to establishing a new Roman identity in the conquered peoples. On the surface he made them Christians to save their souls, but this new religion was his final act of conquest over them.With Christianity now the official religion of the Roman Empire, many things changed very quickly in the Church. Priests from the small communities were given special social rank among their new Roman friends. They no longer had to hide from Roman soldiers and fear for their lives. Instead, they received pay for their services as priests and enjoyed special privileges in Roman society. Bishops were given civil authority and assigned jurisdiction over the people in their area. Romans, who were members of the local ruling elite, quickly converted to Christianity as ordered by the Emperor. These were men trained in public life and skilled in city politics. They became priests and rapidly moved into positions of leadership in the Church.These Roman politicians, with their newly acquired priesthood, brought the impersonal and legalistic attitudes of government to the Church. The celebration of the Eucharist moved from small home gatherings to what we now call "mass" involving huge numbers of people in large buildings. The celebration of the Eucharist became a highly structured ritual that imitated the ceremonies of Rome’s imperial court. This Roman influence is the source of our vestments, genuflection, kneeling, and the strict formality of Mass.An institutional Church structure emerged mirroring that of the Roman government. Large buildings, church tribunal courts, rulers and subjects began to replace the family-based small communities that were served by a local married priesthood. The new Roman priests worked to shift authority away from the married priests in the small communities and consolidate political power around themselves. With the assistance of the Roman Empire, Church leadership became a hierarchy that moved away from its family origins and into the Roman mindset of a ruling class that was above the people in the street. Other changes occurred that shifted emphasis away from the people and towards the preferences of the Roman politicians. The Church adopted the Roman practice of men alone holding institutional authority. There is solid historical evidence that women served as priests and pastors prior to this time…"Later on in the early Middle Ages :-"…In this growing atmosphere of power and legalism, certain medieval popes abused their authority. In the year 1075, Pope Gregory VII declared that nobody could judge a pope except God. Introducing the concept of infallibility, he was the first pope to decree that Rome can never be in error. He had statues made in his likeness and placed them in churches throughout Europe. He insisted that everyone must obey the pope, and that all popes are saints by virtue of their association with St. Peter. The hierarchy viewed married priests as an obstacle to their quest for total control of the church and focused a two pronged attack against them. They used mandatory celibacy to attack and dissolve the influential priestly families throughout Europe and the Mediterranean world. At the same time they claimed ownership of the churches and the lands owned by married priests. As landowners the medieval hierarchy knew that they would gain the political power they sought in every country in Europe. An additional benefit of land ownership was money. They now had the ability to collect taxes from the faithful and charge money for indulgences and other sacramental ministry. This practice contributed to the Protestant reformation and the splintering of the Roman Catholic church community in the sixteenth century. In the eleventh century, the attacks against the married priesthood grew in intensity.In 1074, Pope Gregory VII legislated that anyone to be ordained must first pledge celibacy. Continuing his attack against women, he publicly stated that "…the Church cannot escape from the clutches of the laity unless priests first escape the clutches of their wives". Within twenty years, things took a turn for the worse. In the year 1095, there was an escalation of brutal force against married priests and their families. Pope Urban II ordered that married priests who ignored the celibacy laws be imprisoned for the good of their souls. He had the wives and children of those married priests sold into slavery, and the money went to church coffers. The effort to consolidate church power in the medieval hierarchy and to seize the land assets the married priest families saw its victory in 1139. The legislation that effectively ended optional celibacy for priests came from the Second Lateran Council under Pope Innocent II. The true motivation for these laws was the desire to acquire land throughout Europe and strengthen the papal power base. The laws demanding mandatory celibacy for priests used the language of purity and holiness, but their true intent was to solidify control over the lower clergy and eliminate any challenge to the political objectives of the medieval hierarchy…(my emphasis) "

The above was from my personal blog but the links are broken so i cannot cite the original source. 

[Anonymous]

These days, the Catholic Church I consider the best of the Christian bunch. I consider the evangelicals to be the worst. The Halo Halo! column in the Standard is great!

[Anonymous]

John Oswald wrote:

These days, the Catholic Church I consider the best of the Christian bunch. I consider the evangelicals to be the worst. The Halo Halo! column in the Standard is great!

 Both are birds from the same nest, and from the same egg. This new Pope is only a chameleon, and a new salesman of the Roman multi-national corporation, trying to get new clienteles, or to get back the ones that they have lost, in order to produce more profitsNow he is trying to declare as a saint a criminal known as Fray Junipero Sierras, a new piggy bank, because they know that within a few years the catholic membership is going to increase in the US

[Dave B]

The "industry of death" exists in the world as many people in power live off war, Pope Francis told Italian schoolkids in the Vatican on Monday.“Many powerful people don't want peace because they live off war,"the Pontiff said as he met with pupils from Rome’s primary schools in the Nervi Audience Hall.Talking to children during the audience organized by the Peace Factory Foundation, he explained that every war has the arms industry behind it."This is serious. Some powerful people make their living with the production of arms and sell them to one country for them to use against another country,”the Pope was cited by AGI news agency as saying.The head of the Catholic Church labeled the arms trade “the industry of death, the greed that harms us all, the desire to have more money."“The economic system orbits around money and not men, women,”he told 7,000 kids present at the audience.Despite the fact that wars “lose lives, health, education,” they are being waged to defend money and make even more profit, the Pope said.“The devil enters through greed and this is why they don't want peace,"78-year-old Francis said."There can be no peace without justice,"the Pope said and asked the children to repeat those words out loud three times.http://rt.com/news/257545-pope-francis-war-arms/  Are we being eclipsed by Essex boy comedians and Argentinean Catholics?

[Anonymous]

 I might call it hypocrisyThe Vatican Bank is one of the largest shareholder of the arm manufacturer known as Pietro Beretta. They are against family planning, and the use of condoms, but they have investment in  the same industry, and in the manufacturing of Viagra. There is a  large investigation on the Vatican due to their connection with the new Italian mafia and child prostitution and drug dealing. around the world The Vatican receive large profits from many Italian companies, and the Italian government is planning to include drugs and prostitution  as part of their GDP  

[alanjjohnstone]

Pope Francis the Pacifist Peace-makerMany conflicts across the planet amount to “a kind of Third World War being fought piecemeal and, in the context of global communications, we sense an atmosphere of war,” the pontiff said “Some wish to incite and foment this atmosphere deliberately,” he added, attacking those who want to foster division for political ends or profit from war through arms dealing. But war means children, women and the elderly in refugee camps; it means forced displacement, destroyed houses, streets and factories: above all countless shattered lives."http://rt.com/news/265486-pope-francis-sarajevo-bosnia/

[Anonymous]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Pope Francis the Pacifist Peace-makerMany conflicts across the planet amount to “a kind of Third World War being fought piecemeal and, in the context of global communications, we sense an atmosphere of war,” the pontiff said “Some wish to incite and foment this atmosphere deliberately,” he added, attacking those who want to foster division for political ends or profit from war through arms dealing. But war means children, women and the elderly in refugee camps; it means forced displacement, destroyed houses, streets and factories: above all countless shattered lives."http://rt.com/news/265486-pope-francis-sarajevo-bosnia/

 Pure hypocrisy, they have large investment in one of the biggest  Italian manufacturers and exporter of armaments known as Piero Beretta. He is only a chameleon

[Author]

Posts