Inside the Explosive Meeting Where Trump Officials Clashed With Elon Musk

Simmering anger at the billionaire’s unchecked power spilled out in a remarkable Cabinet Room meeting. The president quickly moved to rein in Mr. Musk.

A man in a suit holds a door open as Elon Musk walks next to an official vehicle with American flags.

Cabinet officials generally like the concept of what Elon Musk set out to do — reducing waste, fraud and abuse in government — but have been frustrated by the hacksaw approach to upending the government and the lack of consistent

By Jonathan Swan and Maggie Haberman

Jonathan Swan and Maggie Haberman are White House correspondents. They reported from Washington.

March 7, 2025

Updated 3:10 p.m. ET

Marco Rubio was incensed. Here he was in the Cabinet Room of the White House, the secretary of state, seated beside the president and listening to a litany of attacks from the richest man in the world.

Seated diagonally opposite, across the elliptical mahogany table, Elon Musk was letting Mr. Rubio have it, accusing him of failing to slash his staff.

You have fired “nobody,” Mr. Musk told Mr. Rubio, then scornfully added that perhaps the only person he had fired was a staff member from Mr. Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency.

Mr. Rubio had been privately furious with Mr. Musk for weeks, ever since his team effectively shuttered an entire agency that was supposedly under Mr. Rubio’s control: the United States Agency for International Development. But, in the extraordinary cabinet meeting on Thursday in front of President Trump and around 20 others — details of which have not been reported before — Mr. Rubio got his grievances off his chest.

Mr. Musk was not being truthful, Mr. Rubio said. What about the more than 1,500 State Department officials who took early retirement in buyouts? Didn’t they count as layoffs? He asked, sarcastically, whether Mr. Musk wanted him to rehire all those people just so he could make a show of firing them again. Then he laid out his detailed plans for reorganizing the State Department.

Image

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has been privately furious with Mr. Musk for weeks.Credit...Haiyun Jiang for The New York Times

Mr. Musk was unimpressed. He told Mr. Rubio he was “good on TV,” with the clear subtext being that he was not good for much else. Throughout all of this, the president sat back in his chair, arms folded, as if he were watching a tennis match.

After the argument dragged on for an uncomfortable time, Mr. Trump finally intervened to defend Mr. Rubio as doing a “great job.” Mr. Rubio has a lot to deal with, the president said. He is very busy, he is always traveling and on TV, and he has an agency to run. So everyone just needs to work together.

The meeting was a potential turning point after the frenetic first weeks of Mr. Trump’s second term. It yielded the first significant indication that Mr. Trump was willing to put some limits on Mr. Musk, whose efforts have become the subject of several lawsuits and prompted concerns from Republican lawmakers, some of whom have complained directly to the president.

Cabinet officials almost uniformly like the concept of what Mr. Musk set out to do — reducing waste, fraud and abuse in government — but have been frustrated by the chain saw approach to upending the government and the lack of consistent coordination.

Thursday’s meeting, which was abruptly scheduled on Wednesday evening, was a sign that Mr. Trump was mindful of the growing complaints. He tried to offer each side something by praising both Mr. Musk and his cabinet secretaries. (At least one, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who has had tense encounters related to Mr. Musk’s team, was not present.) The president made clear he still supported the mission of the Musk initiative. But now was the time, he said, to be a bit more refined in its approach.

From now on, he said, the secretaries would be in charge; the Musk team would only advise.

It is unclear what the long-term impact of the meeting will be. Mr. Musk remains Mr. Trump’s biggest political financial supporter — just this week his super PAC aired $1 million worth of ads that said, “Thank you, President Trump” — and Mr. Musk’s control of the social media website X has made administration staff members and cabinet secretaries alike fearful that he will target them in public.

The cabinet meeting was the first significant indication that President Trump is willing to put some limits on Mr. Musk.Credit...Eric Lee/The New York Times

But if nothing else, the session laid bare the tensions within Mr. Trump’s team, and news of the sharp clashes spread quickly through senior ranks of cabinet agencies after it was over. This account is based on interviews with five people with knowledge of the events.

In a post on social media after the meeting, Mr. Trump said the next phase of his plan to cut the federal work force would be conducted with a “scalpel” rather than a “hatchet” — a clear reference to Mr. Musk’s scorched-earth approach.

Mr. Musk, who wore a suit and tie to Thursday’s meeting instead of his usual T-shirt after Mr. Trump publicly ribbed him about his sloppy appearance, defended himself by saying that he had three companies with a market cap of tens of billions of dollars, and that his results spoke for themselves.

But he was soon clashing with members of the cabinet.

Just moments before the blowup with Mr. Rubio, Mr. Musk and the transportation secretary, Sean Duffy, went back and forth about the state of the Federal Aviation Administration’s equipment for tracking airplanes and what kind of fix was needed. Howard Lutnick, the commerce secretary, jumped in to support Mr. Musk.

Mr. Duffy said the young staff of Mr. Musk’s team was trying to lay off air traffic controllers. What am I supposed to do? Mr. Duffy said. I have multiple plane crashes to deal with now, and your people want me to fire air traffic controllers?

A crane removing pieces of an American Airlines plane that crashed in January from the Potomac River near Ronald Reagan National Airport in Arlington, Va.Credit...Al Drago for The New York Times

Mr. Musk told Mr. Duffy that his assertion was a “lie.” Mr. Duffy insisted it was not; he had heard it from them directly. Mr. Musk, asking who had been fired, said: Give me their names. Tell me their names.

Mr. Duffy said there were not any names, because he had stopped them from being fired. At another point, Mr. Musk insisted that people hired under diversity, equity and inclusion programs were working in control towers. Mr. Duffy pushed back and Mr. Musk did not add details, but said during the longer back and forth that Mr. Duffy had his phone number and should call him if he had any issues to raise.

The exchange ended with Mr. Trump telling Mr. Duffy that he had to hire people from M.I.T. as air traffic controllers. These air traffic controllers need to be “geniuses,” he said.

The secretary of veterans affairs, Doug Collins, has been dealing with one of the most politically sensitive challenges of all the cabinet secretaries. Mr. Musk’s cuts will affect thousands of veterans — a powerful constituency and a core part of the Trump base. Mr. Collins made the point that they should not wield a blunt instrument and cleave off everyone from the V.A. They needed to be strategic about it. Mr. Trump agreed with Mr. Collins, saying they ought to retain the smart ones and get rid of the bad ones.

In response to a request for comment from The New York Times, Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, said in a statement: “As President Trump said, this was a great and productive meeting amongst members of his team to discuss cost-cutting measures and staffing across the federal government. Everyone is working as one team to help President Trump deliver on his promise to make our government more efficient.”

Tammy Bruce, a spokeswoman for the State Department, responded, “Secretary Rubio considered the meeting an open and productive discussion with a dynamic team that is united in achieving the same goal: making America great again.”

A Department of Veterans Affairs spokesman said, “As President Trump has said, it’s important to increase efficiency and reduce bureaucracy while keeping in place the best and most productive federal employees. V.A. is working with DOGE and the rest of the administration to do just that.”

In a post on X on Friday, Mr. Duffy praised Mr. Trump and the work Mr. Musk’s team is doing and said it was an effective cabinet meeting. He added that “the DEI Department at the FAA was eliminated on day 2” and that Mr. Trump’s “approach of a scalpel versus a hatchet and better coordination between Secretaries and DOGE is the right approach to revolutionizing the way our government is run.”

Mr. Musk, who later claimed on X that the cabinet meeting was “very productive,” seemed far less enthused inside the room. He aggressively defended himself, reminding the cabinet secretaries that he had built multiple billion-dollar companies from the ground up and knew something about hiring good people.

Members of labor groups demonstrated against Mr. Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency.Credit...Valerie Plesch for The New York Times

Most cabinet members did not join the fray. Mr. Musk’s anger directed at Mr. Rubio in particular seemed to catch people in the room by surprise, one person with knowledge of the meeting said. Another person said Mr. Musk’s caustic responses to Mr. Duffy and Mr. Rubio seemed to deter other cabinet members, many of whom have privately complained about the Musk team, from speaking.

But it remains to be seen how long this new arrangement will last.

Jonathan Swan is a White House reporter covering the administration of Donald J. Trump. More about Jonathan Swan

Maggie Haberman is a White House correspondent, reporting on the second, nonconsecutive term of Donald J. Trump. More about Maggie Haberman

A version of this article appears in print on of the New York edition with the headline: Anger at Musk Erupts In Cabinet Room Clash With Key Trump Aides.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/07/us/politics/trump-musk-doge-power.html

Elon Musk and 4 of His Sons Meet Pope Francis

Elon Musk shared a photo with four of his kids meeting the Pope following a brief Twitter hiatus.

By Corinne Heller Jul 02, 2022 2:27 PM| Updated Jul 02, 2022 2:26 PM

Elon Musk returned to Twitter after a brief hiatus to share a rare family photo.

On July 1, the billionaire CEO of Tesla and SpaceX tweeted a pic of himself with sons Griffin, 18, and 16-year-old triplets Kai, Damian and Saxon posing with Pope Francis during a recent trip to Italy.

Elon wrote, "Honored to meet @Pontifex yesterday."

According to Italian newspaper La Repubblica, the businessman and the pontiff had a 40-minute meeting at Casa Santa Marta in Vatican City. Elon talked about his ideas on improving the world and humanity, the outlet said.

Elon, the richest person in the world, shares his four teenage sons with first wife Justine Wilson. Griffin has a twin, who in April filed a request in a Los Angeles court to change her name to Vivian Jenna Wilson in accordance with her new gender identity. She stated in her filing, "I no longer live with or wish to be related to my biological father in any way, shape or form." A judge granted Vivian's request on June 22.

Elon, who also shares toddler son X Æ A-Xii and baby girl Exa Dark Sideræl with ex Grimes, had recently started posting again on Twitter, a social media network he uses regularly and plans to purchase, after being largely absent since June 21.

Ten minutes before posting his photo with his four eldest sons, Elon shared a throwback pic of himself with his second ex-wife, actress Talulah Riley, dressed up while walking in the Italian city of Venice. He tweeted, "Talulah designed that dress herself and much of my 40th birthday party. She is a party genius."

https://www.eonline.com/news/1336664/elon-musk-and-4-of-his-sons-meet-pope-francis

Child Welfare Leaders Stunned by Trump’s Call to Freeze Social Services Spending; Legal Action Quickly Threatened

The Trump administration’s call for a funding freeze could total hundreds of billions of dollars, with sweeping impacts on social safety net programs serving children and families. Under threat: child protection and juvenile justice, private foster family agencies, homeless shelters and nonprofits providing foster care services.

Filed 1/28/2025 7:29pm

By Sara Tiano, Nancy Marie Spears, Susanti Sarkar, Jeremy Loudenback and Michael Fitzgerald

UPDATE: On Wednesday, the Washington Post and New York Times reported that the White House budget office has “rescinded” its previous memo freezing federal social services grants. The Imprint will continue to inform readers on further developments.

In a swipe at social spending that stunned state and local officials and advocates for the poor nationwide, the Trump administration ordered a halt to virtually all federal spending on social services, issuing a directive that sought to freeze hundreds of billions of dollars in federal funding.

The memo released from the Office of Budget and Management Monday night that remained in place for more than a day before the courts temporarily intervened calls for a near-immediate pause on all agency “grant, loan, and other financial assistance programs” — much of which focuses on keeping struggling families intact. The spending freeze could have affected monthly checks allowing grandparents to take in kids from foster care, programs helping mothers and fathers reunite their broken families and housing stipends that keep teens raised in state custody off the streets.

In a separate document, the office detailed federal programs subject to the freeze, including Title IV-E of the Social Security Act, which funds foster care, as well as adoption assistance, child abuse and neglect block grants, and programs designed to educate young adults aging out of the child welfare system.

Myriad other social supports that millions of families rely on are also on the list: Head Start, which provides early childhood education to low income families; the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children — or WIC — which provides nutrition and healthcare to pregnant women and their babies and young children and Section 8 housing vouchers.

“Families across the country are wondering whether their child’s preschool is open, whether they can take their child to the doctor, or whether school meals are still available,” First Focus on Children President Bruce Lesley said in a statement.

An analysis by his bipartisan advocacy group estimates that as much as $329 billion in funding for the nation’s neediest children appears to be in danger.

“The Administration has injected fear and despair into families who depend on services — which, by the way, they’ve paid for with their taxes — to care for their children.”

The rationale for the Trump administration’s extraordinary directive was outlined by the Office of Management and Budget’s acting director Matthew Vaeth.

“The hardworking people who look out for others in their communities are at risk of losing their livelihoods because the Trump Administration has put more focus on cutting taxes for its billionaire allies than protecting children, seniors, veterans, and millions of other Americans.”

— Statement from the Center for Law and Social Policy

He stated that the move was part of the incoming administration’s efforts to eliminate “Marxist equity, transgenderism, and green new deal social engineering policies.”

“This temporary pause will provide the Administration time to review agency programs and determine the best uses of the funding for those programs consistent with the law and the President’s priorities,” Vaeth wrote.

The announcement was instantly applauded by Republicans across the country, who now control both houses of Congress and head up 27 statehouses.

