It was no coincidence that the ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH liberalized its CANON LAWS in 1980s-----going from only CHURCH HIERARCHY having rights and protections under CANON LAW----to EQUITY OF ALL CHRISTIANS----meaning all 99% of Catholic citizens were recognized as CANON CITIZENS with rights.
REAGAN REPRESENTED FAR-RIGHT OLD WORLD KINGS EXTREME WEALTH EXTREME POVERTY AT SAME TIME VATICAN LAW AND BANKING PRETENDED TO BECOME EGALITARIAN.
This was the point REAL LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVES started shouting against the CORRUPTION of our LEFT DEMOCRATIC political structures. We KNEW what was being called THE CHRISTIAN RIGHT was NOT RELIGIOUS.
This is when the VATICAN BANKING embraced the NEO-LIBERAL CASINO BANKING which hit WALL STREET.
'A reaffirmation of the equality of all Christians: Though still very much a hierarchy — with the pope as supreme head, the bishop as leader of the diocese, and the pastor as leader of the parish — the 1983 Code of Canon Law affirms the union of exercising jurisdiction with the ordained ministry (bishop, priest, and deacon). At the same time, however, the revised code also reiterates Vatican II, Lumen Gentium #32 in canon 208, when it declares the equality of all the Christian faithful by virtue of their Baptism'.
We discuss in detail how global banking 1% opened FREEMASONRY/GREEK society to more and more of our US 99% WE THE PEOPLE leaders who should have been community leaders attending local universities were being channeled into IVY LEAGUES and tied to being MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD PLAYERS. This happened with each religion---PROTESTANT/CATHOLIC/JEWISH here in US.
Hmmmm, REAGAN era began in earnest CONTINUOUS WARS in LATIN AMERICA as well as SOUTHEAST Asia at the same time VATICAN was declaring itself MORE LIBERAL and inclusive.
GLOBAL BANKING 1% OLD WORLD KINGS VIA US FED EXPANDS TAKING ALL OF US LOCAL BANKING AT THIS POINT.
'What we know of the Vatican bank’s role in the Ustashi plunder relies upon survivor accounts as well as a report written by Emerson Bigelow. At this point what we have are allegations, but it would be a unfair to dismiss this matter on the grounds that, to date, evidence is lacking'.
Today's MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD ONE RELIGION has a ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH led by TRANSHUMANISTS like POPE FRANCIS. This article by a JESUIT media outlet PRETENDS this POPE is not far-right global corporate FASCISM like others.
Perhaps because POPE FRANCIS as JESUIT is global 1% TRANSHUMANIST
In All Things
The Vatican Bank scandal nobody is talking about
Eileen P. Flynn July 15, 2015
Among the many challenges confronting Pope Francis as he assumed the papacy was the issue of the Vatican Bank. Francis could have taken the decisive step of closing the Institutes for the Works of Religion, as the bank is officially known, but, instead, he mandated operational reforms. By replacing key administrators and insisting on implementation of policies and procedures required by the European Union in the post-9/11 world, Francis sought to shore up the bank.
KNIGHTS OF MALTA ARE OF COURSE TIED TO PROTECTING THIS INSTITUTES FOR WORKS OF RELIGION
Pope Francis' fix addressed how the bank will operate going forward. However, he left unaddressed some questions from the past which need to be answered: during and after World War II, was the Vatican bank a witting or unwitting accomplice of Nazi collaborators known as Ustashi who made their way from a seminary in Rome to safe havens in South America? Did the Vatican bank profit as a result of payments received from these Nazi collaborators who were known as the Ustashi? If we were to follow the Ustashi money, where would the trail lead?
What we know of the Vatican bank’s role in the Ustashi plunder relies upon survivor accounts as well as a report written by Emerson Bigelow. At this point what we have are allegations, but it would be a unfair to dismiss this matter on the grounds that, to date, evidence is lacking.
Emerson Bigelow worked for the United States Treasury Department and after World War II he conducted investigations in Europe. An aspect of his research entailed looking into the puppet government put in place in Croatia by the Nazis; the name of this government was the Ustashi. Bigelow determined that the Ustashi stole cash, gold and valuables from Orthodox Christian Serbs, Jews and gypsies and then deported them to concentration camps. What happened to the plunder? According to Aarons and Loftus in Unholy Trinity, approximately 200 million Swiss francs made its way to the Vatican bank where some of it was laundered and used to buy counterfeit passports and passage from Europe for Ustashi leaders. What happened to the remaining cash and plundered gold? Historians allege that some of it wound up in the Vatican bank, adding to the church’s wealth.
