| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"words of truth" |
| Date: |
06 Nov 2005 04:23:27 PM |
| Object: |
Why Europe Needs Exorcism |
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8898
The Exorcism of Europe
By George Neumayr
Published 10/18/2005 12:08:38 AM
Writing in Newsweek International, Barbie Nadeau scoffs at the
Vatican's preservation of its exorcism rite. But judging by the rise of
demonic cults cited in the article -- "Interest in satanic worship has
risen sharply across Europe recently; there are 5,000 Italians involved
in 650 active satanic cults in the country, more than double the number
a decade ago" -- the Church's exorcism rite is needed more than ever.
If enlightened Europe scoffs at Vatican exorcisms, it is not because
Europeans deny the existence of Satan; it is because they don't want to
fight him.
The Exorcism of Emily Rose, released in Europe in early October,
occasioned Nadeau's article. The movie is based on a European legal
case from the 1970s involving Anneliese Michel, a twentyish German
woman, now something of a folk hero, who died after months of
exorcisms.
The wholly secularized German legal authorities blamed her death on
benighted exorcists and her reactionary Catholic parents, who
considered post-Vatican II liberalism to be scandalous and stupid.
(According to media accounts, Anneliese agreed with them. Before her
possession began, she was doing penance for the progressive creeps
rapidly filling up the Church in Germany.) If she had only been left to
the ministrations of science and medicine, her death would never have
happened, went the German court's reasoning, and the exorcists and
parents were convicted of criminal negligence. The court declared
Anneliese, who had requested the exorcists after medicine failed to
help her, the victim of "Doctrinaire Induction."
The verdict illustrated secular Europe's morbid hostility to religious
freedom and Germany's fanatical attempts to uphold a secularist culture
that blocks out any acknowledgement of the spiritual realm. Most
Germans now, including most Protestants and a third of Catholics, don't
believe in life after death. And it is an open question how many
Catholic bishops in Germany believe in life after death. The faithless
cowards who populate much of the German episcopate offered zero help
during Anneliese Michel's trial; worried that they would appear
insufficiently progressive, they made sure to distance themselves from
the Church's teaching on Satan and exorcism.
In Hollywood's very loose but effective adaptation of the Michel trial
(the movie transfers the setting to the American Midwest and restricts
the criminal prosecution to the exorcist), this theme of Church
cowardice is commendably taken up. The movie makes it clear that the
typical modern bishop would rather maintain the good opinion of the
secular world than defend the Church's doctrine on Satan. In the movie,
consequently, that Emily Rose's edifying story gets told at all is not
because of the local bishop but in spite of him. The archdiocese is
content to let the honorable exorcist rot in jail because he refuses to
agree to the pinched, cowardly defense its lawyers prescribed for him,
a defense which would forbid him from talking about the reality of
Satan and the Church's powers of exorcism.
In the Michel trial, the German bishops actually used its outcome to
call on the Vatican to rewrite the exorcism ritual so that it would
incorporate all the proper secularist assumptions. The number of
exorcists in Germany can be counted on one hand, thanks to a Catholic
episcopate there that is now far, far to the left of Germany's historic
liberal Protestant reformers. The Vatican has rightly refused all these
calls, which upsets the glib jackasses at Newsweek who consider satanic
possession to be a punchline to a joke.
But while Newsweek mocks the ancient practice of exorcism, at least a
few people in Hollywood realize that the only successful movies about
Catholicism are the ones that take ancient traditions like it
seriously. While modern church "reforms" are good fodder for comedy,
they can't command the attention of an audience for a drama. In The
Godfather and The Exorcist, and now in The Exorcism of Emily Rose,
Hollywood recognizes that in order to rivet audiences it has to draw
upon ancient traditions of the Church, which contain cultural power
because they derive from a comprehension of the reality of evil rather
than the liberal fatuousness upon which modern "reform" is based.
Europe, according to Newsweek, is too enlightened for the Vatican's
exorcisms. But it is not too enlightened to host a growing number of
demonic cults. The Devil's greatest triumph, it is said, was to
convince man that he doesn't exist. But this saying needs revision.
Europe displays an even greater triumph for the Devil -- not ignorance
of his designs but respect for them.
George Neumayr is executive editor of The American Spectator.
.
|
|
| User: "Therion Ware" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Europe Needs Exorcism |
16 Nov 2005 10:55:39 AM |
|
|
On 6 Nov 2005 08:23:27 -0800 in alt.atheism, words of truth ("words
of truth" <wordsoftruth@hoshmail.com>) said, directing the reply to
alt.atheism
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8898
The Exorcism of Europe
By George Neumayr
Published 10/18/2005 12:08:38 AM
Writing in Newsweek International, Barbie Nadeau scoffs at the
Vatican's preservation of its exorcism rite. But judging by the rise of
demonic cults cited in the article -- "Interest in satanic worship has
risen sharply across Europe recently; there are 5,000 Italians involved
in 650 active satanic cults in the country, more than double the number
a decade ago"
I'd be interested to know how they know this bearing in mind that most
"Satanic Cults" have a long term membership of one and everyone lies
about size[1]; I suspect they're lumping in pagan sects with
Satanists. After all, mostly anything that isn't RCC is de-facto
Satanism, isn't it?
-- the Church's exorcism rite is needed more than ever.
If enlightened Europe scoffs at Vatican exorcisms, it is not because
Europeans deny the existence of Satan; it is because they don't want to
fight him.
More properly, one doesn't fight that which one does not believe in.
Though that said, like being given the last rites, exorcism can be
just the thing to perk a person up, rarely.