“The State of Texas fully supports President Trump’s efforts to cut waste, fraud and abuse, and eliminate funding for DEI and radical gender ideology initiatives,” Gov. Greg Abbott’s press secretary, Andrew Mahaleris, told The Imprint in an email. “This pause in funding will bring transparency to federal spending and is long overdue. Taxpayer dollars should be used to help taxpayers.”

Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma, who chairs the House Appropriations Committee, told reporters that he saw the directive as a “legitimate exercise of executive oversight.”

“The State of Texas fully supports President Trump’s efforts to cut waste, fraud and abuse, and eliminate funding for DEI and radical gender ideology initiatives.”

— TEXAS GOV. GREG ABBOTT

“I think that’s probably what you ought to do when you’re coming in as a new administration,” Cole told CNN’s Manu Raju, adding that “appropriations is not a law, it’s the directive of Congress.”

But minutes before the pause was set to take effect at 5 p.m. ET today, a federal judge blocked parts of the order from taking effect. Under the administrative stay ordered by District Court Judge Loren AliKhan, the administration cannot suspend any funds appropriated by Congress. The stay expires Feb. 3, and a hearing on the issue has been set for Monday.

Full impact and legality unclear

The government has ground to a halt eight times since 1981, all due to Congress failing to reach a spending deal or a president vetoing such an agreement. Another funding cliff looms on March 14, the next point at which the government is set to run out of money.

But critics say the Trump administration’s attempt to halt the flow of money that has already been approved is illegal. In interviews today, numerous policy experts and advocates pointed out that Congress has exclusive power to approve spending, and that the executive branch cannot unilaterally take the actions it proposed.

“What the law allows and what this administration is doing are different things. I think he’s prodding to see what he can get away with and what will get pushed back,” said Sean Hughes, who leads government relations for the consulting firm Social Change Partners.

Hughes added that the administration can put a hold on discretionary spending, but not mandatory payments like those made to child welfare agencies through Title IV-E to pay foster and kinship families.

Some political leaders called the move more bravado than true policy.

Rep. Jonathan Windy Boy of Montana, a member of the Chippewa Cree Tribe, expressed doubt that the move would be successful and likened the attempt to “school bullies on the playground.”

The funding pause is on hold at least until Monday’s hearings, and may well be largely tied up in the courts for much longer, policy analysts speculated.

But multiple lawsuits have already been filed by the National Council of Nonprofits, the American Public Health Organization and Main Street Alliance, which represents small businesses. Multiple states and tribes have also indicated they intend to sue the Trump administration over the spending freeze called for on Monday.

“This memo will have a devastating impact on hundreds of thousands of grant recipients who depend on the inflow of grant money (money already obligated and already awarded),” the lawsuit filed today in the Washington D.C., district court states, which they use to “improve the day-to-day lives of the many people they work so hard to serve.”

A coalition of Democratic attorneys general from 23 states, including California, New York, Arizona and Hawaii have also filed suit.

While the administration indicated that the pause would be temporary, a statement released by the D.C.-based Center for Law and Social Policy warned that even a short- term loss of funding could be catastrophic for programs that may be unable to cover payroll or rent in the interim.

— Statement from the Center for Law and Social Policy

Government and child welfare leaders sound the alarm

There’s little disagreement however. If the pause in funding goes into effect, it would have sweeping impact on essentially all of the social safety net programs serving children and families: child protection and juvenile justice, private foster family agencies, homeless shelters and nonprofit organizations serving families in the foster care system or those at risk of entering.

Many of these programs are paid for with a combination of federal and state dollars. Some state leaders expressed deep dismay over what the loss of funds would mean for vulnerable families in their states.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz.

“Minnesota will do what we can to keep the lights on, but we cannot fill the nearly $2 billion hole this will put in the state budget each month,” Gov. Tim Walz said in a press release. “Shutting off this funding will have a devastating impact on peoples’ lives – from cancer patients, to securing our prisons. President Trump is leaving states out in the cold without any guidance or explanation.”

Walz said he believes the move is unconstitutional, and indicated that his state would sue the administration.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul echoed Walz’ concern: “No state on their own is going to be able to backfill the loss of billions of federal dollars. That’s not possible,” she said at a press conference Tuesday.

But Hochul took a more circumspect tack regarding the legitimacy of Tuesday’s announcement, giving a nod to past actions that have been publicity-attracting but had little substantive impact:

“I’m not playing whack-a-mole with every single initiative that comes out of Washington. We will deal with the issues when they become a reality.”

Hochul noted that she is also working with state Attorney General Letitia James on possible litigation strategies.

In the immediate aftermath of the announcement, little is clear about precisely how specific groups and local governments will be affected. But some details were starting to come to light.

Jeremy Kohomban

Jeremy Kohomban, CEO of Children’s Village in New York, said funding for their migrant children’s program will be impacted. His staff have been looking for ways to fill the funding gaps to avoid any interruption of care for the children, but he noted that reunifying them with families can’t happen without federal approval.

His organization and others are in the dark as to how to proceed, he said.

“We were unprepared for the barrage of broadly worded executive orders, the related MOUs freezing funding, and our inability to identify anyone in DC able to provide guidance or answer simple questions,” he said. “What happens to the children?”

Alex Briscoe, a principal with Public Works Alliance, said the Trump Administration had a fundamental misunderstanding about how local safety net systems provide services such as ambulances, homeless care, special education, medication for children in foster care and care for children with cancer, among other key programs for vulnerable populations.

“Politics shouldn’t matter when we’re talking about how fast the ambulance can get there, or what a suffering child requires to stay alive,” he said in an emailed statement.

Briscoe, a well-regarded expert on Medicaid services who presented his work on children’s mental health at a White House Summit last October, said he hoped a “compassionate fix” would be forthcoming and that fights over funding safety net services would be spared from a divisive national discourse.

Tribal child welfare impacts

Another yet-unknown facet of this funding pause is how it would affect tribal governments, many of which operate their own child welfare and safety net programs with support from the federal government.

Kate Fort

The funding that tribes receive for Indian Health Services, tribal child welfare programs, as well as funding specific to education and land management needs could all be in jeopardy, according to the Office of Management and Budget’s memo. Each tribe will need to assess how their programs have been affected, said Kate Fort, director of Clinics at Michigan State University College of Law.

In a statement sent to The Imprint today, a spokesperson for the Department of the Interior — which is tasked with honoring the “nation-to-nation relationship with Tribes” — said it is “reviewing a number of actions to implement President Donald J. Trump’s Executive Order.”

“This is a devastating blow to vulnerable families in the CPS system who depend on these resources in order to reunify with their children. Without these entitlements, it will take longer to reunify families and could possibly result in permanent family separation. As families lose these benefits and as a result, lose housing, food, and medical care, we are likely to see an increase in CPS case filings.”

— SANTEE SIOUX ATTORNEY ANGELA BIBENS

Newsletter Sign up

Receive weekly updates from The Imprint.

Email*

Email Address*

Meanwhile, Santee Sioux attorney Angela Bibens, who runs a private practice in Colorado, is worried about the bottom-line impact such a freeze could have on the vulnerable families she serves.

“This is a devastating blow to vulnerable families in the CPS system who depend on these resources in order to reunify with their children,” Bibens said. “Without these entitlements, it will take longer to reunify families and could possibly result in permanent family separation. As families lose these benefits and as a result, lose housing, food, and medical care, we are likely to see an increase in CPS case filings.”

Frozen Programs

Below is The Imprint’s annual chart of federal appropriations for youth and family programs. We have confirmed that all of the programs on this list are subject to the freeze initiated by the Trump administration

https://imprintnews.org/child-welfare-2/child-welfare-leaders-stunned-by-trumps-call-to-freeze-social-services-spending-legal-action-quickly-threatened/258488

Case No. 24 PO 00116.30

202

AM 9:0

IN THE JUSTICE COURT OF DAYTON TOWNSHIP

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LYON, STATE OF NEVADA

JULIA ANN BYSE

VS.

10 WILLIAM FRANCIS DUNN IV

Applicant,

Adverse Party,

NOTICE FOR HEARING TO EXTEND THE ORDER FOR PROTECTION

UPON MOTION OF the Applicant to EXTEND the Order for Protection and GOOD CAUSE appearing

YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that a hearing will be held in DAYTON JUSTICE COURT located at 235 MAIN STREET, DAYTON NEVADA 89403 on 08/20/2024 at 3:00 pm, to determine

whether or not to EXTEND the ORDER FOR PROTECTION against the above-named Party.

ANY ORDER FOR PROTECTION WILL CONTINUE IN EFFECT UNTIL SUCH HEARING AND FURTHER ORDER OF THIS COURT.

A copy of the Motion for Hearing, Affidavit, and a copy of this Notice shall be served on the other party by PERSONAL SERVICE.

Dated: Wednesday, August 14, 2024

Clerk of the Court

IN THE JUSTICE COURT OF DAYTON TOWNSHIP

COUNTY OF LYON, STATE OF NEVADA2 13 1

Case Number: 200116.36

JULIA ANN Byse

Vs.

Applicant,

WILLIAM FRQUCIS DUNNIV

Adverse Party,

MOTION TO:

JUSTIC BY like CLE

MODIFY

DISSOLVE

EXTEND

ENFORCE PROTECTION ORDER

This motion is filed by: (check one) Applicant/ Adverse Party.

This motion concerns a current protection order regarding: (check one)

Domestic Violence (NRS 33.030 et. seq.)

Stalking/Harassment (NRS 200.575/200.571)

Sexual Assault (NRS 200.366)

Protection of Minor Child(ren) (NRS 33.400 et. seq.) High Risk Protection Order (NRS 33.500 et. seq.)

I would like the court to do the following: (check one)

Cancel the protection order.

Change the protection order.

Extend the protection order.

Enforce the protection order.

Issue an order to show cause regarding contempt for violation of the order.

Explain in detail what you are asking for and why:

I want to extend to 2 years

He StILL RECORDS ANd any one that comes

to our House

Still taking pictures.

papers which

the posted my adott hat is Right

I did not think

Protection Order - Motion to Modify/Dissolve/Extend

Page 1 of 2

Revised 2023

My Sisters

mother's ORIVER LINSO

His mother's

Piltuck

OF A FRIC

He Posted

at OUR Hous.

picture of the TPO

AND He used my House as His PROFILE Back GROWN ON FACE BOOK-

He get kick OFF Face BooK FOR 30 Days

(attach more pages if you need more room)

I respectfully ask the Court to modify, dissolve, or extend the protection order as the Court finds appropriate.

6. This document does not contain the personal information of any person as defined by NRS 603A.040.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the law of the State of Nevada that the foregoing

is true and correct.

DATED 8-13-2024

2024

Submitted By: (your signature) Julia and Byse

(print your name) JukiA ANN Byse

Page 2 of 2

Protection Order - Motion to Modify/Dissolve/Extend Revised 2023

What Happened? Explain the most recent event and describe any injuries. Give specific and detailed information about the event. You can list past events on the next page. If you are filing on behalf of a child, include details about what happened to the child.

my GRANDSON WAS IN OUR FRONT yard Spraying NS Roses For Bugs AND Billy Started telling him KILLING the Roses. Thew He started on telling Him That HIS GRawdpa was a Fag and HIS GRandmother was Trans Gender, Then he told Nathan to get HIS Brother and meet Him In the middle of the Street + Fight

Attach more pages if you need more room (pages 4a, 4b, 4c).

02022 Nevada Supreme Court

Application for Protection Order - S/H/SA/PM

Page 4 of 8

Julia Byse

https://www.facebook.com/julia.byse

Gaius Julius Caesar[a] (12 July 100 BC – 15 March 44 BC) was a Roman general and statesman. A member of the First Triumvirate, Caesar led the Roman armies in the Gallic Wars before defeating his political rival Pompey in a civil war, and subsequently became dictator from 49 BC until his assassination in 44 BC. He played a critical role in the events that led to the demise of the Roman Republic and the rise of the Roman Empire.

In 60 BC, Caesar, Crassus, and Pompey formed the First Triumvirate, an informal political alliance that dominated Roman politics for several years. Their attempts to amass political power were opposed by many in the Senate, among them Cato the Younger with the private support of Cicero. Caesar rose to become one of the most powerful politicians in the Roman Republic through a string of military victories in the Gallic Wars, completed by 51 BC, which greatly extended Roman territory. During this time he both invaded Britain and built a bridge across the river Rhine. These achievements and the support of his veteran army threatened to eclipse the standing of Pompey, who had realigned himself with the Senate after the death of Crassus in 53 BC. With the Gallic Wars concluded, the Senate ordered Caesar to step down from his military command and return to Rome. In 49 BC, Caesar openly defied the Senate's authority by crossing the Rubicon and marching towards Rome at the head of an army.[3] This began Caesar's civil war, which he won, leaving him in a position of near-unchallenged power and influence in 45 BC.

After assuming control of government, Caesar began a programme of social and governmental reform, including the creation of the Julian calendar. He gave citizenship to many residents of far regions of the Roman Republic. He initiated land reforms to support his veterans and initiated an enormous building programme. In early 44 BC, he was proclaimed "dictator for life" (dictator perpetuo). Fearful of his power and domination of the state, a group of senators led by Brutus and Cassius assassinated Caesar on the Ides of March (15 March) 44 BC. A new series of civil wars broke out and the constitutional government of the Republic was never fully restored. Caesar's great-nephew and adopted heir Octavian, later known as Augustus, rose to sole power after defeating his opponents in the last civil war of the Roman Republic. Octavian set about solidifying his power, and the era of the Roman Empire began.