A key figure in helping the Ustashi was Krunoslav Draganovic (1903-1983), a Croatian priest who was head of the College of San Girolamo in Rome. Men from Croatia who wanted to become priests lived at San Girolamo while studying for ordination; after World War II the college served as a safe house for the Ustashi underground. It is alleged that Draganovic aided Ustashi military and civilian leaders who had been in power in Croatia and committed war crimes. Draganovic’s assistance consisted in obtaining false documents and safe passage out of Italy. Aarons and Loftus write that there are allegations that Draganovic used his Vatican bank connections to launder gold stolen by the Ustashi and that he was paid for his cooperation. Draganovic admitted that in 1945 “he had personally moved 40 kilos of Ustashi gold to Rome, concealed in two packing cases.”
A request made under the Freedom of Information Act resulted in the 1997 release of Bigelow’s report. Criminal conduct described in the report led to the institution of a 1999 lawsuit against the Vatican bank filed by survivors and descendants of the Ustashi. The lawsuit was dismissed in 2009 under terms of the Sovereign Immunities Act. Although the legal case no longer stands, moral questions surrounding the plunder remain.
Ever since allegations concerning the Vatican bank and the Croatian plunder became public, requests have been made to the Vatican to allow access to archival documents from the time of Pope Pius XII. Pius was pope from 1939 until 1958 and, if there is incriminating information, it would be found on documents from his papacy.
Why not request ledgers from the Vatican bank itself? Incredibly, for the first 70 years of its existence, records were destroyed every 10 years and the bank operated under the cloak of super secrecy. So, if cash and gold had been deposited by church insiders acting on behalf of the Ustashi, there would be no record. Whatever data survive the mid-1940s are to be found in documents related to Pope Pius XII. According to Gerald Posner in God’s Bankers, following tradition, documents pertaining to Pope Pius XII could have been made public on March 12, 2014 (75 years after his election as pope); but the date passed without the release of documents.
People around the world believe that Pope Francis operates on the moral high ground and that he stands by the ethics he preaches. It is imperative that he speak out and say that he will do all in his power to shed light on past practices of the Vatican bank, including opening access to the archives. Survivors of the Ustashi are entitled to restitution.
This brings in the early CHRISTIAN religious formation tied to JESUS and DISCIPLES vs JESUS and APOSTLES. We have suggested that those APOSTLES were tied to global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS KNIGHTS OF MALTA TRIBE OF JUDAH rather than to original followers of JESUS.
What was back then KNIGHTS OF MALTA were simply pre-Christian NERO/CATO/SENECA with that PRAETORIAN ARMY.
It is PRE-CHRISTIAN NERO/CATO/SENECA ----those KINGS not tied to religious MORALS AND ETHICS who today represent .00014% of extreme wealth pushing TRANSHUMANISM.
OUR REAL 99% OF CATHOLIC AND JEWISH CITIZENS ARE LIKE ME---THEY KNOW THESE RELIGIONS ARE BEING ATTACKED TO BE ENDED.
As a REAL LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVE who is PROTESTANT ----we take seriously the US stance of FREEDOM OF RELIGION and SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE----meaning we protect Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, Hindi, and Protestant platforms.
Faith and Reason
Why do some Catholics oppose Pope Francis?
Victor Codina, S.J. September 12, 2019
It is neither unusual nor surprising to encounter discord and opposition in the Catholic Church. Such disagreement stretches back from the present day to the time of St. Paul, who stood up to Cephas in Antioch (Gal 2:14).
Opposition was manifest in the first ecumenical councils as well as the last two. At the First Vatican Council (1870), a group of bishops and theologians opposed the proposed definition of papal infallibility. Some did not accept the council and separated from Rome, giving rise to the so-called Old Catholic Church. Others did not leave the church but chose not to participate in or attend the last conciliar vote on infallibility—and some of these were so angry that they threw all the conciliar documents into the Tiber.
A century later (1970), the issue of infallibility arose once more, with theological disputes between the critical voice of Hans Küng and those of Karl Rahner, S.J., Walter Kasper and other more moderate German theologians. The controversy continued between historians critical of Vatican I, such as A. B. Hasler, a disciple of Küng, and more nuanced historians such as Yves Congar, O.P, Joseph Hoffmann and Kasper. Küng was stripped of his license to teach theology in 1979.
In 1950, during Pius XII’s pontificate, when the pope published the encyclical “Humani Generis” against the so-called nouvelle théologie, some Jesuit theologians from Fourvière-Lyon (such as Henri de Lubac, S.J., and Jean Daniélou, S.J.) and some Dominican theologians from Le Saulchoir-Paris (such as Yves Congar, O.P., and Marie-Dominique Chenu, O.P.) were removed from their chairs. A decade later, Pope John XXIII appointed all of them as theological experts at Vatican II.
It is neither unusual nor surprising to encounter discord and opposition in the Catholic Church. Such disagreement stretches back from the present day to the time of St. Paul, who stood up to Cephas in Antioch.