And then of course, Europe has some experience of fighting Satan, as
at least tens of thousands of people could testify, had they not been
individually, ah, examined to determine the extent of their complicity
with Satan, and then set on fire, or hung, or otherwise killed[2].
[snip]
[1]. The Church of Satan, for instance never took anyone off their
membership list, and included quite a few who merely made enquiries.
[2]. A rather poignant history. Herewith below.
The Trial of Anne de Chantraine (1620-25)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Author unknown. If it was you, or you know who it was, please contact
Therion Ware. Thank You.
This document originated from the City of Dis. Feel free to visit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The sad and brutal history of Anne de Chantraine is but one of at
least tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of similar
histories. It reminds us that the people who do such things as were
done to Anne were not monsters, that they were not very different from
ourselves. The history simply shows us what people are capable of when
they believe, from our perspective at least, too much, or wrongly, or
do not care about the human consequences of their beliefs, and what
people are capable of when the foundation of a society cares more for
the alleged unseen than what is.
You should remember Anne de Chantraine, for her own sake,
and that those times will not come again, ushered in by those who do
not know of her, and would not care if they did, saying "It was a long
time ago and doesn't matter now". Personally, I think it does matter,
not least because we should not forget what those who believe are
capable of in the service of their beliefs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The practice of witchcraft and the hatred of its practitioners are to
be found in every age and every part of the world. But in
sixteenth-century Europe witch-hunting reached a sustained level of
ferocity without parallel. We have the bull Summis desiserantes of
Innocent VIII followed by the Malleus maleficarum (Hammer of Witches),
written by two Dominicans. Calvin was a witch burner. It was under
pressure from John Knox that Scotland passed its first law making
death the penalty (or witchcraft. James IV of Scotland, who was to be
James I of England, presided personally at burnings. Most of Europe
was involved in the mania; Ireland seems to have been free of it.
Was it mania? The persecutors were convinced that Satan was in it.
Some of the witches were, too. But as the learned English Jesuit
Father Herbert Thurston said, "The vast majority of the lives
sacrificed were those of innocent victims hunted down in a blind panic
of hatred and terror."
The reader may draw their own conclusions from the story of Anne de
Chantraine and the Witches of Salem.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the beginning of March 1620, the sergent of the court of
Warêt-la-Chaussée arrested a girl of seventeen, Anne de Chantraine,
who had recently come to live in the village with her father and was
reputed to be a witch. She was imprisoned and soon brought before the
mayor, Thomas Douclet, and the aldermen of the district. She made no
bones about relating her deplorable life, and made the most brazen
avowals.
The daughter of a travelling merchant of Lèige, she scarcely
remembered her mother, who had died when Anne was only two years old.
Her father placed her in the orphanage of the Soeurs Noires at Lèige.
The child remained there ten years, and received an education rare for
her time and certainly above her station: reading, writing, catechism,
needlework. At twelve years old she was placed by the good sisters
with a widow of the city, Christiane de la Chéraille, a second-hand
clothier by trade. Anne mended old clothes there the whole day long.
One evening she saw her mistress rub grease on her body as far as
her girdle and disappear up the chimney. Before leaving, Christiane de
la Chéraille recommended her to do the same, which she forthwith did.
Passing up the chimney in a gust of strong wind, she found herself in
the company of her patron in a huge hall, filled with many people, in
which there was a large table covered with white bread, cakes, roast
meats, and sausages. There was much joyful feasting and banqueting.
Anne was timidly approaching the table when a young man, "with a look
as of fire," accosted her politely and asked if he could "have to do
with her." Dismayed by this audacity, Anne was much troubled, and she
uttered an ejaculatory prayer, accompanying it with the sign of the
cross. Immediately table and food, banqueting room, and revellers all
disappeared. She found herself alone in the dark, imprisoned among the
empty casks of her patron's cellar, from which she was delivered by
that same lady the following morning.
This was Anne de Chantraine's first contact with the infernal
powers. The contacts which followed were not so furtive, and the
awakening of fleshly desire was first occasioned in her through
Christiane de la Chéraille. She then gave herself to the Sabbath with
all the violence of her youth. She was present three times a week-on
Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday-and took part in all the rites: dances
dos-a-dos, copulation with a demon, adoration of the devil in the form
of a goat, etc. She received the magic powder and the power of
witchcraft.
Laurent de Chamont, brother-in-law and lover of her mistress, king of
the sorcerers in that region, very quickly noticed Anne. He was chief
of a group who knew how to take a very practical advantage of their
Satanic initiation; they entered houses by magic and stole money,
vessels, clothes, and food. It was Laurent de Chamont who cut hairs
from the sexual organs of his own daughter, Anne, and of the children
of Christiane de la Chéraille and, placing them on the palm of his
hand, blew them into keyholes; for it was thus, by the help of the
devil, that doors of houses and locks of chests were opened.
But the band of nightbirds was soon overtaken. Laurent de Chamont
and Christiane de la Chéraille were burned, and their accomplices were
dispersed. Six weeks later Anne was also arrested and, after being
tried, was sentenced to banishment. Leaving the principality of Lèige,
she came to her father, who had settled at Warêt, but not daring to
remain with him, she hired herself as a milkmaid to a farmer of
Erpent, four leagues off-a certain Laurent Streignart, a shady
character, who was himself suspected of heresy.
Such were the avowals of Anne de Chantraine, and they sufficed to
provoke prosecution. Her trial was immediately put in hand. On March
17 the mayor of Warêt demanded from the Provincial Council a procureur
for the accused, and the advocate Martin of Namur was named. But
because of contemporary troubles, the number of cases under
consideration, or the slowness of the judicial machinery, the matter
remained for six months in suspense. Anne spent the whole spring of
1620 in the prison of Warêt.