Caesar was an accomplished author and historian as well as a statesman; much of his life is known from his own accounts of his military campaigns. Other contemporary sources include the letters and speeches of Cicero and the historical writings of Sallust. Later biographies of Caesar by Suetonius and Plutarch are also important sources. Caesar is considered by many historians to be one of the greatest military commanders in history.[4] His cognomen was subsequently adopted as a synonym for "Emperor"; the title "Caesar" was used throughout the Roman Empire, giving rise to modern descendants such as Kaiser and Tsar. He has frequently appeared in literary and artistic works.

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

The Supreme Court of Cassation (Italian: Corte Suprema di Cassazione) is the highest court of appeal or court of last resort in Italy. It has its seat in the Palace of Justice, Rome.

The Court of Cassation also ensures the correct application of law in the inferior and appeal courts and resolves disputes as to which lower court (penal, civil, administrative, military) has jurisdiction to hear a given case.

Procedure

The Italian Supreme Court of Cassation is the highest court of Italy. Appeals to the Court of Cassation generally come from the Appellate Court, the second instance courts, but defendants or prosecutors may also appeal directly from trial courts, first instance courts. The Supreme Court can reject, or confirm, a sentence from a lower court. If it rejects the sentence, it can order the lower court to amend the trial and sentencing, or it can annul the previous sentence altogether. A sentence confirmed by the Supreme Court of Cassation is final and definitive, and cannot be further appealed for the same reasons. Although the Supreme Court of Cassation cannot overrule the trial court's interpretation of the evidence it can correct a lower court's interpretation or application of the law connected to a specific case.[1]

As explained by the Cassazione, "The appeal in cassation may be lodged against the measures issued by the ordinary courts at the appellate level or in degree only: the reasons given to support the use may be, in civil matters, the violation of the right material (errores in iudicando) or procedural (errores in proceeding), the vices of motivation (lack, insufficiency or contradiction) of the judgment under appeal; or, again, the grounds for jurisdiction. A similar scheme is expected to appeal to the Supreme Court in criminal matters".[2]

The Italian judicial system is based on civil law within the framework of late Roman law, and not based on common law. Its core principles are entirely codified into a normative system which serves as the primary source of law, which means judicial decisions of the supreme court, as well as those of lower courts, are binding within the frame of reference of each individual case submitted, but do not constitute the base for judicial precedent for other future cases as in Common Law. While in Civil Law jurisdictions the doctrine of stare decisis (precedent) does not apply, in practice the decisions of the Supreme Court of Cassation usually provide a very robust reference point in jurisprudence constante. The two essential aims of the Supreme Court of Cassation are to ensure that lower courts correctly follow legal procedure, and to harmonize the interpretation of laws throughout the judicial system.

Members and organization

The Supreme Court of Cassation is organized into two divisions: a criminal section and a civil section. The court has a general president, The First President of the Court of Cassation, a deputy, and each section has its own president. Cases brought to the supreme court are normally heard by a panel of five judges. In more complex cases, especially those concerning compounded matters of statutory interpretation an extended panel of nine judges ("united sections" of the supreme court) hear the case.[3][4] In addition, in every case submitted to the supreme court, the office of public prosecutor must state their interpretation of the applicable law, to assist and facilitate the court, in a consultative capacity, in reaching its final decision.[5][6]

Brief history

The need for this kind of court in Europe became apparent with the Ancien Régime's difficulties in maintaining both uniformity of interpretation and supremacy of the central laws against local privileges and rights. This kind of court first appeared during the French Revolution. The original French courts were initially much more like a legislative body than a judicial one. During his conquests, Napoleon greatly influenced Italian legal theory, and the Court of Cassation was formed using many imported French ideas.

The Court of Cassation was provided by the former Italian Civil Code in 1865 and then it was reorganized by royal decree 12 on 30 January 1941,[1] supplanting the previous court.[7]

On 1 March 2023, the High Council of the Judiciary unanimously elected the magistrate Margherita Cassano in the role of first president of the Court of Cassation. She is the first woman to hold this position.[8][9][10]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_Cassation_(Italy)

Physician-Assisted Suicide

Download PDF

Thoughtful, morally admirable individuals hold diverging, yet equally deeply held and well-considered perspectives about physician-assisted suicide. Nonetheless, at the core of public and professional debate about physician-assisted suicide is the aspiration that every patient come to the end of life as free as possible from suffering that does not serve the patient’s deepest self-defining beliefs. Supporters and opponents share a fundamental commitment to values of care, compassion, respect, and dignity; they diverge in drawing different moral conclusions from those underlying values in equally good faith.

Guidance in the AMA Code of Medical Ethics encompasses the irreducible moral tension at stake for physicians with respect to participating in assisted suicide. Opinion 5.7 powerfully expresses the perspective of those who oppose physician-assisted suicide. Opinion 1.1.7 articulates the thoughtful moral basis for those who support assisted suicide.

Opinion 5.7

Physician-assisted suicide occurs when a physician facilitates a patient’s death by providing the necessary means and/or information to enable the patient to perform the life-ending act (e.g., the physician provides sleeping pills and information about the lethal dose, while aware that the patient may commit suicide).

It is understandable, though tragic, that some patients in extreme duress—such as those suffering from a terminal, painful, debilitating illness—may come to decide that death is preferable to life. However, permitting physicians to engage in assisted suicide would ultimately cause more harm than good.

Physician-assisted suicide is fundamentally incompatible with the physician’s role as healer, would be difficult or impossible to control, and would pose serious societal risks.

Instead of engaging in assisted suicide, physicians must aggressively respond to the needs of patients at the end of life. Physicians:

Should not abandon a patient once it is determined that cure is impossible.

Must respect patient autonomy.

Must provide good communication and emotional support.

Must provide appropriate comfort care and adequate pain control.

Opinion 1.1.7

Physicians are expected to uphold the ethical norms of their profession, including fidelity to patients and respect for patient self-determination. Yet physicians are not defined solely by their profession. They are moral agents in their own right and, like their patients, are informed by and committed to diverse cultural, religious, and philosophical traditions and beliefs. For some physicians, their professional calling is imbued with their foundational beliefs as persons, and at times the expectation that physicians will put patients’ needs and preferences first may be in tension with the need to sustain moral integrity and continuity across both personal and professional life.

Preserving opportunity for physicians to act (or to refrain from acting) in accordance with the dictates of conscience in their professional practice is important for preserving the integrity of the medical profession as well as the integrity of the individual physician, on which patients and the public rely. Thus physicians should have considerable latitude to practice in accord with well-considered, deeply held beliefs that are central to their self-identities.

Physicians’ freedom to act according to conscience is not unlimited, however. Physicians are expected to provide care in emergencies, honor patients’ informed decisions to refuse life-sustaining treatment, and respect basic civil liberties and not discriminate against individuals in deciding whether to enter into a professional relationship with a new patient.

In other circumstances, physicians may be able to act (or refrain from acting) in accordance with the dictates of their conscience without violating their professional obligations. Several factors impinge on the decision to act according to conscience. Physicians have stronger obligations to patients with whom they have a patient-physician relationship, especially one of long standing; when there is imminent risk of foreseeable harm to the patient or delay in access to treatment would significantly adversely affect the patient’s physical or emotional well-being; and when the patient is not reasonably able to access needed treatment from another qualified physician.

In following conscience, physicians should:

Thoughtfully consider whether and how significantly an action (or declining to act) will undermine the physician’s personal integrity, create emotional or moral distress for the physician, or compromise the physician’s ability to provide care for the individual and other patients.

Before entering into a patient-physician relationship, make clear any specific interventions or services the physician cannot in good conscience provide because they are contrary to the physician’s deeply held personal beliefs, focusing on interventions or services a patient might otherwise reasonably expect the practice to offer.

Take care that their actions do not discriminate against or unduly burden individual patients or populations of patients and do not adversely affect patient or public trust.

Be mindful of the burden their actions may place on fellow professionals.

Uphold standards of informed consent and inform the patient about all relevant options for treatment, including options to which the physician morally objects.

In general, physicians should refer a patient to another physician or institution to provide treatment the physician declines to offer. When a deeply held, well-considered personal belief leads a physician also to decline to refer, the physician should offer impartial guidance to patients about how to inform themselves regarding access to desired services.

Continue to provide other ongoing care for the patient or formally terminate the patient-physician relationship in keeping with ethics guidance.

https://code-medical-ethics.ama-assn.org/ethics-opinions/physician-assisted-suicide

Providing superior service to Northern Nevada since 2001.

Sierra Oxygen Services, a family-run business specializing in oxygen and home medical equipment, is dedicated to offering high-quality medical products and services to our community. Established in Carson City, NV, we have been serving our clients since 2001. Our commitment to excellence is further reinforced by our accreditation from the Accreditation Commission for Health Care (ACHC).

https://sierraoxygen.com/

Catdependent No More, parodying the title of my book, makes the 1991 Christmas book list here in Minnesota.

Some things have changed. I’ve written four more books, traveled the world, divorced (but not remarried), and paid back the welfare department for the financial help they gave me.

I feel more passionately about the importance of healing from our abuse issues. I feel more passionately. I’ve become more spontaneous, embraced my femininity, and learned new lessons along the way—about boundaries, flexibility, and owning my power. And about love. I’m learning to respect men. My relationships have deepened. Some have changed.

The most significant change in my life has been the loss of my son, Shane. As you may have heard or read, in February of 1991, three days after his twelfth birthday, my beloved Shane—so much a part of my life and work—was killed suddenly in a ski accident on the slopes at Afton Alps.

I’m learning about death and life.

Codependent No More

by Melody Beattie

http://dickyricky.com/books/recovery/Codependent%20No%20More%20-%20Melody%20Beattie.pdf

The Jesuit Abuser lives with his Jesuit Provincial

July 12, 2009

tags: Daniel C. O'Connell SJ, Frank Reale SJ, Missouri Jesuits, Phil Steele SJ, Tim McMahon SJ

I learned recently that the abusive Jesuit, Daniel O’Connell, lives with his Jesuit provincial, Tim McMahon.

I thought the Catholic church had already decided that wasn’t a good idea. Didn’t Cardinal George have a similar kind of problem?

It was important enough for me to ask, six years ago, if the Jesuit abuser was going to live with the provincial.

See, under the legal agreement the abuser cannot be assigned to a Jesuit community with a sponsored work, such as a university or parish. I asked the province investigator — the provincial’s assistant at the time, Phil Steele — if that meant the perp was going to be living with the provincial. Oh no, he said, we have other places for him to live. He added, “And Frank would never allow that.” Frank Reale was provincial number one.

The Missouri province has gone backwards over the past six years. I’m sure provincial number two, Tim McMahon, has talents. All I got was his mistakes.

https://reportingajesuit.wordpress.com/2009/07/12/the-jesuit-abuser-lives-with-his-jesuit-provincial/

Himmler used the Jesuits as the model for the SS, since he found they had the core elements of absolute obedience and the cult of the organisation.[59][60] Hitler is said to have called Himmler "my Ignatius of Loyola".[59] As an order, the SS needed a coherent doctrine that would set it apart.[61] Himmler attempted to construct such an ideology, and deduced a "pseudo-Germanic tradition" from history.[61] Himmler dismissed the image of Christ as a Jew and rejected Christianity's basic doctrine and its institutions.[62] Starting in 1934, the SS hosted "solstice ceremonies" (Sonnenwendfeiern) to increase team spirit within their ranks.[63] In a 1936 memorandum, Himmler set forth a list of approved holidays based on pagan and political precedents meant to wean SS members from their reliance on Christian festivities.[64] In an attempt to replace Christianity and suffuse the SS with a new doctrine, SS-men were able to choose special Lebenslauffeste, substituting common Christian ceremonies such as baptisms, weddings and burials. Since the ceremonies were held in small private circles, it is unknown how many SS-members opted for these kind of celebrations.[65]

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

The large Latin inscription on the façade reads: Clemens XII Pont Max Anno V Christo Salvatori In Hon SS Ioan Bapt et Evang. This abbreviated inscription translates as: "The Supreme Pontiff Clement XII, in the fifth year [of his Pontificate, dedicated this building] to Christ the Savior, in honor of Saints John the Baptist and [John] the Evangelist".[5] The inscription indicates, with its full title (see below), that the archbasilica was originally dedicated to Christ the Savior and, centuries later, rededicated in honor of Saint John the Baptist and Saint John the Evangelist. Christ the Savior remains its primary dedication, and its titular feast day is 6 August, the Transfiguration of Christ. As the cathedral of the pope as bishop of Rome, it ranks superior to all other churches of the Catholic Church, including Saint Peter's Basilica.

Name

The archbasilica's Latin name is Archibasilica Sanctissimi Salvatoris ac Sancti Ioannis Baptistae et Ioannis Evangelistae ad Lateranum,[6] which in English is the Archbasilica of the Most Holy Savior and Saints John the Baptist and John the Evangelist at the Lateran, and in Italian Arcibasilica [Papale] del Santissimo Salvatore e Santi Giovanni Battista ed Evangelista in Laterano.[4]

https://en.wikipedia.org/.../Archbasilica_of_Saint_John...