Strong opposition arose there, led by the French bishop Marcel Lefebvre, who rejected Vatican II as neo-modernist and neo-Protestant. When Bishop Lefebvre began to ordain bishops without Roman authorization for his Society of Saint Pius X in 1988, he was excommunicated by John Paul II.
After “Humanae Vitae,” his 1968 encyclical on birth control, Pope Paul VI was challenged respectfully by numerous episcopal conferences. Without denying the value of the encyclical’s contents, they called for greater elaboration and qualification of certain issues.
During the pontificates of John Paul II and Benedict XVI, more than 100 theologians were questioned, reprimanded or silenced [by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith]. Some were dismissed from their academic positions, and one was even excommunicated.
The purpose of this historical preamble is to remove any surprise that today, in the face of the new image of the church proposed by Pope Francis, there are discordant voices and critics who are strongly opposed to his pontificate.
Viewing the shifting winds over the course of time, we can see that the type and orientation of opposition always reflect the historical moment. There are progressive and prophetic voices in periods when classical Christianity or neo-Christianity dominates, and reactionary, fundamentalist and conservative voices in moments of ecclesial reform and attempts to return to evangelical origins and the style of Jesus.
Criticisms of Pope Francis have two dimensions, one theological and the other more socio-political, although there are instances where these dimensions converge.
Criticisms of Francis
At present, there is a strong group opposing Francis’ church: laypeople, theologians, bishops and cardinals who would like him to resign or promptly disappear from the scene while they wait for a new conclave to change the current direction of the church.
I do not want to conduct a socio-historical inquiry here, nor a Western-style television program pitting good against bad, so I prefer not to cite the names of the opponents who are currently skinning Francis alive. Rather, I would like to discuss the theological background to this systematic opposition to Francis in order to understand what the controversy is about.
The criticisms of Francis have two dimensions, one theological and the other more socio-political, although (as we will see later) there are instances where these dimensions converge.
What really bothers the detractors of Pope Francis is that his theology stems from reality: from the reality of injustice, poverty and the destruction of nature, and from the reality of ecclesial clericalism.
POPE FRANCIS IS GLOBAL NEO-LIBERALISM------HE IS NOT JUSTICE, ENVIRONMENTAL, OR PRO-POOR.
The theological critique starts from the conviction that Francis is not a theologian but comes from the Global South, from the end of the world; and that this lack of theological professionalism—in stark contrast to the academic acumen of St. John Paul II and obviously of Pope Benedict XVI—explains what they consider his inaccuracies and even his doctrinal errors.
According to this assessment, Francis’ deficit in theology would explain his dangerous positions on God’s mercy in [his 2015 papal bull] “Misericordiae Vultus,” his philo-communist tendency in support of the poor and popular movements, and his notion of popular piety as a theological locus in [his 2013 apostolic exhortation] “Evangelii Gaudium.” His shortfall in moral theology is displayed in his opening the door to the sacraments of penance and the Eucharist in some cases (after personal and ecclesial discernment) to separated Catholics who have remarried, according to [his 2016 post-synodal apostolic exhortation] “Amoris Laetitia.” His  encyclical “Laudato Si’,”on the care for our common home, shows a lack of scientific and ecological competence. And his excessive emphasis on divine mercy in “Misericordiae Vultus” is scandalous because it lessens the grace and cross of Jesus.
In the face of these accusations, I would like to recall a classic affirmation of St. Thomas Aquinas that distinguishes between the magisterial chair, proper to theologians and professors of universities, and the pastoral chair assigned to bishops and pastors of the church. Cardinal John Henry Newman returned to this tradition by affirming that although there may sometimes be tension between the two chairs, in the end there is convergence between them.
This distinction applies to Francis. Although he had studied and taught pastoral theology at San Miguel de Buenos Aires as Jorge Mario Bergoglio, S.J., now his pronouncements belong to the pastoral seat of the bishop of Rome. He does not aspire to fulfill this role as a theologian but as a pastor. As has been said of him with a certain touch of humor, it is necessary to move on from the Bergoglio of history to the Francis of faith.
What really bothers his detractors is that his theology stems from reality: from the reality of injustice, poverty and the destruction of nature, and from the reality of ecclesial clericalism.
It bothers many that Pope Francis canonized St. Óscar Romero, the martyred Salvadoran archbishop, branded by many as a communist and a useful dupe of the left; his cause had been blocked for years.
It is all right for him to hug children and the sick, but it is definitely upsetting when he visits Lampedusa, and refugee and migrant camps like the one on Lesbos. It bothers people when he says that we should not build walls against refugees but bridges of dialogue and hospitality. He is annoying when, following in the footsteps of Pope John XXIII, he says that the church has to be poor and exist for the poor, that the shepherds have to smell like sheep, that it has to be an outgoing church that reaches out to the peripheries and that the poor are a theological locus, topic or source.