On September 13 the accused was informally examined. That same
day the tribunal decided to send one of its members to Lèige to obtain
more complete information. This step had grievous results for the
accused. Together with the report of the interrogation of Laurent de
Chamont and of Christiane de la Chéraille, the magistrate returned
with the evidence of Gaspard José, who was for a few weeks her
employer after the arrest of Christiane, and that of Jean Agnus, her
accomplice in flights about the city. All these taxed her with
evildoing, with witchcraft and witchflights.
Recalled on October 9, Anne admitted to all the horrors of the
accusation, and in particular to having given herself to an unknown
man dressed in black, with cloven feet, who appeared to her while she
was blaspheming because the heat of the day had dispersed her herd. As
a result, she avowed, the cows reassembled of their own accord.
On the fourteenth of the same month two women of the village, and one
from Erpent, came forward as witnesses against her. The first said she
knew the accused had the reputation of being a witch, and one day when
she felt ill, she was convinced she had been bewitched by Anne.
Accordingly she complained to the accused, and Anne prepared some
pancakes for her. When she had eaten the first, she began to vomit and
immediately felt better. The second witness was a friend of the
accused and had received certain confidences from her which she made
known to the tribunal-common- places about the Sabbath and the magic
powders. She could give only one definite fact: one of her children
had been poisoned and cured by Anne on the same day. The third witness
declared on oath that the prisoner had cured two bewitched children by
taking away a spell, but that she had also procured the death of a
young girl "who lived two leagues south of Warêt."
The accusations having been established, the clerk of the court of
Warêt gave her in charge at Namur, where, a few weeks later, the
Provincial Council gave an authorisation for torture "in order to
learn more of the misdemeanours of the accused and of her
accomplices."
Another questioning took place on February 15, 1621, in the course
of which Anne revealed to the judges how Christiane de la Chéraille
had taught her to cure the bewitched: "When a poisoned person was
brought to her to be cure, she said: 'Devil, do you wish me to remove
the poison from this person in whom you have placed it?' - and having
said this, she seized him under the arms, turned him one way and then
the other, saying the same words and touching the hand of the poisoned
person, declaring that he was cured and ending with further curious
ritual." She admitted to having received four sous for the cure of a
girl.
On April 15 Léonard Balzat returned to Warêt. It was decided that the
accused should be submitted to the torture of cold and hot water, and
two days later the torture was repeated. This time the torturer poured
water which was almost boiling through a funnel placed in her throat,
already in a terrible condition. In spite of these two sessions, the
judges failed to gain their ends, for Anne de Chantraine did not
reveal her accomplices.
Two months passed. On June 14 Léonard Balzat returned and submitted
her to the fearful torture reserved for great criminals and sorcerers.
She persisted in her declarations, but nothing more could be found
out.
Two days later five witnesses came from Liège to testify on her
morals. They were Conrad de Phencenal, from whom she had stolen many
tin plates; Anne de Chevron, who had lost linen and jewels; Léonard de
Vaulx and his daughter, who brought a theft of 300 florins against
her. A young merchant tailor, Wautier Betoren, declared he had been
her victim to the extent of a piece of linen, but that a friend of
Anne, a certain Perpienne, had given him twenty florins by way of
indemnity.
Since she now was established as a thief, avowed under torture as a
sorceress, her sentence from the Provincial Council can scarcely
astonish us. On July 16 Guillaume Bodart, the deputy commissioner,
brought to the mairie sentence of death against her, "for the
confessed crime of witchcraft, and for having assisted at several
larcenies by night, by means of the same witchcraft, in the houses of
citizens in the city of Liège." On July 23 the sentence was made known
to Anne, and she, overwhelmed with despair, denied all her avowals. In
this way she gained time, for only confessions freely admitted counted
in law.
The embarrassment occasioned to the judges did not last long. As soon
as they were informed, the delegates of the Provincial Council
condemned Anne de Chantraine to death anew, on July 26, and this
condemnation was immediately read to the girl. She was then asked if
all the confessions she had made were true, and she said that they
were. The clerk of the court and the jailer then retired, and a
religious came to confess her.
Why was the sentence not executed? No document justified such
shirking of duty. Had the denials in extremis of the condemned moved
the magistrates of Warêt? Were motives of law, reasons of force
majeure added to the documents we now possess? The whole matter is
wrapped in mystery. It remains true that the condemned lived on for
almost a year in the scabrous village prison. It would seem that she
was forgotten.
However, during the winter of 1621-22 the mayor made another visit to
Namur. On December 9 he received an answer that "in view of the
inquiries held by a deputed commission since the sentence pronounced
in the court of Warêt on July 21, the aldermen should see to it that
the said sentence be carried into execution according to due form and
tenor." On the following day this new sentence was read to Anne de
Chantraine. She said to her confessor, Père Monceau, who accompanied
the clerk of the court, that she was content to die for her sins, but
that she persisted in her denials.
Again the judges temporised, and months went by without a solution. In
the summer of 1622 the Council decided to re-examine the facts avowed
by the accused. Two new councillors were appointed, and in order to
facilitate the inquiry, the accused was taken to Namur, where she was
imprisoned in the Tour de Bordial, on the bank of the Sambre, at the
foot of the citadel.
Proceedings began again. Did torture again play its part, or had the
two years of hopeless imprisonment so weakened the accused that she
confessed freely; or did the judges simply ignore her denials? We do
not know, for this part of the trial is surrounded with mystery. It
would seem that the judges were particularly interested in the sanity
of the accused. At the beginning of September they asked the jailer if
he had remarked anything abnormal about Anne. On September 12 he
replied that "in daily conversations, the turnkey, his wife, and
others have not noticed that she is in any way troubled in mind or in
judgement."