From modest beginnings the SS (Schutzstaffel; Protection Squadrons), became a virtual state within a state in Nazi Germany, staffed by men who perceived themselves as the “racial elite” of Nazi future.

In the Nazi state, the SS assumed leading responsibility for security, identification of ethnicity, settlement and population policy, and intelligence collection and analysis. The SS controlled the German police forces and the concentration camp system. The SS conceived and implemented plans designed to restructure the ethnic composition of eastern Europe and the occupied Soviet Union.

From 1939, the SS assumed responsibility for “solving” the so-called Jewish Question; after 1941, its leadership planned, coordinated and directed the so-called Final Solution of the Jewish Question. This “solution” was the annihilation of the European Jews, which we now refer to as the Holocaust

https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/ss

2 §1. The character and charism of the Society of Jesus arise from the Spiritual Exercises which our holy father Ignatius and his companions went through. Led by this experience, they formed an apostolic group rooted in charity, in which, after they had taken the vows of chastity and poverty and had been raised to the priesthood, they offered themselves as a HOLOCAUST to God,[2] so that serving as soldiers of God beneath the banner of the cross and serving the Lord alone and the Church his spouse under the Roman Pontiff, the vicar of Christ on earth,[3] they would be sent into the entire world[4] for the defense and propagation of the faith and for the progress of souls in Christian life and doctrine. [5]

The Constitutions of The Society of Jesus and Their Complimentary Norms

The ratlines (German: Rattenlinien) were systems of escape routes for German Nazis and other fascists fleeing Europe from 1945 onwards in the aftermath of World War II. These escape routes mainly led toward havens in the Americas, particularly in Argentina, though also in Paraguay, Colombia,[1] Brazil, Uruguay, Mexico, Peru, Guatemala, Ecuador, and Bolivia, as well as the United States, Canada, Australia, Spain, and Switzerland.

There were two primary routes: the first went from Germany to Spain, then Argentina; the second from Germany to Rome, then Genoa, then South America. The two routes developed independently but eventually came together.[2] The ratlines were supported by rogue elements in the Vatican, particularly an Austrian bishop and four Croatian clergy of the Catholic Church who sympathized with the Ustaše.[3][4][5] Starting in 1947, U.S. Intelligence used existing ratlines to move certain Nazi strategists and scientists.[6]

While consensus among Western scholars is that Nazi leader Adolf Hitler died by suicide in 1945, in the late 1940s and 1950s the U.S. investigated claims that he survived and fled to South America.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratlines_(World_War_II)

9. Interprovincial Works and Houses in Rome

304 §1. In the spirit of our fourth vow, the Society confirms its commitment to the interprovincial Roman works entrusted to it by the Holy See: the Pontifical Gregorian University and its associated institutes, the Pontifical Biblical Institute and the Pontifical Oriental Institute, as well as the Pontifical Russicum College, the Vatican Radio, and the Vatican Observatory, all of which are common works of the whole Society, placed directly under the superior general. Recognizing the very valuable service that these institutions have offered and continue to offer today, it calls upon major superiors who share Father General s responsibility for them to continue their help through subsidies and especially by training and offering professors and other personnel to them. §2. Also recommended to the care of all the provinces are those other works or houses in Rome that render a service to the entire Society, such as the Historical Institute of the Society of Jesus and the international colleges of the Society in Rome.[142]"

The Constitutions of The Society of Jesus and Their Complimentary Norms

A Complete English Translation of the Official Latin Texts

THE INSTITUTE OF JESUIT SOURCES SAINT LOUIS, 1996

https://web.archive.org/web/20200211182223/https://jesuitas.lat/uploads/the-constitutions-of-the-society-of-jesus-and-their-complementary-norms/Constitutions%20and%20Norms%20SJ%20ingls.pdf

[529] C. 1The entire purport of this fourth vow of obedience to the pope was and is with regard to missions; 2and this is how the bulls should be understood where they speak of this obedience in all that the sovereign pontiff may command and wherever he may send one, and so on."

The Constitutions of The Society of Jesus and Their Complimentary Norms

A Complete English Translation of the Official Latin Texts

THE INSTITUTE OF JESUIT SOURCES SAINT LOUIS, 1996

https://web.archive.org/web/20200211182223/https://jesuitas.lat/uploads/the-constitutions-of-the-society-of-jesus-and-their-complementary-norms/Constitutions%20and%20Norms%20SJ%20ingls.pdf

Christopher Michael Benoit (/bəˈnwɑː/ bə-NWAH; May 21, 1967 – June 24, 2007) was a Canadian professional wrestler. He worked for various pro-wrestling promotions during his 22-year career, but is notorious for murdering his wife and youngest son.

Bearing the nicknames The (Canadian) Crippler alongside The Rabid Wolverine throughout his career, Benoit held 30 championships between World Wrestling Federation/World Wrestling Entertainment (WWF/WWE), World Championship Wrestling (WCW), Extreme Championship Wrestling (ECW – all United States), New Japan Pro-Wrestling (NJPW – Japan), and Stampede Wrestling (Canada). He was a two-time world champion, Benoit having reigned as a one-time WCW World Heavyweight Champion and a one-time World Heavyweight Champion in WWE;[7][8] he was booked to win a third world championship at a WWE event on the night of his death.[9] Benoit was the twelfth WWE Triple Crown Champion and the seventh WCW Triple Crown Champion, and the second of four men in history to achieve both the WWE and the WCW Triple Crown Championships. He was also the 2004 Royal Rumble winner, joining Shawn Michaels and preceding Edge as one of the three men to win a Royal Rumble as the number one entrant.[10] Benoit headlined multiple pay-per-views for World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) including a victory in the World Heavyweight Championship main event triple threat match of WrestleMania XX in March 2004.[11]

In a three-day double-murder and suicide, Benoit murdered his wife in their residence on June 22, 2007, and his 7-year-old son the next day, before killing himself on June 24.[12][13] The incident profoundly shocked and changed the professional wrestling industry and drew intense mainstream media criticism regarding brain injuries, substance abuse, and the long-term health of athletes in contact sports. Subsequent research undertaken by the Sports Legacy Institute (now the Concussion Legacy Foundation) suggested that depression and chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), a condition of brain damage, from multiple concussions that Benoit had sustained throughout his pro-wrestling career were likely contributing factors of the crimes.[14]

Due to his murders, Benoit's legacy in the professional wrestling industry is heavily debated.[15][16] Benoit has been renowned by many for his exceptional technical wrestling ability. Prominent combat sports journalist Dave Meltzer considers Benoit "one of the top 10, maybe even [in] the top five, all-time greats" in professional wrestling history.[17] Benoit was inducted into the Stampede Wrestling Hall of Fame in 1995 and the Wrestling Observer Newsletter Hall of Fame in 2003.[18] His WON induction was put to a re-vote in 2008 to determine if Benoit should remain a member of their Hall of Fame. The threshold percentage of votes required to remove Benoit was not met.[19]

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

Ultramontanism was a school of thought of the Catholic Church which promoted supreme papal authority in matters of spirituality and governance. Ultramontanism rejected modern ideals in favour of the supremacy of Catholicism and the Catholic Church in public life. This school of thought was particularly influent in the French-Canadian society during the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century.

https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/ultramontanism

I do further declare that I will help, assist, and advise all or any of His Holiness’s agents, in any place where I should be, in Switzerland, Germany, Holland, Ireland or America, or in any other kingdom or territory I shall come to, and do my utmost to extirpate the heretical Protestant or Masonic doctrines and to destroy all their pretended powers, legal or otherwise. I do further promise and declare that, notwithstanding, I am dispensed with to assume any religion heretical for the propagation of the Mother Church’s interest; to keep secret and private all her agents’ counsels from time to time, as they entrust me, and not to divulge, directly or indirectly, by word, writing or circumstances whatever; but to execute all that should be proposed, given in charge, or discovered unto me by you, my Ghostly Father, or any of this sacred order.

I do further promise and declare that I will have no opinion or will of my own or any mental reservation whatever, even as a corpse or cadaver (perinde ac cadaver), but will unhesitatingly obey each and every command that I may receive from my superiors in the militia of the Pope and of Jesus Christ. That I will go to any part of the world whithersoever I may be sent, to the frozen regions north, jungles of India, to the centres of civilisation of Europe, or to the wild haunts of the barbarous savages of America without murmuring or repining, and will be submissive in all things, whatsoever is communicated to me.

I do further promise and declare that I will, when opportunity presents, make and wage relentless war, secretly and openly, against all heretics, Protestants and Masons, as I am directed to do, to extirpate them from the face of the whole earth; and that I will spare neither age, sex nor condition, and that will hang, burn, waste, boil, flay, strangle, and bury alive these infamous heretics; rip up the stomachs and wombs of their women, and crush their infants’ heads against the walls in order to annihilate their execrable race. That when the same cannot be done openly I will secretly use the poisonous cup, the strangulation cord, the steel of the poniard, or the leaden bullet, regardless of the honour, rank, dignity or authority of the persons, whatever may be their condition in life, either public or private, as I at any time may be directed so to do by any agents of the Pope or Superior of the Brotherhood of the Holy Father of the Society of Jesus.

In confirmation of which I hereby dedicate my life, soul, and all corporal powers, and with the dagger which I now receive I will subscribe my name written in my blood in testimony thereof; and should I prove false, or weaken in my determination, may my brethren and fellow soldiers of the militia of the Pope cut off my hands and feet and my throat from ear to ear, my belly be opened and sulphur burned therein with all the punishment that can be inflicted upon me on earth, and my soul shall be tortured by demons in eternal hell forever.

That I will in voting always vote for a Knight of Columbus in preference to a Protestant, especially a Mason, and that I will leave my party so to do; that if two Catholics are on the ticket I will satisfy myself which is the better supporter of Mother Church and vote accordingly. That I will not deal with or employ a Protestant if in my power to deal with or employ a Catholic. That I will place Catholic girls in Protestant families that a weekly report may be made of the inner movements of the heretics. That I will provide myself with arms and ammunition that I may be in readiness when the word is passed, or I am commanded to defend the Church either as an individual or with the militia of the Pope.

The Jesuit Oath

https://www.jamesjpn.net/religion/the-jesuit-oath/

11 Traditional Wedding Vows to Exchange During Your Ceremony

Opt for a classic with these time-honored scripts.

By Blythe Copeland Updated on February 26, 2025

If reciting promises you wrote yourself in front of a large group of family, friends, and in-laws sounds more like a public speaking nightmare than a romantic start to a new life with your partner, relying on traditional wedding vows is a time-honored alternative.

Many traditional vows are determined by the religion that underlies your marriage ceremony, though interfaith and non-denominational ceremonies also have their own traditions. From the recited vows to the wording of the ring exchanges, these age-old promises are familiar, constant, and enduring.

You can use our traditional wedding vow scripts below word for word—or you can work with your partner or officiant to identify parts that resonate. Either way, inspiration awaits.

Reciting Traditional Wedding Vows

In many (but not all) religions, the declaration of vows symbolizes the moment when a couple officially becomes one—though the wordings vary according to the specific religion. There are several ways to perform the following monologue-style vows: You can memorize the words ahead of time, repeat them after the officiant, or the officiant can recite them in the form of a question, prompting a response of "I do" or "I will." Your religious official can often accommodate variations on the traditional wording.

At most wedding ceremonies, the exchange of rings immediately follows the recitation of vows and serves to seal those promises, though not all religions or ceremonies include a ring exchange. The ring symbolizes the unbroken circle of love, and, at many ceremonies, more vows are spoken as rings are exchanged.

While in some religious ceremonies (such as Orthodox and some Conservative Jewish weddings) only one partner usually receives a ring, many couples choose to have a double-ring ceremony. This is where both partners give and receive rings, although this practice did not become popular in the United States until after World War II.

Reciting Traditional Wedding Vows

The Vows

In Jewish ceremonies, vows are recited only when the ring is given (or rings are exchanged).

The Rings

The groom says: "Harey at mekuddeshet li B'taba'at zo k'dat Moshe V'israel," which means, "Behold, thou are consecrated unto me with this ring according to the law of Moses and of Israel." Then the groom places the ring on the bride's finger.

If the wedding is a double-ring ceremony, the bride recites the same words (with changes for gender) and places the ring on the groom's finger.

The phrase, "I am my beloved's and my beloved is mine," is often recited in Hebrew, as well.

Catholic Wedding Vows

The Vows

"I, ___, take you, ___, for my lawful [wife/husband/partner], to have and to hold from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, until death do us part. I will love and honor you all the days of my life."

The Rings

The priest will bless each ring one at time, after which each partner should place it on the other's finger. Each says: "In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Take and wear this ring as a sign of my love and faithfulness."

Episcopal Wedding Vows

The Vows

"In the name of God, I, ___, take you, ___, to be my [wife/husband/partner], to have and to hold from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, until parted by death. This is my solemn vow."

The Rings

Before placing the ring on their partner's finger, "___, I give you this ring as a symbol of my vow, and with all that I am and all that I have, I honor you, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."