He bothers people when he says that clericalism is the leprosy of the church and when he lists the 14 temptations of the Vatican Curia, which range from the feeling of being indispensable and necessary to the craving for riches to living a double life and suffering from spiritual Alzheimer’s. And he augments the irritation when he adds that these are also the temptations of dioceses, parishes and religious communities. It is annoying to hear that the church should be conceived of as an inverted pyramid, with the laity above and the pope and the bishops below, just as it is annoying to hear him say that the church is polyhedral and above all synodal. This means that we all need to travel the same path together, that we have to listen and dialogue with each other. It is annoying that in [his 2018 apostolic constitution] “Episcopalis Communio,” Francis speaks of the synodal church and of the need to listen to each other.
It bothers some groups that Francis has thanked Gustavo Gutiérrez, O.P., Leonardo Boff, Jon Sobrino, S.J., and José María Castillo, S.J., for their theological contributions and annulled the suspensions a divinis of Miguel d’Escoto, M.M., and Father Ernesto Cardenal; they are bewildered that when Hans Küng wrote to him about the need to rethink infallibility, Francis answered by calling Küng “dear companion” (lieber Mitbruder), saying that he would take Küng’s observations into account and was willing to enter into a dialogue about infallibility. And it bothers many that Francis canonized St. Óscar Romero, the martyred Salvadoran archbishop, branded by many as a communist and a useful dupe of the left; his cause had been blocked for years.
It is annoying that he says “Who am I to judge?” It is annoying that he says the church is feminine and that if women are not listened to, the church will be impoverished and biased.
Francis’ invocation of mercy, a mercy that is at the center of biblical revelation, does not prevent him from speaking of zero tolerance toward the abuse of minors and women by important members of the church, a monstrous crime for which one must ask forgiveness from God and the victims, recognize the complicit and guilty silence of the hierarchy, seek reparations, protect young people and children, and avoid a repetition of the abuse. And his hand does not tremble when he demotes and removes the guilty from their positions, whether they are a cardinal, nuncio, bishop or priest.
Obviously, the problem is not that he is not a theologian but rather that his theology is pastoral. Francis passes from dogma to kerygma, from theoretical principles to pastoral discernment and mystagogy. And his theology is not colonialist but from the Global South, and this bothers the North.
Pope Francis passes from dogma to kerygma, from theoretical principles to pastoral discernment and mystagogy.
Confronting those who accuse Francis of being a third-worldist and a communist, we must affirm that his messages are in perfect continuity with the prophetic biblical tradition and the church’s social teachings. What hurts is his prophetic clairvoyance: He says no to an economy of exclusion and inequality, no to an economy that kills, no to an economy without a human face, no to an unjust social and economic system that locks us into unjust social structures, no to a globalization of indifference, no to the idolatry of money, no to money that governs rather than serves, no to an inequality that engenders violence, no to anyone who tries to hide behind God to justify violence, no to the social insensitivity that anesthetizes us in the face of the suffering of others, no to weapons and the war industry, no to human trafficking, no to any form of provoked death (as seen in “Evangelii Gaudium,” 52-75).
Francis does nothing but update the commandment “Thou shall not kill,” defends the value of human life from beginning to end and repeats in the present day the Lord’s question to Cain: “Where is your brother?”
ARGENTINA IS SCHOOL OF AMERICA------POPE FRANCIS NOW LEADS KNIGHTS OF MALTA------THOU SHALT NOT KILL? REALLY? POPE FRANCIS WORKS FOR GLOBAL MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATIONS TIED TO TIMBER, OIL, HYDROELECTRIC AND MINING.
Also disturbing is Francis’ criticism of the anthropocentric and technocratic paradigm that destroys nature, pollutes the environment, attacks biodiversity and excludes the poor and indigenous from a dignified human life (as seen in “Laudato Si’,” 20-52). It bothers the multinational corporations when he criticizes the timber, oil, hydroelectric and mining companies that destroy the environment, harm the indigenous people of those lands and threaten the future of our common home. Irksome, too, is his criticism of political leaders incapable of taking courageous decisions (“Laudato Si’,” 53-59).
The announcement of the upcoming synod on the Amazon in October 2019, which will amplify the need to protect the environment and save indigenous Amazonian groups from genocide, is already beginning to annoy. Some major church leaders have said that the instrumentumlaboris, or working document for the synod, is heretical and pantheistic and denies the need for salvation in Christ.
Other commentators have focused only on the suggestion of ordaining married indigenous men to celebrate the Eucharist in remote parts of the Amazon but have been totally silent about the prophetic denunciation that this synod working document makes against the extractivist destruction that is being perpetrated in the Amazon, the issue of poverty and exclusion of indigenous peoples who surely have never been as threatened as they are now.