On the same day the jailer, armed with scissors and razor, visited
her, cut her hair and shaved every part of her body. He took away her
clothes, and left only a rough chemise of jute in their place.
But the councillors began to have scruples. They were not content with
the jailer's report, and they recalled him. When questioned again on
the mental state of the accused, he was less sure in his answers than
he had been. He said that "the prisoner was stupid, and did not
understand what she said, though sometimes she seemed quite right in
her mind."
On October 17 the definitive sentence was brought in: death by
fire with preliminary strangulation. From that day Anne was kept at
Warêt-la-Chaussée, the place fixed for the execution.
During the following night Léonard Balzat and his assistant prepared
the pyre, a huge heap of a hundred fagots bought in the village
itself. In the centre, sheaves of straw were placed, and a hollow was
made in the straw large enough to contain a stool .
At dawn Anne was awakened by the jailer the clerk of the court, and a
friar minor, who announced the fatal news to her. She was led out. The
executioner was waiting with the cart, and the condemned girl climbed
into it. When they reached the end of the village where the pyre was
prepared, Anne collected all the strength that remained to her. In a
loud voice, she acknowledged her sins, denied that she was a witch,
and admitted to no accomplice. Léonard Balzat helped her to climb the
pyre, seated her on the stool among the straw and abruptly strangled
her. His assistant kindled the straw and the fagots. Acrid smoke
quickly enveloped her, and the crackling of the flames was like a
fearful whisper through the entire village. The pyre burned for two
days. At dawn on the third day the ashes were dispersed to the four
winds.
The memory of a young, beautiful, and celebrated witch was for many
years to haunt the minds of the villagers. Her story was told and
retold by the light of a winter's fire. No one, however, knew her
name, and no folklorist recounted her trial. Only F. Chavee, in his
"Notice sur le village de Leuze" (Annales de la Société archéolique,
21 [1895], 481), speaks of "a field situated between Leuze and
Warêt-la-Chaussée, made famous by a Liège witch and poisoner whom the
justices of the high court of Warêt condemned to death and executed in
the year 1623 [sic]."
--
"Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You."
- Attrib: Pauline Reage.
#442. www.video2cd.co.uk. Your 8mm films on DVD.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "GoDrex" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Europe Needs Exorcism |
06 Nov 2005 05:41:28 PM |
|
|
"words of truth" <wordsoftruth@hoshmail.com> wrote in message
news:1131294207.853785.164730@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8898
I wonder if alt.atheism can do an exorcism to get rid of you
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ike" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Europe Needs Exorcism |
06 Nov 2005 04:31:31 PM |
|
|
"words of truth" <wordsoftruth@hoshmail.com> wrote in message
news:1131294207.853785.164730@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8898
The Exorcism of Europe
By George Neumayr
Published 10/18/2005 12:08:38 AM
Writing in Newsweek International, Barbie Nadeau scoffs at the
Vatican's preservation of its exorcism rite. But judging by the rise of
demonic cults cited in the article -- "Interest in satanic worship has
risen sharply across Europe recently; there are 5,000 Italians involved
in 650 active satanic cults in the country, more than double the number
a decade ago" -- the Church's exorcism rite is needed more than ever.
If enlightened Europe scoffs at Vatican exorcisms, it is not because
Europeans deny the existence of Satan; it is because they don't want to
fight him.
To fight him he has to exist first.
.
|
|
|
| User: "kevin hollingsworth" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Europe Needs Exorcism |
06 Nov 2005 05:52:26 PM |
|
|
"Ike" <accordiondocxyzxyzxyz@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:Ddqbf.6049$AS6.4128@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
"words of truth" <wordsoftruth@hoshmail.com> wrote in message
news:1131294207.853785.164730@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8898
The Exorcism of Europe
By George Neumayr
Published 10/18/2005 12:08:38 AM
Writing in Newsweek International, Barbie Nadeau scoffs at the
Vatican's preservation of its exorcism rite. But judging by the rise of
demonic cults cited in the article -- "Interest in satanic worship has
risen sharply across Europe recently; there are 5,000 Italians involved
in 650 active satanic cults in the country, more than double the number
a decade ago" -- the Church's exorcism rite is needed more than ever.
If enlightened Europe scoffs at Vatican exorcisms, it is not because
Europeans deny the existence of Satan; it is because they don't want to
fight him.
To fight him he has to exist first.
The Pope who is Satons Ambassador & the Embodiment of Evil on Earth
certainly does exist but how do you exorcise a Nazi Pointif?
.
|
|
|
| User: "News Post" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Europe Needs Exorcism |
15 Nov 2005 01:08:47 AM |
|
|
kevin hollingsworth wrote:
To fight him he has to exist first.
The Pope who is Satons Ambassador & the Embodiment of Evil on Earth
certainly does exist but how do you exorcise a Nazi Pointif?
Contrived.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Europe Needs Exorcism |
15 Nov 2005 03:11:11 PM |
|
|
"News Post" <newsgroup@post.internet> wrote in message
news:mPWdndCuB9CHqOTenZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@rogers.com...
kevin hollingsworth wrote:
To fight him he has to exist first.
The Pope who is Satons Ambassador & the Embodiment of Evil on Earth
certainly does exist but how do you exorcise a Nazi Pointif?
Contrived.
Who the heck is Satons?
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ariadne" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Europe Needs Exorcism |
15 Nov 2005 02:19:11 AM |
|
|
News Post wrote:
kevin hollingsworth wrote:
To fight him he has to exist first.