If the wedding is a double-ring ceremony, the other partner does and recites the same.

Presbyterian Wedding Vows

The Vows

"I, ___, take you, ___, to be my [wife/husband/partner], and I do promise and covenant, before God and these witnesses, to be your loving and faithful [husband/wife/partner] in plenty and in want, in joy and in sorrow, in sickness and in health, as long as we both shall live."

The Rings

Before placing the ring on their partner's finger, "This ring I give you, in token and pledge of our constant faith and abiding love."

If the wedding is a double-ring ceremony, the other partner does and recites the same.

Protestant Wedding Vows

The Vows

"I, ___, take thee, ___, to be my wedded [wife/husband/partner], to have and to hold from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death do us part, according to God's holy ordinance; and thereto I pledge thee my faith."

The Rings

After the blessing from the celebrant, one partner says, "I give you this ring as a symbol of my love; and with all that I am and all that I have, I honor you, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." The ring is then slipped on their love's finger.

If the wedding is a double-ring ceremony, the other partner does the same.

Muslim Wedding Vows

The Vows

"I,___, offer you myself in marriage and in accordance with the instructions of the Holy Quran and the Holy Prophet, peace and blessing be upon him. I pledge, in honesty and with sincerity, to be for you an obedient and faithful [wife/husband/partner]."

The other partner responds: "I,___, in accordance with the instructions of the Holy Quran and the Holy Prophet, peace and blessing be upon him. I pledge, in honesty and sincerity, to be for you a faithful and helpful [wife/husband/partner]."

Hindu Wedding Vows

The Vows

At Hindu weddings, couples recite a set of vows known as saptapadi, or the Seven Steps. This list of promises are recited as the couple walks around a ring of fire to honor Agni, the Hindu god of fire. As they walk, they state the following:

"I take this vow for (1) the fulfillment of the material needs of the family and for prosperity, (2) for the development of physical, mental, and spiritual strength, (3) to acquire wealth by pure and righteous means and to spend it wisely, (4) for a harmonious relationship, (5) to excel in raising strong and virtuous children, (6) for togetherness and compatibility, and (7) for friendship—to be dependable and faithful and for lifelong companionship."

Quaker Wedding Vows

The Vows

"In the presence of God and these our friends, I take thee to be my wife/husband, promising with divine assistance to be unto thee a loving and faithful husband/wife so long as we both shall live."

The Rings

While wedding bands are not part of Quaker wedding tradition, many couples opt to add a ring exchange during (or after) the marriage ceremony.

What to Do With Your Engagement Ring During the Wedding

Unitarian/Universalist Wedding Vows

The Vows

"I, ___, take you, ___, to be my [wife/husband/partner], to have and to hold, from this day forward, for better for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and cherish always."

The Rings

One partner places the ring on their beloved's finger and says: "With this ring, I wed you and pledge you my love now and forever." If the wedding is a double-ring ceremony, the bride does the same.

Interfaith Wedding Vows

The Vows

"I,___, take you, ___, to be my wife/husband. I promise to be true to you in good times and in bad, in sickness and in health. I will love and honor you all the days of my life."

The Rings

An interfaith ceremony is designed by the engaged couple and their officiant to accommodate any type or number of religions, so each couple decides individually on the text accompanying the ring exchange.

Nondenominational Wedding Vows

The Vows

"___, I now take you to be my wedded [wife/husband/partner], to live together after God's ordinance in the holy relationship of marriage. I promise to love and comfort you, honor and keep you, and forsaking all others, I will be yours alone as long as we both shall live."

The Rings

A nondenominational wedding can also include the couple's choice of wording during the ring exchange.

https://www.marthastewart.com/7888175/traditional-wedding-vows

The Ring of the Fisherman (Latin: Anulus piscatoris; Italian: Anello Piscatorio), also known as the Piscatory Ring, is an official part of the regalia worn by the pope, who according to Catholic theology is the head of the Catholic Church and successor of Saint Peter, who was a fisherman by trade. It used to feature a bas-relief of Peter fishing from a boat, a symbolism derived from the tradition that the apostles were "fishers of men" (Mark 1:17). The Fisherman's Ring is a signet used until 1842 to seal official documents signed by the pope.[1] Since at least the Middle Ages it has been a tradition for Catholics meeting the pope to show their devotion by kissing the ring.[2]

History

A letter written by Pope Clement IV to his nephew Pietro Grossi in 1265 includes the earliest known mention of the Ring of the Fisherman, which was used for sealing all the pope's private correspondence. Public documents, by contrast, were sealed by stamping a different papal seal onto lead which was attached to the document. Such documents were historically called papal bulls, named after the stamped bulla (seal) of lead.[3]

Use of the Fisherman's Ring changed during the 15th century when it was used to seal official documents called papal briefs. That practice ended in 1842, when the sealing wax was replaced by a stamp which affixed the same device in red ink.[4]

Creation, transfer, and destruction

A new ring is cast for each pope as a general practice in tradition. Around the relief image is the reigning pope's Latin name. During the ceremony of a papal coronation or papal inauguration, the Camerlengo traditionally slips the ring on the ring finger of the new pope's right hand.[5] Benedict XVI had the dean of the College of Cardinals give him the ring, which he then placed upon himself.[6] Pope Francis was bestowed his ring by Cardinal Sodano at his installation.[7]

Upon a papal death, the ring used to be ceremonially destroyed using a hammer in the presence of other cardinals by the Camerlengo.[citation needed] This was done to prevent issuance of forged documents during the sede vacante.[8] Today, the destruction of the ring's device with deep scratches is a symbol of the end of rule of the pope who used to wear that ring.[citation needed] This custom was followed after the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI by applying two deep cuts, in the shape of a cross, on the signet with a chisel.[9]

Wear

Pope Benedict XVI wearing his papal ring in 2005

Although Pope Benedict XVI wore his Fisherman's Ring daily, it is no longer the custom for popes to wear it at all. Generally, a new pope will either inherit the daily-wear ring of his predecessor, keep an old ring of his own preference, or will choose a new daily-wear style. Pope John Paul I usually wore a wide gold band similar in design to the mitre-shaped Second Vatican Council ring; in imitation of this, Pope John Paul II wore a wide gold crucifix shaped into a ring that had belonged to Pope Paul VI.[citation needed]

In former times, a special coronation ring was placed on the pope's finger, designed very large since it was worn over the pope's glove. That custom and the use of a coronation ring ended with Pope Paul VI.[citation needed]

Generally, popes of the past wore episcopal rings in keeping with the fashions of the time. Pope Pius XII, for example, often wore a heavily ornate ring set with a stone. Pope Pius IX most often wore a cameo of himself, made entirely of tiny diamonds, whilst Pope Pius X wore a simple, smaller stone-set ring. In keeping with the modern spirit suggested by Pope John XXIII and actually practiced in his later years by Pope Paul VI, Pope Francis only wears a simple gold-plated silver ring for papal ceremonies, preferring to wear a small silver ring from his days as a cardinal.[10]

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

Thus, it is only after having finished his second course, first as a simple Scholar, and then as an approved Scholar, and if at the end of his course of study as a scholar he is "regarded as highly promising," is the Jesuit Scholar allowed to pass into the third class-the Coadjutors. This later class is divided still into two further chapters-temporal and spiritual. Only the spiritual Coadjutors are admitted into holy orders as priest (Examen 6, sec. 1); the temporal go out into the various trades, vocations and professions to fulfill their assigned roles in the GRAND DESIGN. And note reader, that some, says Wylie, "are retained to minister in the lowest offices: they become college cooks, porters, or purveyors." For the "greater glory of God" it is held expedient that these should be "content to serve the society in the careful office of Martha [a servant]."

On the other hand, the spiritual Coadjutors are sent on the most difficult or important assignments: either as priests to royalty, leaders, and the affluent or as teachers in the best schools, and universities and institutions of PUBLIC POLICY. As priests, the Coadjutors would seek to reach and mold the youth, the wealthy, and the leaders. The work of reason, says Wylie, "he is required to be a priest of adequate learning, that he may assist the Society [the Jesuit Order] in hearing confessions, and giving instructions" in Catholic doctrine. In short, the Coadjutors are top-flight agents, selected for the most difficult assignments."

Chapter 13 "Crack Troops-The Training of a Jesuit"

Codeword Barbelon book One

by P.D. Stuart

SECTION 4:

POVERTY CERTAIN GENERAL PRINCIPLES

157 Voluntary religious poverty is the attempt of fallen human beings, in the radical following of the humble and poor Christ, to achieve that freedom from every inordinate attachment which is the condition for a great and ready love of God and neighbor.[39]

158 The principle and foundation of our poverty is found in a love of the Word of God made flesh and crucified.[40] Therefore in the Society that way of life is to be maintained which is as far as possible removed from all infection of avarice and as like as possible to evangelical poverty, which our first fathers experienced as more gratifying, more undefiled, and more suitable for the edification of the neighbor.[41]

159 §1. Our poverty in the Society is apostolic: our Lord has sent us to preach in poverty. [42] Therefore our poverty is measured by our apostolic purpose, so that our entire apostolate is informed with the spirit of poverty.[43] §2. Efficiency in the apostolate and the witness of apostolic poverty are two values that are closely united and must be held in an ongoing tension; this is a rule for apostolic institutes as well as for individuals.[44]

160 Our poverty is the condition of our apostolic credibility,[45] as the total expression of our trust in God and our freely given service to others,[46] when we are made witnesses of the freely bestowed love of God, who gave his Son for us in the total emptying of the incarnation and the cross.[47]

161 The forms of our poverty must truly suit the mentality, life, and apostolate of our times and give a visible witness to the Gospel. Therefore, our contemporary poverty must be especially characterized by these qualities: sincerity, by which our lives are really poor; devotion to work, by which we resemble workers in the world; and charity, by which we freely devote ourselves and all we have for the service of the neighbor.[48]

162 Let our poverty, sincerely and profoundly renewed,

be simple in community expression and joyous in the following of Christ,

happy in sharing all goods among ourselves and with others,

apostolic in its active indifference and readiness for any service,

inspiring our selection of ministries and turning us to those most in need,

spiritually effective, proclaiming Jesus Christ in our way of life and in all we do.[49]

163 The preferential option for the poor, as proposed by the Church, which the Society wishes to make its own, should find some concrete expression directly or indirectly in the life of every companion of Jesus, as well as in the orientations of our existing apostolic works and in our choice of new ministries.[50]

The Constitutions of The Society of Jesus and Their Complimentary Norms

A Complete English Translation of the Official Latin Texts

THE INSTITUTE OF JESUIT SOURCES

SAINT LOUIS, 1996

https://web.archive.org/web/20200211182223/https://jesuitas.lat/uploads/the-constitutions-of-the-society-of-jesus-and-their-complementary-norms/Constitutions%20and%20Norms%20SJ%20ingls.pdf

Freemason Karl Heinrich Marx, 1818 – 1883 #155

Karl Marx, “the Father of Modern Communism” was himself an occultist and high-level Jewish Freemason, intimately associated with Rome’s Giuseppe Mazzini (1805-1872)—the foremost Freemason on the Continent and founder of the Mafia—and Albert Pike (1809-1891), the foremost Freemason in Fourteenth Amendment America and a leader of the first Ku Klux Klan. He was privately tutored by Jesuits in the huge Reading Room of the British Museum while writing The Communist Manifesto based upon the ten maxims or “planks” the Order had perfected on its Paraguayan Reductions (1609-1767) and its Maryland Reductions (1650-1838). His writings (including The Jewish Question in promoting the Company’s European “Jewish Question Agitation,” Marx claiming, “behind every tyrant stands a Jew, as a Jesuit stands behind every Pope,” and exhorting “the workers of the world to fight and eliminate such a cancer”) were financed by the Society’s wealthy, White Gentile cartel-capitalists, such as John D. Rockefeller, Jr., and J. P. Morgan, also 33rd Degree Freemasons who, being in their doctrines and deeds, were in fact the revived old Order of the crusading Papal Knights Templars. Brought to international fame in 1870 via the Order’s Paris Commune, Marx, a racial Jew, was chosen for this task, the Order intending to blame all the brutal and savage evils of their absolutist, Communist Inquisition on the Semitic/Hebrew/Israelitic/Jewish Race. This masterstroke of Jesuit genius was fulfilled by the Black Pope’s Third Reich with its invasion of Russia during “Operation Barbarossa,” followed by the Order’s SS “extirpation” of “infidel” European and Russian Jewry with the aid of Stalin, Churchill, and FDR pursuant to the bigoted and accursing Council of Trent. Marx and Satan, Richard Wurmbrand, (Westchester, Illinois: Crossway Books, 1986) p. 41. Karl Marx: A Life, Francis Wheen, (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1999).

Vatican Assassins:

“Wounded In The House Of My Friends”

Third Edition

by Eric Jon Phelps

https://ia802505.us.archive.org/28/items/EricJonPhelpsVaticanAssassins3rdEdition/Eric%20Jon%20Phelps%20-%20Vatican%20Assassins%203rd%20Edition.pdf

[525] 2. 1First of all the superior general, or the one who with his authority admits the subject to profession,[19] will celebrate Mass in the church publicly[20] before the members of the house and the others who happen to be present. Then with the most holy Sacrament he will turn toward the one who is making the profession [A], 2and he, after reciting the Confiteor and the words which precede Holy Communion,[21] will in a loud voice read[22] his written vow (which he will have pondered for some days in advance) in this formula [527].