The opposition to Pope Francis is opposition to the Second Vatican Council and to the evangelical reform of the church that Pope John XXIII wanted to promote.
Reforming the church
There is undoubtedly a convergence between theological and social criticisms of Francis, with reactionary ecclesial groups aligning themselves with powerful economic and political groups, especially in the North.
The opposition to Francis is opposition to the Second Vatican Council and to the evangelical reform of the church that Pope John XXIII wanted to promote. Francis belongs to the line of all the prophets who have wanted to reform the church, joining Francis of Assisi, Ignatius of Loyola, Catherine of Siena and Teresa of Jesus, Angelo Roncalli, Dom Hélder Câmara, Dorothy Stang, Pedro Arrupe, Ignacio Ellacuría and the nonagenarian Brazilian bishop emeritus Pedro Casaldáliga.
Francis still has many tasks to complete for an evangelical reform of the church. We do not know what his future trajectory will be, nor what will happen in the next conclave.
Popes come and go, but the Lord Jesus is ever present and animates the church until the end of time. It is the same Jesus who was seen as an eater and drinker, a friend of sinners and prostitutes, the possessed, crazy, seditious and blasphemous. And we believe that the Spirit of the Lord who descended upon the early church at Pentecost never abandons her and will not allow sin to triumph over holiness in the long run.
In the meantime, as Francis always asks, from his first appearance on the balcony of St. Peter’s as bishop of Rome to the present day, let us pray to the Lord for him. Let us pray that he not lose hope and that he may strengthen the faith of his brothers and sisters (see Luke 22:32). And if we cannot pray or we are not believers, let us at least send him our good thoughts and energy (in his words, “me mande buena onda”).
What we think is a REAL early Christian movement with PROPHETS touched by GOD------giving us JESUS as MOSES as MOHAMMAD-----was CORRUPTED by 1000BC OLD WORLD KINGS.
That same corruption is raising its head today now wanting to END WESTERN RELIGIONS replacing them with a NEW CREATION STORY ------called TRANSHUMANISM.
This .00014% of global richest are NOT RELIGIOUS.
This phrase of ROBBING PETER----THE VATICAN TO PAY PAUL----TRIBE OF JUDAH is about to be made OBSOLETE.
TRANSHUMANISTS are indeed using our US UNIVERSITIES tied with DIVINITY SCHOOLS all being hyper-----NEO-LIBERAL NEO-CON to graduate DIVINITY LEADERS who are TRANSHUMANISTS-----ergo, the religious journalism saying there is CHRISTIAN TRANSHUMANIST-----JEWISH TRANSHUMANISTS----MUSLIM TRANSHUMANIST------HINDI/BUDDHIST TRANSHUMANIST.
These are ACADEMIC RELIGIOUS PHILOSOPHY structures -----studying global religions does not make someone RELIGIOUS.
That is basically what is being said below.
'The result of their inquiry has created a crisis of confidence around all academic disciplines that fall under the umbrella of cultural studies, particularly those within the “theoretical humanities.” This crisis arises because not only were the methods and ethics applied in their bogus papers intentionally insufficient, but also the methodology they used for them was consistent. It always began with a conclusion or approach that they believed would flatter the political biases of the reviewers and editors evaluating their submissions and then bent the existing literature to reach those conclusions. This is, in a word, sophistry, and it cannot be trusted'.
This crisis in CULTURAL STUDIES----SOCIAL JUSTICE that once was tied to REAL LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVE MORALS AND ETHICS PHILOSOPHY and
Western religious tenets of SOCIAL JUSTICE has been replaced by this far-right wing extreme wealth and power pushing for TRANSHUMANISM.
CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA represent that transition------corrupting each of 99% of WE THE PEOPLE black, white, and brown-----REAL Jewish, Catholic, Protestant, Muslim religious structures MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD ONE RELIGION---TRANSHUMANISM.
'Rob Peter to pay Paul
Other phrases about:
The proverbs of John Heywood'
When did we start mortgage loan payments which place INTEREST PAYMENT before PRINCIPLE?
Reagan era saw FHA rules change as US FED took control of our Federal agencies as all US banking regulations were being dismantled.
Hmmmm, funny that OBAMA era Federal Student Loan rehabilitation for those lapsed came with all INTEREST PAID first then principle.
We have suggested often that ST PETER and his throne in VATICAN was pre-Christian NERO/CATO/SENECA while ST PAUL was pre-Christian JEWISH convert to CHRISTIANITY who without coincidence traveled into what is today being called the destination of LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL.
ROBBING PETER REFERRED TO CATHOLIC BANKING----TO PAY PAUL REFERRED TO JEWISH BANKING.
Rob Peter to pay Paul
Other phrases about:
The proverbs of John Heywood
What's the meaning of the phrase 'Rob Peter to pay Paul'?