The Pope who is Satons Ambassador & the Embodiment of Evil on Earth
certainly does exist but how do you exorcise a Nazi Pointif?
Contrived
That's a very polite thing to call neo-Nazi propaganda.
The "British" nazis love Muslim terrorists and hate
everyone else.
.
|
|
|
| User: "kevin hollingsworth" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Europe Needs Exorcism |
15 Nov 2005 02:34:52 PM |
|
|
Nazism is a failed ideology like communism. The nearest equivalent to
Nazism in Britain today is Blairs Third Way. It is like Nazi ideology in
that it allows the amoral to take on the pretense of the moral. It is a
anti-ethical stance that is exploited by judges,lawyers and a few
politicians. It will fail and should be quite spectacular when it does!!!
Don't say I haven't warned you!!!
"Ariadne" <ariadne@mac.hush.com> wrote in message
news:1132021151.211628.231340@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
News Post wrote:
kevin hollingsworth wrote:
To fight him he has to exist first.
The Pope who is Satons Ambassador & the Embodiment of Evil on Earth
certainly does exist but how do you exorcise a Nazi Pointif?
Contrived
That's a very polite thing to call neo-Nazi propaganda.
The "British" nazis love Muslim terrorists and hate
everyone else.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Simon" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Europe Needs Exorcism |
16 Nov 2005 03:49:51 PM |
|
|
"kevin hollingsworth" <kevin.h0llingsworth@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:gmmef.1320$TL4.595@newsfe1-win.ntli.net...
Nazism is a failed ideology like communism. The nearest equivalent to
Nazism in Britain today is Blairs Third Way.
According to Google Nazism is anticommunist, anti-Semitic, racist,
nationalistic, imperialistic and militaristic - I challenge you to justify
how our present government is measures up to any of these criteria to any
significant degree.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Paul Duca" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Europe Needs Exorcism |
16 Nov 2005 12:34:09 AM |
|
|
in article gmmef.1320$TL4.595@newsfe1-win.ntli.net, kevin hollingsworth at
kevin.h0llingsworth@ntlworld.com wrote on 11/15/05 9:34 AM:
Nazism is a failed ideology like communism. The nearest equivalent to
Nazism in Britain today is Blairs Third Way. It is like Nazi ideology in
that it allows the amoral to take on the pretense of the moral. It is a
anti-ethical stance that is exploited by judges,lawyers and a few
politicians. It will fail and should be quite spectacular when it does!!!
Don't say I haven't warned you!!!
And don't say I didn't warn you when God fails to provide reward.
Paul
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "News Post" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Europe Needs Exorcism |
15 Nov 2005 04:47:36 PM |
|
|
kevin hollingsworth wrote:
Nazism is a failed ideology like communism. The nearest equivalent to
Nazism in Britain today is Blairs Third Way. It is like Nazi
ideology in that it allows the amoral to take on the pretense of the
moral. It is a anti-ethical stance that is exploited by
judges,lawyers and a few politicians. It will fail and should be
quite spectacular when it does!!! Don't say I haven't warned you!!!
"Ariadne" <ariadne@mac.hush.com> wrote in message
news:1132021151.211628.231340@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
News Post wrote:
kevin hollingsworth wrote:
To fight him he has to exist first.
The Pope who is Satons Ambassador & the Embodiment of Evil on Earth
certainly does exist but how do you exorcise a Nazi Pointif?
Contrived
That's a very polite thing to call neo-Nazi propaganda.
The "British" nazis love Muslim terrorists and hate
everyone else.
You're mind sure does bounce around.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Europe Needs Exorcism |
07 Nov 2005 05:29:41 PM |
|
|
Ike wrote:
"words of truth" <wordsoftruth@hoshmail.com> wrote in message
news:1131294207.853785.164730@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8898
The Exorcism of Europe
By George Neumayr
Published 10/18/2005 12:08:38 AM
Writing in Newsweek International, Barbie Nadeau scoffs at the
Vatican's preservation of its exorcism rite. But judging by the
rise of demonic cults cited in the article -- "Interest in satanic
worship has risen sharply across Europe recently; there are 5,000
Italians involved in 650 active satanic cults in the country, more
than double the number a decade ago" -- the Church's exorcism rite
is needed more than ever. If enlightened Europe scoffs at Vatican
exorcisms, it is not because Europeans deny the existence of Satan;
it is because they don't want to fight him.
To fight him he has to exist first.
Only the Flying Spaghetti Monster can save us now.
--
The official spokesman of the Foxes said
today that investigation into what happened
to the henhouse may be needed.
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Paul Duca" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Europe Needs Exorcism |
07 Nov 2005 01:36:07 AM |
|
|
in article 1131294207.853785.164730@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com, words of
truth at wrote on 11/6/05 11:23 AM:
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8898
The Exorcism of Europe
By George Neumayr
Published 10/18/2005 12:08:38 AM
Writing in Newsweek International, Barbie Nadeau scoffs at the
Vatican's preservation of its exorcism rite. But judging by the rise of
demonic cults cited in the article -- "Interest in satanic worship has
risen sharply across Europe recently; there are 5,000 Italians involved
in 650 active satanic cults in the country, more than double the number
a decade ago" -- the Church's exorcism rite is needed more than ever.
If enlightened Europe scoffs at Vatican exorcisms, it is not because
Europeans deny the existence of Satan; it is because they don't want to
fight him.
The Exorcism of Emily Rose, released in Europe in early October,
occasioned Nadeau's article. The movie is based on a European legal
case from the 1970s involving Anneliese Michel, a twentyish German
woman, now something of a folk hero, who died after months of
exorcisms.