[526] A. 1These details and those which follow below are appropriate and should be observed when possible, but they are not necessary. 2For it could happen that the one who through the superior general s order is admitting to profession is not a priest or is unable to celebrate Mass. 3What is essent ial is that the vow be read publicly in the presence of the Societ y s members and the externs who are present ,[23] and that it be made and received as a solemn vow.

[527] 3. 1 I, N., make profession, and I promise to Almighty God, in the presence of his Virgin Mother, the whole heavenly court, and all those here present, 2and to you, Reverend Father N., superior general of the Society of Jesus and the one holding the place of God, and to your successors (or, to you, Reverend Father N., representing the superior general of the Society of Jesus and his successors and holding the place of God), 3perpetual poverty, chastity, and obedience; and, in conformity with it, special care for the instruction of children [B] according to the manner of living contained in the apostolic letters of the Society of Jesus and in its Constitutions.

4 I further promise a special obedience to the sovereign pontiff in regard to the missions [C], according to the same apostolic letters and the Constitutions.

5 Rome, or elsewhere, on such a day, month, or year, and in such a church.

[528] B. 1The promise to instruct children and uneducated persons in conformity with the apostolic letters and the Constitutions does not induce a greater

[19] (This refers to receiving the vows.)

[20] Modified by a very ancient practice. (See note 30 to CN 132. This is noted by Fr. Nadal in a scholion to this number; indeed, this was already the usage from the profession of the first fathers: see MHSI, MI, Fontes narr. 1:21.)

[21] Modified because of a change in liturgical norms. (See CN 132.)

[22] (But see CN 130.) [23] Modified by CN 130. (For validity, some unambiguous expression of the vow that is taken is sufficient.) 206 The Constitutions and Norms obligation than the other spiritual exercises by which the neighbor is aided, 2such as confessions, preaching, and the like. Each one ought to employ himself in these as directed by the commands of his superiors. 3But the promise about the children is placed in the vow so that this holy practice may be held as something more especially enjoined and may be exercised with greater devotion, in view of the special service thereby given to God our Lord in aid of his souls 4and the greater danger of its being allowed to fall into oblivion and dropped than is the case with other more conspicuous services such as preaching and the like.

[530] 4. 1Thereupon the one professed will receive the most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist. 2When this has been done, his name should be written in the book of the Society which will exist for this purpose, along with the name of the person into whose hands he made the profession, with the day, month, and year in which it was made. 3His written vow should be preserved so that it may always be evidence of all this, to the glory of God our Lord.

[531] 5. 1Those who are admitted to the profession of only three solemn vows will read[24] their written vow in the church before receiving the most holy Sacrament, in the presence of the members of the house and the others from outside who are present. The formula is as follows:

[532] 6. 1 I, N., make profession, and I promise to Almighty God, in the presence of his Virgin Mother, the whole heavenly court, and all those here present, 2and to you, Reverend Father N., superior general of the Society of Jesus and the one holding the place of God, and to your successors (or, to you, Reverend Father N., representing the superior general of the Society of Jesus and his successors and holding the place of God) 3perpetual poverty, chastity, and obedience; and, in conformity with it, special care for the instruction of children, according to the manner of living contained in the apostolic letters of the Society of Jesus and its Constitutions.

Rome, or elsewhere, on such a day, month, and year, and in such a church.

4Thereupon Holy Communion will follow and all the rest, as was stated above.

[24] (See CN 130.)

The Constitutions of The Society of Jesus and Their Complimentary Norms

A Complete English Translation of the Official Latin Texts

THE INSTITUTE OF JESUIT SOURCES

SAINT LOUIS, 1996

https://jesuitas.lat/uploads/the-constitutions-of-the-society-of-jesus-and-their-complementary-norms/Constitutions%20and%20Norms%20SJ%20ingls.pdf

The Jesuit Oath

https://www.jamesjpn.net/religion/the-jesuit-oath

THE CHILD WHO MURDERS

A Review of Theory and Research

KATHRYNN A. ADAMS

Department of Psychology

University of Alabama

Moist people are aware of the existence of the child murderer

from newspaper headlines; yet, little scientific study has

been done on this category of offenders. Much previous

research involves the study and diagnosis of children and their

case histories and hypothesizes an element or elements common

to all the cases in that particular study. Thus far, however,

theorists have not agreed upon a single underlying cause or

group of causes which could explain and be used to predict all

instances of homicide committed by children.

It .is not surprising that little attention has been given to the

problem when one considers the small percentage of total crime

that the very young commit. In 1925, there were .8% murderers

per 100 male delinquents (Burt, 1965). A study done in the

Greater Cleveland area from 1947-1953 found only .9% of all

people charged with felonious homicide were between 11-15

years of age. Only two other age groups (76 years and older and

66-70 years old) had lower rates (Bensing and Schrader, 1960).

In a 1960-1963 study in Philadelphia, only 2, or 1.4%, of 145

offenses causing bodily harm were murder. The subjects were

youths of the city ranging from 7-18 years of age (Sellin and

Wolfgang, 1964).

[51]

[52]

CHARACTERISTICS OF CHILD MURDERERS

Child murderers almost defy definition. They represent

widely different socioeconomic backgrounds. Their personal

ities range from timid and withdrawn to aggressive and often

cruel. Some are troublesome; others are considered well-ad

justed and even do adequate schoolwork (Reinhardt, 1970). Of

the seventeen child murderers Reinhardt studied, only six had a

record of earlier offenses and only three &dquo;had exhibited

qualities of a potential murderer&dquo; (Reinhardt, 1970: xv). In

research done by Sargent (1962), none of nine killers had a

history of disobedience or delinquent behavior. Malnquist

(1971) studied twenty youths whose past offenses were

property or juvenile offenses. None had committed an offense

against a person before, but one had been present during a

murder by a friend a year earlier. These killers do not fit into

the street gang category of delinquents. They usually commit

their crime by themselves.

According to the studies made thus far, the reactions of

children to and motives for their homicidal acts are diverse. Just

as adult murderers, children are most likely to kill a family

members, friend, or frequent associate (Macdonald, 1961).

Motives in assault and homicide are often relatively trivial

(National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Vio

lence, 1969). This may suggest, however, that tensions and

frustrations had increased to the point where it only took a

seemingly unimportant event to trigger the pent-up emotions

and aggression. Burt (1965) says killing to a young child means

one of two things: (1) it is the most complete type of personal

revenge the child has heard of; or (2) an undesired individual

disappears forever. Reinhardt (1970) found most child mur

derers show no guilt. In the ones who did show guilt feelings,

the emotion was minimal. The youths could not give an answer

to why they killed except &dquo;for fun&dquo; or &dquo;I don’t know.&dquo; All nine

children in Sargent’s (1962) study perceived the fatal deed as

their own and willingly accepted responsibility for it. There was

no attempt to project the blame on anyone else. All but one,

though, denied any homicidal forethought. Bender (1959)

[53]

concluded that the children she studied neither anticipated nor

intended a person’s death to result from their activities. The

victim happened to block an activity, unintentionally fatal,

initiated by the child. Thus, Bender claims that death was

always accidental regardless of the child’s part in causing the

disastrous consequences. After the death, the child reacts

profoundly. Nothing before the death seems important any

more. For periods lasting as long as years, there is intense

mourning, during which the child attempts to reverse or deny

the death process. This finding of Bender appears opposite to

that of Reinhardt and Sargent.

Bender and Curran (1940) state there are different mecha

nisms in child and adolescent aggression. Adolescents seem to

show the same processes seen in adult aggressive criminals. They

accept the finality of the act and attempt to accept its effects

upon their lives, giving the artificial impression of not being

emotionally affected by refuting any blame and denying

feelings of guilt. Children cannot understand death. They do

not apprehend its permanence and believe it is reversible. A

prepuberty child tries to examine every method to convince

himself or herself that death is impossible.

The complexity and variety of homicidal acts and the

diversity of the offender characteristics and backgrounds are

associated with an unpromising scientific record in postulating

instigative factors. However, the socialization experience of a

child seems to be a well-accepted, albeit broad, area of

importance. Many researchers have found the family structure

and early childhood experience of child murderers to be similar,

especially the early deprivation of parental love and affection

(Guttmacher, 1960; National Commission on the Causes and

Prevention of Violence, 1969; Reinhardt, 1970). Family dis

organization is seen as one factor leading to physically

aggressive crime (Shulman, 1957). Bender (1959) thinks ex

tremely adverse home environments and life experiences are

significant in causing children to later become murderers.

Bender and Curran (1940) found the observable manifestation

of death wishes becomes dangerously exaggerated when the

competition within the family becomes strikingly acute due to

[54]

some external force or in foster home circumstances where the

child has no sound, favorable feelings of love to restrain or

control her or his strong aggressive tendencies. Most children

who commit homicides &dquo;come from broken homes or homes

grown hateful from a lack of parental love, heartless discipline,

incompatibility, unstable economic or emotional patterns, or an

absence of security and warmth&dquo; (Deutsch, 1950). Dr. Ralph S.

Banay, a psychiatrist, who has studied youth homicide, exten

sively divided child killers into five main categories, two of

which were: (1) children who had been emotionally starved,

neglected, and abused; and (2) products of a totally confused

and demoralizing home life in economically poor circumstances

(Deutsch, 1950).

MODELING AND VICTIM-PRECIPITATION

Experiences with violence in early childhood and parental

encouragement even though unconscious, seem to lead the child

in the direction of violence himself or herself. Children identify

with their parents who, as a model, demonstrate a lack of

impulse control and direct physical manifestation of their

aggressive tendencies. These children must cope with extra

emotional stress (Bender and Curran, 1940; Easson and Stein

hibler, 1961; Silver et al., 1969).

A child may be substituting for his or her parent or society in

his or her role as a murderer. Bromberg ( 1961 ) contends most

murderers gratify the needs and impulses of others. Created by

society as a vent for anti-social feelings, they serve as a

scapegoat for its guilt feelings. Sargent (1962: 35) attempts to

support the hypothesis that a child sometimes acts as an

innocent, but nonetheless deadly, agent of an adult (usually his

or her parent) who &dquo;unconsciously prompts the child to kill so

that he can vicariously enjoy the benefits of the act.&dquo; The adult

may exploit the latent hostility which the child feels toward his

or her victim while the child’s susceptibility and willingness to

act in accordance with prompting from the parent may stem

from the child’s immature ego and the emotional relationship

established between the two. In his study in Detroit of nine

killers, Sargent found that the surviving parent acted as if a

[55]

difficulty had been removed after the death of their spouse.

Even though they did not admit a conscious desire for the

victim to die or for their child to kill, all admitted they wished

the deceased out of the way. A strong protective attitude by the

child toward the provoking parent was also found.

A victim may aid in the cause of his or her death, either by

threats to the subsequent killer or by other forms of provoca

tion (Wolfgang, 1967). Nagging or ridicule by a parent or parent

substitute may provide the necessary stimulation for a child to

murder (Smith, 1965). Macdonald (1967) has named this

’

phenomena the &dquo;threat to kill.&dquo; The recipient of the threat to

kill was the first to behave in a menacing manner, and so the

victim brought about his or her own murder unintentionally

through his or her initial provoking action. In an unmotivated

murder (under which many child murders seem to fall), a victim

may also fit into the unconscious tensions of the murderer.

Thus, the victim unknowingly sets into motion a youngster’s

homicidal potential (Satten, 1960).

REACTIONS TO STRESS

The building up of tensions and frustrations, culminating in

murder by the child, may serve the function of turning built-up

aggression outward instead of inward; so actually saving the

child’s life. An association between the homicide-suicide phe

nomena has been postulated by Malnquist (1971). &dquo;Homicide

may serve the illusatory function of saving one’s self and ego

from disintegration by displacing onto someone else the focus

for aggressive discharge&dquo; (Malnquist, 1971: 465). Here, there

seems to be a choice of the lesser evil in preference of oneself.

The finding of Greenberg and Blank (1970) that there is no

evidence of children twelve years and below in recent American

literature who murdered and then destroyed themselves may

serve as proof of Malnquist’s theory. Studies have found that

between 4% and 35% of adult murderers commit suicide

(Dorpat, 1967).

Connected to Malnquist’s hypothesis may be what some

consider the final breaking point in committing murder. Halleck

(in Malnquist, 1971) thinks it is a feeling of hopelessness and

[56]

helplessness. A deep state of mourning is brought to the point

of no return because of the seeming hopelessness of relief. The

final impetus toward murder could be an irreconcilable insult to

the child’s integrity for which there seemed no repair (Maln

quist, 1971). Cormier (in Malnquist, 1971) has established a

relationship between depression and acts of violence. Just

whom the violence is toward may depend on environmental

factors.

Some children seem forced to commit murder to escape their

present environment. The theme of Reinhardt’s book, nothing

left but ... Murder, is that children have no choice but to kill

because their lives are so full of unhappiness and failures which

the people in their environment seem to try to aggrevate.

Homicide may be an adolescent’s way of dealing with unbear

able situations due to his or her parents’ exerting of authority

(Bender and Curran, 1940).