To take from one merely to give to another; to discharge one debt by incurring another.
What's the origin of the phrase 'Rob Peter to pay Paul'?
There's a text, first published in 1661, that purports to explain the origin of this expression - Peter Heylyn's Ecclesia Restaurata:
The lands of Westminster so dilapidated by Bishop Thirlby, that there was almost nothing left to support the dignity; for which good service he had been preferred to the see of Norwich, in the year foregoing. Most of the lands invaded by the great men of the court, the rest laid out for reparation to the church of St Paul - pared almost to the very quick in those days of rapine. From hence first came that significant by-word (as is said by some) of robbing Peter to pay Paul.
A 350 year-old text claiming to explain the origin of a phrase is usually almost as good as a smoking gun for etymologists. Regrettably, Heylyn's understanding was flawed; the phrase was known long before 1661 and even before the birth of the 16th century cleric Thomas Thirlby. The ecclesiastical tome Jacob's well: an English treatise on the cleansing of man's conscience, circa 1450, includes the phrase in it's original form:
To robbe Petyr & geve it Poule, it were non almesse but gret synne.
The expression may be even earlier than 1450. John Wyclif's Selected English Works contains this text:
Lord, hou schulde God approve that you robbe Petur and gif is robbere to Poule in ye name of Crist?
There is however, some dispute as to the date of the above. It is reprinted in a Victorian book but the original is now lost. If it does indeed arise from Wyclif the date would be 1380. Others have speculated that a more realistic date is around 1500.
The expression was well enough established in English for it to have been considered proverbial by John Heywood when he published A dialogue conteinyng the nomber in effect of all the prouerbes in the Englishe tongue in 1546:
Rob Peter and pay Paul: thou sayest I do;
But thou robbest and poulst Peter and Paul too
The phrase was also in use in other European countries and was known in France by at least 1611, when Cotgrave produced A Dictionarie of the French and English Tongues:
Découvrir Saint Pierre pour couvrir Saint Paul [Strip Peter to clothe Paul]
Rob Peter to pay PaulThe precise date is not the only aspect of this phrase that is somewhat uncertain. Scholars also disagree as to the thinking of whoever coined it. Given that any two names would work in a 'rob X to pay Y' proverb, why choose Peter and Paul? It has been suggested that the primary reason for Peter and Paul is the alliteration, that is, the same reason that Jack was paired with Jill when they went up the hill. That may well be part of the story, but there's surely more to it. The similarities between Saint Peter and Saint Paul go deeper than their sharing of the letter P.
The expression was coined at a time when almost all English people were Christian and they would have been well used to hearing Peter and Paul paired together. They were both apostles of Christ, both martyred in Rome and shared the Feast Day on 29th June. This commemoration now passes by with little mention, but not so in medieval England. The essence of the meaning of 'rob Peter to pay Paul' is the pointlessness of taking from one only to give to another who was similar. There are many churches of Saint Peter and Saint Paul in England and throughout Europe. It may not be the case that, as Peter Heylyn asserted, that the phrase arose from the borrowing of money from one church to fund another, but from the familiarity of the notion of Peter and Paul being alike and inseparable.
We shared earlier this week what we see as a REVISIONIST HISTORY of human migration tied to LOST TRIBES -------EMPIRE OF ISRAEL brought about by attacks from ASSYRIANS -----captured and moved east into what is now Middle and Far East. We can believe 1000BC did see those TRIBES OF ISRAEL sacked and looted and captured ---what we think about is this:
They had no exposure to modern PROPHETS as JESUS--they were MOSAIC LAW---TORAH. ST PAUL as a JEWISH turned CHRISTIAN apostle would in his travels have MET with these LOST TRIBES maybe seeing that tie to OLD MOSAIC law among LOST TRIBES living abroad.
THE IDEA OF MIGRATION OF LOST TRIBES NORTH AND EAST IS NOT THE PROBLEM. LOST TRIBES IN EUROPE AND UK ----OF COURSE. DO THEY REPRESENT ALL OF WHAT WAS NORTHERN VIKING/ANGLO-SAXON MIGRATION-----MAYBE NOT.
What we do KNOW is the migration of what are now called NATIVE AMERICANS happened 14,000 years ago------LOST TRIBES started their migration in 1000BC.
LOST TRIBES CANNOT BE------NATIVE AMERICANS----WHETHER LATINO OR NORTHERN AMERICAN.
'Many have speculated and wondered what happened to the other 10 Tribes of Israel in the Bible. It has been often speculated that the 10 tribes have been destroyed, or are in the “Spirit,” are of so-called African-American descent, or of so-called indigenous decent. After careful research and diligentstudy within the scriptures and history,we have concluded that the 10 Lost Tribes of Israel are of so-called Latino/Chicano and Indian descent.