The wholly secularized German legal authorities blamed her death on
benighted exorcists and her reactionary Catholic parents, who
considered post-Vatican II liberalism to be scandalous and stupid.
(According to media accounts, Anneliese agreed with them. Before her
possession began, she was doing penance for the progressive creeps
rapidly filling up the Church in Germany.) If she had only been left to
the ministrations of science and medicine, her death would never have
happened, went the German court's reasoning, and the exorcists and
parents were convicted of criminal negligence. The court declared
Anneliese, who had requested the exorcists after medicine failed to
help her, the victim of "Doctrinaire Induction."
The verdict illustrated secular Europe's morbid hostility to religious
freedom and Germany's fanatical attempts to uphold a secularist culture
that blocks out any acknowledgement of the spiritual realm. Most
Germans now, including most Protestants and a third of Catholics, don't
believe in life after death. And it is an open question how many
Catholic bishops in Germany believe in life after death. The faithless
cowards who populate much of the German episcopate offered zero help
during Anneliese Michel's trial; worried that they would appear
insufficiently progressive, they made sure to distance themselves from
the Church's teaching on Satan and exorcism.
In Hollywood's very loose but effective adaptation of the Michel trial
(the movie transfers the setting to the American Midwest and restricts
the criminal prosecution to the exorcist), this theme of Church
cowardice is commendably taken up. The movie makes it clear that the
typical modern bishop would rather maintain the good opinion of the
secular world than defend the Church's doctrine on Satan. In the movie,
consequently, that Emily Rose's edifying story gets told at all is not
because of the local bishop but in spite of him. The archdiocese is
content to let the honorable exorcist rot in jail because he refuses to
agree to the pinched, cowardly defense its lawyers prescribed for him,
a defense which would forbid him from talking about the reality of
Satan and the Church's powers of exorcism.
In the Michel trial, the German bishops actually used its outcome to
call on the Vatican to rewrite the exorcism ritual so that it would
incorporate all the proper secularist assumptions. The number of
exorcists in Germany can be counted on one hand, thanks to a Catholic
episcopate there that is now far, far to the left of Germany's historic
liberal Protestant reformers. The Vatican has rightly refused all these
calls, which upsets the glib jackasses at Newsweek who consider satanic
possession to be a punchline to a joke.
But while Newsweek mocks the ancient practice of exorcism, at least a
few people in Hollywood realize that the only successful movies about
Catholicism are the ones that take ancient traditions like it
seriously. While modern church "reforms" are good fodder for comedy,
they can't command the attention of an audience for a drama. In The
Godfather and The Exorcist, and now in The Exorcism of Emily Rose,
Hollywood recognizes that in order to rivet audiences it has to draw
upon ancient traditions of the Church, which contain cultural power
because they derive from a comprehension of the reality of evil rather
than the liberal fatuousness upon which modern "reform" is based.
Europe, according to Newsweek, is too enlightened for the Vatican's
exorcisms. But it is not too enlightened to host a growing number of
demonic cults. The Devil's greatest triumph, it is said, was to
convince man that he doesn't exist. But this saying needs revision.
Europe displays an even greater triumph for the Devil -- not ignorance
of his designs but respect for them.
George Neumayr is executive editor of The American Spectator.
If I could make a nice pile of money saying stupid things that claim
God favors me, the way Mr. Neumayr does, maybe I'd worry about being
possessed by the Devil.
Paul
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "AGOG" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Europe Needs Exorcism |
07 Nov 2005 07:28:58 AM |
|
|
words of truth wrote:
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8898
The Exorcism of Europe
By George Neumayr
Published 10/18/2005 12:08:38 AM
Writing in Newsweek International, Barbie Nadeau scoffs at the
Vatican's preservation of its exorcism rite. But judging by the rise of
demonic cults cited in the article -- "Interest in satanic worship has
risen sharply across Europe recently; there are 5,000 Italians involved
in 650 active satanic cults in the country, more than double the number
a decade ago" -- the Church's exorcism rite is needed more than ever.
If enlightened Europe scoffs at Vatican exorcisms, it is not because
Europeans deny the existence of Satan; it is because they don't want to
fight him.
The Exorcism of Emily Rose, released in Europe in early October,
occasioned Nadeau's article. The movie is based on a European legal
case from the 1970s involving Anneliese Michel, a twentyish German
woman, now something of a folk hero, who died after months of
exorcisms.
The wholly secularized German legal authorities blamed her death on
benighted exorcists and her reactionary Catholic parents, who
considered post-Vatican II liberalism to be scandalous and stupid.
(According to media accounts, Anneliese agreed with them. Before her
possession began, she was doing penance for the progressive creeps
rapidly filling up the Church in Germany.) If she had only been left to
the ministrations of science and medicine, her death would never have
happened, went the German court's reasoning, and the exorcists and
parents were convicted of criminal negligence. The court declared
Anneliese, who had requested the exorcists after medicine failed to
help her, the victim of "Doctrinaire Induction."
The verdict illustrated secular Europe's morbid hostility to religious
freedom and Germany's fanatical attempts to uphold a secularist culture
that blocks out any acknowledgement of the spiritual realm. Most
Germans now, including most Protestants and a third of Catholics, don't
believe in life after death. And it is an open question how many
Catholic bishops in Germany believe in life after death. The faithless
cowards who populate much of the German episcopate offered zero help
during Anneliese Michel's trial; worried that they would appear
insufficiently progressive, they made sure to distance themselves from
the Church's teaching on Satan and exorcism.