Several investigators have divided child killers into categories

of causes other than those mentioned above. These lists often

overlap in their content, but no two are exactly alike. Bender

(1959), Malnquist ( 1971 ), Reinhardt (1970), and Smith (1965)

state one rarely finds an instance where some form of emotional

disturbance is not conspicuously present. Bender claims the

psychopathology is usually in the form of brain disease,

epilepsy, or schizophrenia. Diagnosis of the disturbances by the

others range from schizophrenia to personality disorders and

psychopathy. Other researchers see child murderers as normal

psychologically (Bromberg, 1961; Easson and Steinhibler, 1961;

Guttmacher, 1960; Shulman, 1957). These investigators rely on

early childhood experience and present environmental condi

tions to explain the child’s actions. Two studies suggest that

organic sickness, especially in the brain, causing a devaluation of

the self and increasing locomotor activity and impulsivity may

partly cause. the child’s homicidal act (Bender, 1959; Bender

and Curran, 1940).

An ego defect which allows recurrent breakthroughs of

strong, aggressive impulses, sometimes of homicidal propor

tions, is also hypothesized as a cause of children murdering

(Sargent, 1962; Satten, 1960; Shulman, 1957; Smith, 1965).

[57]

Frequently, young adolescents barely remember their violent

deed. &dquo;The amnesia that so frequently cloaks these outbursts

for the time that the usual controls are lost stems in part from

the fact that the patient’s regressing to a precognitive undiffer

entiated ego state from which memory is likely to be only

fragmentary at best&dquo; (Smith, 1965: 316). Smith goes further to

state that these children have an immature capacity for

identification. The abundant and vivid fantasy life of some

children, which makes it difficult for them to perceive the

difference between reality and fantasy, may play a part in

homicidal acts (Bender, 1959; Satten, 1960; Smith, 1965).

Megargee (1967) hypothesizes overcontrolled and under

controlled aggressive types are assaulting offenders. Most

children develop inhibitions against parenticide and usually

against other forms of homicide during their formative years.

Consequently, most matricides and patricides come after a

certain amount of conflict. From Megargee’s theory, one could

guess children who commit murder overcontrol or undercontrol

their aggression and that their environmental situation is

frustrating. Banay (in Reinhardt, 1970) postulates one more

category of child killers-the &dquo;model children,&dquo; but gives no

explanation of the causes of their killing.

With such varied hypotheses regarding causative factors, it

seems almost impossible to predict who will become a child

murderer. However, investigators are finally getting clues.

Deutsch (1950) claims there is a striking indication of deviant

behavior patterns in most child killers, paralleling ones found in

children with serious emotional problems. Without treatment,

these symptoms may become exacerbated or channeled into a

form manifesting itself as murderous action. In a study by

Malnquist (1971) of twenty adolescents charged with murder,

signs before the homicides were committed were found. The

signs included &dquo;behavioral changes, ’cries for help,’ use of drugs,

object losses, threats to manhood, somatization, emotional

crescendo, and homosexual threats&dquo; (Malnquist, 1971: 461).

LEGAL REACTIONS AND TREATMENT

Most states deny children the status of juvenile delinquent

[58]

when they commit homicide. The law typically assumes a child

has not reached a degree of sophistication intellectually or

emotionally to qualify him or her as responsible for an act; but

there is an apparent exclusion when the offense is especially

noxious to society. Then, complete responsibility is placed on

the child, and she or he faces the full brunt of the law (Deutsch,

1950; Malnquist, 1971). After being sent to adult court, the

case must be settled by application of M’Naghten Rule or one

of the several other rules of criminal liability. The test for

criminality is thus knowledge of good and evil. Yet not all who

commit homicide are seen for psychiatric evaluation. Some are

waived without being seen under the juvenile court, and, once

they are under adult court, there is no requirement for appraisal

unless a specific motion is made. A juvenile may proceed

through the criminal justice system without examination of the

act except for the evidence needed for conviction (Malnquist,

1971 ). The psychological study of a murderer must go beyond

the knowledge of right and wrong.

Most juvenile murderers are sentenced to long terms in state

reformatories or penitentiaries. Only a lucky few are sent to

mental hospitals or schools for the emotionally disturbed, and

even fewer receive the concentrated treatment they need

(Deutsch, 1950). (Of course, this implies that all murderers are

emotionally disturbed.) Deutsch (1950) and Smith (1965) think

the emotional injuries incurred are often permanent. Since

children are prone to violent expressions of feeling, the first

concern to them is protection, and the best solution is to

institutionalize the child for his or her own and for society’s

good and safety. The highly structured institutional setting

should provide the patient with firm external controls. Bender.

(1959) and Bender and Curran (1940) claim intensive treatment

over an extended duration is necessary, not from the factors

leading to the murder, but for the intense reactions of the child

from it.

If it can be detected from sound evidence that parental

encouragement prompted the murder, the information should

be given to the child to alleviate his or her extreme guilt. It

could also be used as extenuating circumstances in the child’s

[59]

behalf before the court. If the child’s behavior serves his or her

parent’s unconscious motives and the parent has antagonistic

feelings toward a family member, it is necessary to be alert to

the potential danger. Therapeutic intervention with the child

and parent may be called for, as may removal of the child from

his or her home (Sargent, 1962).

PREDICTION AND PREVENTION

There is great need to predict this violent behavior of

children and intervene therapeutically. For this group, deter

rence has failed. More than race, social class, age, and urban area

predisposition are needed. Malnquist (1971) concluded that

certain warning signs and symptoms culminating in homicide

appeared consistently, but the main difficulty is the prevalence

of similar characteristics in people who never commit violent

crimes or acts. And the potential injustices done by overpredic

tion of dangerousness-i.e., false positives-have been decried by

many. One objective is to determine through psychiatric

interviews and psychological testing the existence of these

danger signals hours or days before the outburst. Megargee

(1967) attempted to develop an MMPI scale to predict overt

aggressive behavior and was unable to derive a simple aggressive

scale. He did, however, construct and cross-validate one which

appears to assess overcontrolled hostility, a theoretical precur

sor to violence.

Deutsch (1950) does not see the major problem as one of

identifying premonitory signals and alerting professional mental

and legal attention, but one of making contact with the family

that can be accepted. Too many times treatment is recom

mended, but ignored. Often the disorder or problem is sensed

and apprehended by adults, but is pushed aside or treated too

little or too late. Who is then to blame-emotionally crippled

children or organized society?

Deutsch (1950) recommends extensive preventive measure

ments. School systems should offer adequate mental health

services, including both psychiatric and social casework, for

problem children. Prompt and effective treatment could then be

provided emotionally disturbed children. Child-guidance clinics

[60]

with competent professional staffs should be established in all

large communities. Basic to the problem of prevention is

extensive research on the physical, mental, emotional, and

environmental elements contributing to child delinquency and

especially those resulting in homicidal behavior.

The child killer phenomenon is defmitely a problem that

needs attention. Guttmacher (1960) contends there is a certain

amount of violent hostility within all people that they must

express. Bromberg (1961) claims that since a murderer is only

fulfilling the needs and urges of others, everyone is a potential

murderer. One must then predict murderers from the entire

population of children. This is consistent with the variety of

backgrounds and traits found among child killers and the

diverse situations in which the murder is committed. The

context in which the aggressive act takes place is important and

certainly must be considered in court and in diagnosis and

treatment.

A major question is: what causes these aggressive reactions to

be expressed by some children in such a violent manner? The

answer can be found from more objective and intensive study of

child offenders, their personality, and their environment.

Follow-up and longitudinal studies are needed to see the effects

of the homicidal act and treatment upon the youths. Other

research must concentrate on the prediction of killers and

consequently treat the children, preventing their homicidal acts.

Too many try to solve the problem with a one-cause, one-cure

approach. The important predisposition variables that cause one

to act out his aggression vary in different theoretical frame

works. The best explanation will probably be found in a

combination of these frameworks. Hostile aggression in children

does not seem to be innate or instinctive, but a reaction to

deprivation and frustration arising from maturational disorders

and environmental factors that fail to meet the child’s needs.

[61]

REFERENCES---

BENDER, L. (1959) "Children and adolescents who have killed." Amer. J. of

Psychiatry 116: 510-513.

and F. J. CURRAN (1940) "Children and adolescents who kill." J. of Criminal

Psychopathology 1: 297-322.

BENSING, R. C. and O. SCHRADER (1960) Homicide in an Urban Community.

Springfield, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas.

BROMBERG, W. (1961) The Mold of Murder: A Psychiatric Study of Homicide.

New York: Grune & Stratton.

BURT, C. (1965) The Young Delinquent. London: Univ. of London Press.

DEUTSCH, A. (1950) Our Rejected Children. Boston: Little, Brown.

DORPAT, T. L. (1967) "Suicide in murderers," pp. 193-197 in M. Wolfgang (ed.)

Studies in Homicide. New York: Harper & Row.

EASSON, W. M. and R. M. STEINHIBLER (1961) "Murderous aggression by

children and adolescents." Archives of General Psychiatry 4: 1-9.

GREENBERG, H. R. and R. H. BLANK (1970) "Murder and self-destruction by a 12

year old boy." Adolescence 5: 391-396.

GUTTMACHER, M. S. (1960) The Mind of the Murderer. New York: Farrar, Stras &

Cudahy.

MACDONALD, J. M. (1967) "The threat to kill," pp. 103-113 in M. Wolfgang (ed.)

Studies in Homicide. New York: Harper & Row.--- (1961 ) The Murderer and His Victims. Springfield, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas.

MALNQUIST, C. P. (1971) "Premonitory signs of homicidal aggression in juveniles."

Amer. J. of Psychiatry 128: 461-465.

MEGARGEE, E. (1967) "Matricide, patricide, and the dynamics of aggression."

Presented at the Florida State University Symposium on Murder Within the

Family, American Psychological Association Convention, Washington, D.C.

National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence (1969) Violent

Crime. New York: George Braziller.

REINHARDT, J. M. (1970) nothing left but ... Murder. Lincoln, Neb.: Johnsen.

SARGENT, D. (1962) "Children who kill-a family conspiracy?" Social Work 17:

35-42.

SATTEN, J. (1960) "Murder without apparent motive: a study in personality

disorganization." Amer. J. of Psychiatry 117: 48-53.

SELLIN, T. and M. WOLFGANG (1964) The Measurement of Delinquency. New

York: John Wiley.

SHULMAN, H. M. (1957) "A social science view of delinquency causation and

control," pp. 124-145 in F. J. Cohen (ed.) Youth and Crime. New York:

International Universities Press.

SILVER, L. B., C. C. DUBLIN, and R. S. LOURIE (1969) "Does violence breed

violence?" Amer. J. of Psychiatry 126: 404-407.

SMITH, S. (1965) "The adolescent murderer." Archives of General Psychiatry 13:

310-319.

WOLFGANG, M. (1967) "Victim-precipitated criminal homicide," pp. 72-87 in M.

Wolfgang (ed.) Studies in Homicide. New York: Harper & Row.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/009385487400100107

ISIS child soldier with an AK47 rifle given by his teacher pledges allegiance to the terrorist group

Article Meta February 2, 2018

Shocking images from one of the Islamic State’s terrorist training camps for children show pre-teen boys being awarded AK47 assault rifles for good behaviour and firing machine guns.

The children are so-called ‘Cubs of the Caliphate’ – the name given to children who have been brainwashed with ISIS ideologies and trained to fight and kill for the terror group.

Since their early days of power, the all-but obliterated terrorist organisation has been using children as front-line soldiers and suicide attackers, and these images indicate that the practice is ongoing despite their recent defeats in Iraq and Syria.

ISIS propaganda chiefs – desperate to show their regime is still functioning despite the loss of 30,000 fighters and virtually all its lands – released the pics of the ‘Cubs’ at their training camp.

The youngsters are shown carrying out gruelling physical exercises and handling weapons.

One lad – laying prone on the ground – aims a machine gun that is virtually the same length as the tiny recruit.

Others are shown receiving copies of the Koran and pledging their allegiance to the murderous regime.

The chilling catalogue of pictures are said to be from a camp in Syria’s Damascus province where ISIS still has pockets of land.

The pictures come as the UK’s leading counter terrorist police officer warned children trained by Islamic State monsters could return to the UK to ‘commit atrocities’.

The head of the Met’s Counter Terrorism Command, Commander Dean Haydon, said that as a result of the growing threat, all those returning to Britain from Iraq and Syria are assessed on a case-by-case basis.

Commander Haydon said: ‘A child in a war zone would have seen some pretty horrendous things.

‘Some terror groups are training children to commit atrocities.

‘We need to not just understand the risk the mother poses but the risk that any child poses as well. We look at them on a case-by-case basis and they may be arrested.’

His chilling warning comes after a suspected jihadi bride became the first to return to the UK with a baby born under ISIS in Syria last month.

The unnamed 27-year-old was arrested at Heathrow Airport in London after arriving back in the country with her child.

The terror suspect landed on a flight from Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa nine days ago, in an apparent attempt to cover her tracks

But cops from Scotland Yard’s counter-terror squad were waiting for her when she landed.

Her toddler son, whose nationality is unclear, has been taken into care.