First,we must remember that the Tribes of Israel weredoomed to be cursed for disobedience (DeuteronomyChapter 28).
While some have concluded that these curses applied to the so-called African-Americans only, historically and prophetically, we have found that the history of the so-called Latinos and Indians are indeed a part of the curses from our Father. We have a kindred spirit, history, and legacy that cannot be ignored. Utilizing the Bible, historical references and geography,we will attempt to prove that the so-called Latinos and Native Americans of indigenous decent are indeed part of the 12 Lost Tribes of Israel'
IT'S ALL TRANSHUMANISM promoted by global 1% .000014% of people.
Whether our US 99% of WE THE AFRICAN AMERICANS are AME----ISLAM----JEWISH -------none of them are NATIVE AMERICANS or tied to TRIBE OF ISRAEL through THIS MIGRATION.
'First Americans Lived on Bering Land Bridge for Thousands of ...
Genetic evidence supports a theory that ancestors of Native Americans lived for 15,000 years on the Bering Land Bridge between Asia and North America until the last ice age ended. Escape to America The last ice age ended and the land bridge began to disappear beneath the sea, some 13,000 years ago.
The Bering Land Bridge and the First Americans - SAPIENS
Searching for the Origins of the First Americans. Geneticists believe that the split into northern and southern branches took place about 13,000 years ago. At some point between these two splits (between 23,000 and 13,000 years ago), people on the land bridge moved into Alaska'.
'Black Hebrew Israelites - Wikipedia
Black Hebrew Israelites are groups of Black Americans who believe that they are the descendants of the ancient Israelites. To varying degrees, Black Hebrews adhere to the religious beliefs and practices of both Christianity and Judaism. With the exception of a small number of individuals who have formally converted to Judaism, they are not recognized as Jews by the greater Jewish community. Many choose to identify as Hebrew Israelites or Black Hebrews rather than Jews in order to indicate their '
Here we see REAL JEWISH citizens questioning or denying a BLACK ISRAELITE tie to being Jewish.
It is easy to see the CORRUPTION of all Western religions via what is MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD ONE RELIGION pushed by .00014% of global richest-----to end these religions and replace with TRANSHUMANISM.
African Hebrew Israelites
American black community finds spiritual home in the Negev.
By Ahmadiel Ben Yehuda
Jews and the African Slave TradeFAQ
My Jewish Learning is a not-for-profit and relies on your help
African Hebrew Israelites, often referred to as Black Hebrews, are the largest organized group of African-American expatriates living anywhere in the world. The African Hebrew Israelites are the followers of Ben Ammi Ben Israel, who they believe received a vision in 1966 in which he was directed to return African-American descendants of the ancient Israelites to the Promised Land, and to establish the long-awaited Kingdom of God on earth.
By 1967, Ben Ammi convinced approximately 400 African-Americans (largely from Chicago) to leave, America (known as the “Lands of the Great Captivity”), and travel to Israel. The first group of “returnees” arrived in Israel in 1969, after a brief sojourn in the wilderness of Liberia.
The movement can be understood in the context of the “great awakening” to historical roots and cultural identity that African-Americans underwent in the 1960s. The Hebrew Israelites maintain their return was not just to their ancestral homeland of Israel (which they consider northeastern Africa), but to a way of life that would testify to the power of God.
While only approximately 3,000 saints (as they call themselves) reside in Israel, thousands live across the US, Caribbean, Europe and Africa and identify with the community, living according to their doctrinal tenets.
Organizing in Israel
On arrival in Israel in 1969, the African Hebrew Israelites were given temporary visas and assigned to Dimona, an economically-depressed development town in Israel’s Negev region. The initial welcoming proved short-lived, as a change in Israel’s Law of Return less than a year later cast the community into a legal limbo. At first the members did not have work visas, but were not deported by the government. Beginning in the early 1990s, African Hebrew Israelites were given temporary resident status, and the community members received permanent residency in 2003. The Israeli government now allows African Hebrew Israelites to pursue citizenship of Israel. The first African Hebrew Israelite received Israeli citizenship in 2009, and more Hebrews have become citizens since then.
Meanwhile, faced with overcrowded conditions, no access to schools or health care, and the constant threat of deportation, the Hebrew Israelites were challenged to develop institutions that addressed their basic needs. They developed a biblically-based system of communal living and sharing, called All in Common, which drove the economy. They also founded, Bayt Safer Akvah (Brotherhood School), a community-run school under the auspices of Israel’s Ministry of Education.
In 1980 an abandoned absorption center for 1970s-era immigrants was given to the community by Jacques Amir, a sympathetic mayor. Renovated by the members, the site provided a brief respite from massive overcrowding. Later proclaimed the Village of Peace, it is now a destination for hundreds of tourists each week.