In Hollywood's very loose but effective adaptation of the Michel trial
(the movie transfers the setting to the American Midwest and restricts
the criminal prosecution to the exorcist), this theme of Church
cowardice is commendably taken up. The movie makes it clear that the
typical modern bishop would rather maintain the good opinion of the
secular world than defend the Church's doctrine on Satan. In the movie,
consequently, that Emily Rose's edifying story gets told at all is not
because of the local bishop but in spite of him. The archdiocese is
content to let the honorable exorcist rot in jail because he refuses to
agree to the pinched, cowardly defense its lawyers prescribed for him,
a defense which would forbid him from talking about the reality of
Satan and the Church's powers of exorcism.
In the Michel trial, the German bishops actually used its outcome to
call on the Vatican to rewrite the exorcism ritual so that it would
incorporate all the proper secularist assumptions. The number of
exorcists in Germany can be counted on one hand, thanks to a Catholic
episcopate there that is now far, far to the left of Germany's historic
liberal Protestant reformers. The Vatican has rightly refused all these
calls, which upsets the glib jackasses at Newsweek who consider satanic
possession to be a punchline to a joke.
But while Newsweek mocks the ancient practice of exorcism, at least a
few people in Hollywood realize that the only successful movies about
Catholicism are the ones that take ancient traditions like it
seriously. While modern church "reforms" are good fodder for comedy,
they can't command the attention of an audience for a drama. In The
Godfather and The Exorcist, and now in The Exorcism of Emily Rose,
Hollywood recognizes that in order to rivet audiences it has to draw
upon ancient traditions of the Church, which contain cultural power
because they derive from a comprehension of the reality of evil rather
than the liberal fatuousness upon which modern "reform" is based.
Europe, according to Newsweek, is too enlightened for the Vatican's
exorcisms. But it is not too enlightened to host a growing number of
demonic cults. The Devil's greatest triumph, it is said, was to
convince man that he doesn't exist. But this saying needs revision.
Europe displays an even greater triumph for the Devil -- not ignorance
of his designs but respect for them.
George Neumayr is executive editor of The American Spectator.
Allah = Satan
.
|
|
|
| User: "kevin hollingsworth" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Europe Needs Exorcism |
07 Nov 2005 07:32:02 AM |
|
|
"AGOG" <agog@agog.com> wrote in message news:0nDbf.10481$7s1.648@fe04.lga...
words of truth wrote:
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8898
The Exorcism of Europe
By George Neumayr
Published 10/18/2005 12:08:38 AM
Writing in Newsweek International, Barbie Nadeau scoffs at the
Vatican's preservation of its exorcism rite. But judging by the rise of
demonic cults cited in the article -- "Interest in satanic worship has
risen sharply across Europe recently; there are 5,000 Italians involved
in 650 active satanic cults in the country, more than double the number
a decade ago" -- the Church's exorcism rite is needed more than ever.
If enlightened Europe scoffs at Vatican exorcisms, it is not because
Europeans deny the existence of Satan; it is because they don't want to
fight him.
The Exorcism of Emily Rose, released in Europe in early October,
occasioned Nadeau's article. The movie is based on a European legal
case from the 1970s involving Anneliese Michel, a twentyish German
woman, now something of a folk hero, who died after months of
exorcisms.
The wholly secularized German legal authorities blamed her death on
benighted exorcists and her reactionary Catholic parents, who
considered post-Vatican II liberalism to be scandalous and stupid.
(According to media accounts, Anneliese agreed with them. Before her
possession began, she was doing penance for the progressive creeps
rapidly filling up the Church in Germany.) If she had only been left to
the ministrations of science and medicine, her death would never have
happened, went the German court's reasoning, and the exorcists and
parents were convicted of criminal negligence. The court declared
Anneliese, who had requested the exorcists after medicine failed to
help her, the victim of "Doctrinaire Induction."
The verdict illustrated secular Europe's morbid hostility to religious
freedom and Germany's fanatical attempts to uphold a secularist culture
that blocks out any acknowledgement of the spiritual realm. Most
Germans now, including most Protestants and a third of Catholics, don't
believe in life after death. And it is an open question how many
Catholic bishops in Germany believe in life after death. The faithless
cowards who populate much of the German episcopate offered zero help
during Anneliese Michel's trial; worried that they would appear
insufficiently progressive, they made sure to distance themselves from
the Church's teaching on Satan and exorcism.
In Hollywood's very loose but effective adaptation of the Michel trial
(the movie transfers the setting to the American Midwest and restricts
the criminal prosecution to the exorcist), this theme of Church
cowardice is commendably taken up. The movie makes it clear that the
typical modern bishop would rather maintain the good opinion of the
secular world than defend the Church's doctrine on Satan. In the movie,
consequently, that Emily Rose's edifying story gets told at all is not
because of the local bishop but in spite of him. The archdiocese is
content to let the honorable exorcist rot in jail because he refuses to
agree to the pinched, cowardly defense its lawyers prescribed for him,
a defense which would forbid him from talking about the reality of
Satan and the Church's powers of exorcism.
In the Michel trial, the German bishops actually used its outcome to
call on the Vatican to rewrite the exorcism ritual so that it would
incorporate all the proper secularist assumptions. The number of
exorcists in Germany can be counted on one hand, thanks to a Catholic
episcopate there that is now far, far to the left of Germany's historic
liberal Protestant reformers. The Vatican has rightly refused all these
calls, which upsets the glib jackasses at Newsweek who consider satanic
possession to be a punchline to a joke.
But while Newsweek mocks the ancient practice of exorcism, at least a
few people in Hollywood realize that the only successful movies about
Catholicism are the ones that take ancient traditions like it
seriously. While modern church "reforms" are good fodder for comedy,
they can't command the attention of an audience for a drama. In The
Godfather and The Exorcist, and now in The Exorcism of Emily Rose,
Hollywood recognizes that in order to rivet audiences it has to draw
upon ancient traditions of the Church, which contain cultural power
because they derive from a comprehension of the reality of evil rather
than the liberal fatuousness upon which modern "reform" is based.
Europe, according to Newsweek, is too enlightened for the Vatican's
exorcisms. But it is not too enlightened to host a growing number of
demonic cults. The Devil's greatest triumph, it is said, was to
convince man that he doesn't exist. But this saying needs revision.
Europe displays an even greater triumph for the Devil -- not ignorance
of his designs but respect for them.
George Neumayr is executive editor of The American Spectator.
Allah = Satan=The Pope
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "News Post" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Europe Needs Exorcism |
15 Nov 2005 04:57:46 PM |
|
|
AGOG wrote:
words of truth wrote:
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8898
The Exorcism of Europe
By George Neumayr
Published 10/18/2005 12:08:38 AM
Writing in Newsweek International, Barbie Nadeau scoffs at the
Vatican's preservation of its exorcism rite. But judging by the rise
of demonic cults cited in the article -- "Interest in satanic
worship has risen sharply across Europe recently; there are 5,000
Italians involved in 650 active satanic cults in the country, more
than double the number a decade ago" -- the Church's exorcism rite
is needed more than ever. If enlightened Europe scoffs at Vatican
exorcisms, it is not because Europeans deny the existence of Satan;
it is because they don't want to fight him.
The Exorcism of Emily Rose, released in Europe in early October,
occasioned Nadeau's article. The movie is based on a European legal
case from the 1970s involving Anneliese Michel, a twentyish German
woman, now something of a folk hero, who died after months of
exorcisms.
The wholly secularized German legal authorities blamed her death on
benighted exorcists and her reactionary Catholic parents, who
considered post-Vatican II liberalism to be scandalous and stupid.
(According to media accounts, Anneliese agreed with them. Before her
possession began, she was doing penance for the progressive creeps
rapidly filling up the Church in Germany.) If she had only been left
to the ministrations of science and medicine, her death would never
have happened, went the German court's reasoning, and the exorcists
and parents were convicted of criminal negligence. The court declared
Anneliese, who had requested the exorcists after medicine failed to
help her, the victim of "Doctrinaire Induction."
The verdict illustrated secular Europe's morbid hostility to
religious freedom and Germany's fanatical attempts to uphold a
secularist culture that blocks out any acknowledgement of the
spiritual realm. Most Germans now, including most Protestants and a
third of Catholics, don't believe in life after death. And it is an
open question how many Catholic bishops in Germany believe in life
after death. The faithless cowards who populate much of the German
episcopate offered zero help during Anneliese Michel's trial;
worried that they would appear insufficiently progressive, they made
sure to distance themselves from the Church's teaching on Satan and
exorcism. In Hollywood's very loose but effective adaptation of the
Michel
trial (the movie transfers the setting to the American Midwest and
restricts the criminal prosecution to the exorcist), this theme of
Church cowardice is commendably taken up. The movie makes it clear
that the typical modern bishop would rather maintain the good
opinion of the secular world than defend the Church's doctrine on
Satan. In the movie, consequently, that Emily Rose's edifying story
gets told at all is not because of the local bishop but in spite of
him. The archdiocese is content to let the honorable exorcist rot in
jail because he refuses to agree to the pinched, cowardly defense
its lawyers prescribed for him, a defense which would forbid him
from talking about the reality of Satan and the Church's powers of
exorcism. In the Michel trial, the German bishops actually used its
outcome to
call on the Vatican to rewrite the exorcism ritual so that it would
incorporate all the proper secularist assumptions. The number of
exorcists in Germany can be counted on one hand, thanks to a Catholic
episcopate there that is now far, far to the left of Germany's
historic liberal Protestant reformers. The Vatican has rightly
refused all these calls, which upsets the glib jackasses at Newsweek
who consider satanic possession to be a punchline to a joke.
But while Newsweek mocks the ancient practice of exorcism, at least a
few people in Hollywood realize that the only successful movies about
Catholicism are the ones that take ancient traditions like it
seriously. While modern church "reforms" are good fodder for comedy,
they can't command the attention of an audience for a drama. In The
Godfather and The Exorcist, and now in The Exorcism of Emily Rose,
Hollywood recognizes that in order to rivet audiences it has to draw
upon ancient traditions of the Church, which contain cultural power
because they derive from a comprehension of the reality of evil
rather than the liberal fatuousness upon which modern "reform" is
based. Europe, according to Newsweek, is too enlightened for the
Vatican's
exorcisms. But it is not too enlightened to host a growing number of
demonic cults. The Devil's greatest triumph, it is said, was to
convince man that he doesn't exist. But this saying needs revision.
Europe displays an even greater triumph for the Devil -- not
ignorance of his designs but respect for them.
George Neumayr is executive editor of The American Spectator.
Allah = Satan
Um .. hmm .. Allah is a name of God. In the Arabic language, AFAIK, people
from a variety of religions use "Allah" for the name of God [including
Arabic speaking Christians]. Now, if what you mean by "Allah" is actually
the spiritual force behind that the confusion that is many Islamic
doctrines, then maybe you have a case. But as time marches on, some people
might want to know not to flat out equate "Allah" with "Satan".
For example, one can call, say, a new Buick "God". One can worship it and
face towards it when one prays to it. That doesn't mean the name "God"
doesn't mean "God". It just means one has a false god and addresses it
inappropriately, according the Name to it which it doesn't deserve.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