Community services include a general store, guest house, health spa, dance studio, communal dining area and sewing center, all staffed and maintained by community members. They produce a line of soy and vegan food products that are marketed throughout Israel and operate a global chain of vegan restaurants in cities such as Atlanta, Chicago, Washington DC, St. Louis, and Los Angeles, as well as Acre and Cape Coast (Ghana).
Spiritual and Social Life
Some have mistakenly reported that the African Hebrew Israelites claim to be descendents of the 10 lost tribes. The community actually considers itself the descendants of the tribe of Judah, as they spiritually identify with Judah’s role as the “gatherer” of the other tribes. (King David was from the tribe of Judah.) The community’s vision invokes Israel’s prophetic mandate to be a “light unto the nations.” The Hebrews take this charge seriously, incorporating a respect for what they see as the “sacred Truth” into every aspect of their culture.
The Hebrews maintain a firm distinction between religion on the one hand, and spirituality on the other. The former is frowned upon, and seen as the root of many evils in the world today. “The true worship of God is an entire way of life, a continuous action, from the meal you eat in the morning, to the job you work on,” wrote Ben Ammi in God the Black Man and Truth. “It encompasses your every deed and thought pattern.”
The Holy Council–12 men known as princes, chaired by Ben Ammi–constitutes the group’s spiritual leadership. Twelve ministers oversee the daily affairs and operations of the community. A third tier of governance, Crowned Brothers and Sisters, oversees the daily affairs of the adult community. The community’s vibrant cultural dress–all bordered with fringes and “cords of blue”, like a tallit–is unmistakable.
Polygyny, the practice of having more than one wife at a time, was practiced among Hebrew Israelites until 1990. The community defended this practice because it accorded with biblical tradition and also because of the community’s unique demographic conditions. Significantly more women traveled to Israel in the first wave of aliyah, and the community valued marriage and companionship, even if it meant one man having multiple wives.
In addition to keeping the Holy Days prescribed in the Bible, the Hebrews have incorporated a New World Passover into their calendar, which commemorates their exodus from the United States in 1967. Each May, hundreds of international guests join in two full days of feasting, music and family-oriented fun. Shavuot (Feast of Weeks) observances feature the annual “Dance for the Land” featuring an elaborate display of sound and motion celebrating their joy at being back in their ancestral land.
The Prophetic Priesthood, the body of men responsible for administering spiritual needs of the community also read psalms to women during pregnancy and labor, counsel couples considering marriage, officiate weddings, conduct Sabbath services, and perform circumcisions on the male children. Fasting, for all older than 13 years old, is part of the community’s mandatory Sabbath observance, and considered part of their holistic approach to health.
Health and Wellness
It is here, in the arena of preventive health, that the African Hebrew Israelites have scored, perhaps, their most impressive success. They have virtually eradicated high blood pressure, diabetes, cancer, heart disease, and obesity from their community. Indeed there have been no deaths in the community attributable to these diseases, which in the US disproportionally impact African-Americans.
Members of the community are vegans. Tobacco, drugs, and alcoholic beverages aside from naturally fermented wines are avoided. Regular exercise (three times weekly) is mandatory for all adults, as is a monthly massage. No-salt days, sugarless weeks, and live food weeks dot their calendar. According to the community’s belief system, the choice of relationships, clothing, and music all matter where health is concerned, and every effort is made to create an environment conducive to healing. This consciousness is woven into the lifestyle, resulting in an admired comprehensive health literacy. In 2006, Ghana’s Ministry of Health summoned a team from Dimona to assist in the development of a health and nutrition program crucial to that West African country.
Working for Peace on Many Fronts
The Hebrews also participate in civic activities of the State of Israel. Since 2004, more than 125 of their youth have served in the Israel Defense Forces. Defending their homeland is viewed as a moral obligation, and other members of the community reach out to the neighboring Arab population. By virtue of their experience in overcoming prejudice, the group considers itself uniquely positioned to mediate disputes where ethnicity and other differences are at the root of social strife. A conflict resolution center, the Dr. Martin Luther King/SCLC (Southern Christian Leadership Conference)-Ben Ammi Center for a New Humanity, opened in 2005.
Israel’s Foreign Ministry considers the community a corps of goodwill ambassadors. They are particularly active throughout Africa. Today, the frictions that once characterized the community’s relationship with the Israeli government and with
ultra-Orthodox parties, who denied the community members were Jewish, are a distant memory.
Times may not have always been rosy for the community, but along the way, public praises have poured forth: the U.S. Congressional Human Rights Caucus recognized them as a “miracle in the desert,” and the Foreign Ministry’s website calls them “a phenomenon in a land of phenomena.”
Their struggle for acceptance behind them, the African Hebrews continue to look at the challenges ahead. “Ever onward and upward,” says Prince Rockameem, 74, one of the founding pioneers. “If you’re coasting, you’re going downhill!”