She was reportedly released on bail while police inquiries continue.

https://www.gfatf.org/archives/teacher-pledges-allegiance-terrorist/

What is Chrislam?

Answer

Chrislam is an attempt to syncretize Christianity with Islam. While it began in Nigeria in the 1980s, Chrislamic ideas have spread throughout much of the world. The essential concept of Chrislam is that Christianity and Islam are compatible, that one can be a Christian and a Muslim at the same time. Chrislam is not an actual religion of its own, but a blurring of the differences and distinctions between Christianity and Islam.

Advocates of Chrislam point to facts such as Jesus being mentioned 25 times in the Qur’an, or Christianity and Islam having similar teachings on morals and ethics, or the need for the two largest monotheistic religions to unite to fight against the rise of atheism and alternative spirituality. Chrislam is viewed by some as the solution for the ongoing conflict between the Western world, which is predominantly Christian, and the Middle East, which is predominantly Muslim.

While it is undeniable that there are many similarities between Christianity and Islam (and Judaism, for that matter), Chrislam ultimately fails because Christianity and Islam are diametrically opposed on the most important of issues – the identity of Jesus Christ. True Christianity declares Jesus to be God incarnate. For Christians, the deity of Christ is a non-negotiable, for without His deity, Jesus’ death on the cross would not have been sufficient to be the atoning sacrifice for the sins of the entire world (1 John 2:2).

Islam adamantly rejects the deity of Christ. The Qur’an declares the idea that Jesus is God to be blasphemy (5:17). Belief in the deity of Christ is considered shirk (“polytheism”) to Muslims. Further, Islam denies the death of Christ on the cross (4:157–158). The most crucial doctrine of the Christian faith is rejected in Islam. As a result, the two religions are absolutely not compatible, making Chrislam a concept both Christians and Muslims should reject.

https://www.gotquestions.org/Chrislam.html

mosque (mŏsk)

A building used as a place of Muslim worship.

[French mosquée, from Middle French mousquaie, from Old Italian moschea, variant of moscheta, alteration (possibly with influence from Old Italian mosco, MUSK, in reference to the perfuming of mosques with musk and the mixing of musk into the mortar used to build them) of meschita, from Old Spanish mezquita and Medieval Latin mezquita, from early Arabic (possibly Yemeni dialectal) masgida (attested in early Arabic documents written in the Greek alphabet; compare classical Arabic masjid and Berber tamasgida, mosque, an early borrowing from Arabic), from Aramaic masgədā, definite form (with -ā, suffixed definite article) of *masgid, place of worship, altar; see MASJID.]

https://www.ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=mosque

The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)[note 1] is an initiative of the second Donald Trump administration in the United States tasked with reducing federal spending. It was established on January 20, 2025, by an executive order renaming the United States Digital Service (USDS) to the United States DOGE Service (USDS), and establishing a temporary organization, the U.S. DOGE Service Temporary Organization (USDSTO), within USDS.[6][7] The initiative established "DOGE teams" at federal agencies and aims to carry out spending cuts and "modernize federal technology and software to maximize governmental efficiency and productivity".[6][8] USDSTO is scheduled to be dissolved on July 4, 2026.[9]

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

Elon Musk breaks silence on Twitter, posts a picture with the pope

By Reuters

July 2, 20226:13 AM PDT Updated 2 years ago

July 2 (Reuters) - Elon Musk on Friday night broke his nine-day silence on Twitter, the social media platform he is trying to buy for $44 billion, posting a picture of him meeting Pope Francis on Thursday.

The world's richest person tweeted a picture where he can be seen standing next to the pope, captioning it: "Honored to meet @pontifex yesterday."

Musk's four teenage boys are also pictured, but not his 18-year-old transgender daughter who, on June 20 sought to change her name and sever ties with him. Musk has a total of eight children. read more

The purpose and location of Musk's meeting with the pope were not immediately clear.

Last month, Musk said there were "still a few unresolved matters" on the deal to buy Twitter, including the number of spam users on the system and the coming together of the debt portion of the deal.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/musk-breaks-silence-twitter-posts-picture-with-pope-2022-07-02/

Pontifex Maximus

Introduction

The head priest of the Roman state religion was the Pontifex Maximus, or the greatest of the college of pontifices. While an obviously important and prominent position within the ranks of the Roman system, the Pontifex Maximus was not considered a magistrate comparable to a Consul, Praetor, etc.

During the Republic, the Pontifex was elected by the Comitia Tributa and served for life, while during the Empire, the position was generally held by the Emperor himself.

Originally, the Ponifices were Patrician only, but the social conditions and changes during the late Republic allowed for Plebeian election as well. These men were responsible for the oversight of the state religious cult as a whole and didn't really oversee particular godly cults, though they could if necessary.

By the Imperial period there were 16 pontifices under the high priest, 15 flamines, who were special priests of the main deities, and the Rex Sacrorum (king of the sacrifices) who performed the religious acts that the king had usually done. Perhaps most importantly, he was he was also responsible for the 18 Vestal Virgins.

The main duty of the pontifices was to provide the pax deorum, or the 'peace with the gods'. Interpreting omens, sometimes through augures, controlling and keeping the official calendar, and the oversight of funerals all fell under the domain of the Pontifex Maximus.

He was responsible for an enormous collection of omens (annales maximi); that would be recorded and collected on a nearly constant basis. These heavenly signs would be written down along with accompanying events, and used to determine the divine favor of the gods. Doing so allowed following generations of priests and magistrates to understand the historic will of the gods and interpret future events against past patterns.

Today, the head of the Roman Catholic Church, the Pope, is still called the Pontifex Maximus. It's a political or governing office that has been in existence and in perpetual use for nearly 3,000 years.

Pontifex Maximus List

Roman Office of the Pontifex Maximus

Year

Pontifex

Notes

712 BC

Numa Pompilius

The office was said to begin during the tenure of the Kings of Rome. However, very little recorded evidence exists. This name has been recorded as Numa Marcius and it is difficult to determine if it was a different person, or the actual second king of Rome.

509 BC

Papirius

Complete dates in office unknown.

449 BC

Furius

Complete dates in office unknown.

431 BC

Cornelius Cossas

Complete dates in office unknown.

420 BC

Minucius

Complete dates in office unknown.

390 BC

Follius Flaccinator

Complete dates in office unknown.

332 - 304 BC

Cornelius Callissa

304 - ? BC

Cornelius Scipio Barbatus

Complete dates in office unknown.

254 - 243 BC

Tib. Coruncanius

First Plebeian Pontifex Maximus

243 - 221 BC

Caecilius Metellus

217 - 213 BC

Cornelius Lentulus Caudinus

212 - 183 BC

Licinius Crassus Dives

183 - 180 BC

Servilius Geminus

180 - 152 BC

Aemilius Lepidus

152 -150 BC

No Pontifex Maximus

150 - 141 BC

Cornelius Scipio Nasica Corculum

141 - 132 BC

Publius Cornelius Scipio Nasica Serapio

Described by Plutarch as the first Pontifex to break the religious law not allowing him to leave Italy.

132 - 130 BC

Licinius Crassus Dives Mucianus

Also noted as the first to leave Italy, during the social disorder of the Gracchi Brothers. After which, it became increasingly common and certainly not against the law for the Pontifex to leave Italy.

? - 115 BC

P. Mucius Scaevola

Complete dates in office unknown, but assumedly shortly after his predecessor.

114 - 103 BC

Caecilius Metellus Delmaticus

103 - 89 BC

Domitius Ahenobarbus

89 - 82 BC

Q. Mucius Scaevola

81 - 63 BC

Caecilius Metellus Pius

63 - 44 BC

Gaius Julius Caesar

44 - 13 BC

Aemilius Lepidus

12 BC

Augustus

With the accession of Augustus, the election of the Pontifex Maximus ceased as each successive emperor held the office. In 382 AD, when the Eastern emperor Theodosius established Christianity as the official religion of the empire, the Western Emperor Gratian relinquished the office to the Christian Popes of Rome, who have held it since that time.

Did you know...

Julius Caesar was elected pontifex maximus in 63 BCE and kept the office until his death. The house where he spent the night before he was killed, was the domus publica.

https://www.unrv.com/culture/pontifex-maximus.php

9. Interprovincial Works and Houses in Rome

§2. Also recommended to the care of all the provinces are those other works or houses in Rome that render a service to the entire Society, such as the Historical Institute of the Society of Jesus and the international colleges of the Society in Rome.[142]

The Constitutions of The Society of Jesus and Their Complimentary Norms

A Complete English Translation of the Official Latin Texts

THE INSTITUTE OF JESUIT SOURCES

SAINT LOUIS, 1996

https://web.archive.org/web/20200211182223/https://jesuitas.lat/uploads/the-constitutions-of-the-society-of-jesus-and-their-complementary-norms/Constitutions%20and%20Norms%20SJ%20ingls.pdf

Can. 666 In the use of means of social communication, necessary discretion is to be observed and those things are to be avoided which are harmful to one’s vocation and dangerous to the chastity of a consecrated person."

TITLE II. RELIGIOUS INSTITUTES (Cann. 607 - 709)

CODE OF CANON LAW

https://www.vatican.va/archive/cod-iuris-canonici/eng/documents/cic_lib2-cann607-709_en.html

Head:

1. See Illness, mental

2. The superior general, head of the Society [666]"

page 463

The Constitutions of The Society of Jesus and Their Complimentary Norms

A Complete English Translation of the Official Latin Texts

THE INSTITUTE OF JESUIT SOURCES

SAINT LOUIS, 1996

https://web.archive.org/web/20200211182223/https://jesuitas.lat/uploads/the-constitutions-of-the-society-of-jesus-and-their-complementary-norms/Constitutions%20and%20Norms%20SJ%20ingls.pdf

Revelation 13:18

New International Version

18 This calls for wisdom. Let the person who has insight calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man.[a] That number is 666.

Read full chapter

Footnotes

Revelation 13:18 Or is humanity’s number

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%2013%3A18&version=NIV

Civil Twilight:

Begins in the morning, or ends in the evening, when the geometric center of the sun is 6 degrees below the horizon. Therefore morning civil twilight begins when the geometric center of the sun is 6 degrees below the horizon, and ends at sunrise. Evening civil twilight begins at sunset, and ends when the geometric center of the sun is 6 degrees below the horizon. Under these conditions absent fog or other restrictions, the brightest stars and planets can be seen, the horizon and terrestrial objects can be discerned, and in many cases, artificial lighting is not needed. Civil Twilight is also known as Civil Dawn and Civil Dusk.

Nautical Twilight:

Begins in the morning, or ends in the evening, when the geometric center of the sun is 12 degrees below the horizon. In general, the term nautical twilight refers to sailors being able to take reliable readings via well known stars because the horizon is still visible, even under moonless conditions. Absent fog or other restrictions, outlines of terrestrial objects may still be discernible, but detailed outdoor activities are likely curtailed without artificial illumination. Nautical Twilight is also known as Nautical Dawn and Nautical Dusk.

Astronomical Twilight:

Begins in the morning, or ends in the evening, when the geometric center of the sun is 18 degrees below the horizon. In astronomical twilight, sky illumination is so faint that most casual observers would regard the sky as fully dark, especially under urban or suburban light pollution. Under astronomical twilight, the horizon is not discernible and moderately faint stars or planets can be observed with the naked eye under a non light polluted sky. But to test the limits of naked eye observations, the sun needs to be more than 18 degrees below the horizon. Point light sources such as stars and planets can be readily studied by astronomers under astronomical twilight. But diffuse light sources such as galaxies, nebula, and globular clusters need to be observed under a totally dark sky, again when the sun is more than 18 degrees below the horizon.

https://www.weather.gov/fsd/twilight

BULL of Pope Boniface VIII promulgated November 18, 1302

For, according to the Blessed Dionysius, it is a law of the divinity that the lowest things reach the highest place by intermediaries. Then, according to the order of the universe, all things are not led back to order equally and immediately, but the lowest by the intermediary, and the inferior by the superior. Hence we must recognize the more clearly that spiritual power surpasses in dignity and in nobility any temporal power whatever, as spiritual things surpass the temporal. This we see very clearly also by the payment, benediction, and consecration of the tithes, but the acceptance of power itself and by the government even of things. For with truth as our witness, it belongs to spiritual power to establish the terrestrial power and to pass judgement if it has not been good. Thus is accomplished the prophecy of Jeremias concerning the Church and the ecclesiastical power: ‘Behold to-day I have placed you over nations, and over kingdoms‘ and the rest. Therefore, if the terrestrial power err, it will be judged by the spiritual power; but if a minor spiritual power err, it will be judged by a superior spiritual power; but if the highest power of all err, it can be judged only by God, and not by man, according to the testimony of the Apostle: ‘The spiritual man judgeth of all things and he himself is judged by no man‘ [1 Cor 2:15]. This authority, however, (though it has been given to man and is exercised by man), is not human but rather divine, granted to Peter by a divine word and reaffirmed to him (Peter) and his successors by the One Whom Peter confessed, the Lord saying to Peter himself, ‘Whatsoever you shall bind on earth, shall be bound also in Heaven‘ etc., [Mt 16:19]. Therefore whoever resists this power thus ordained by God, resists the ordinance of God [Rom 13:2], unless he invent like Manicheus two beginnings, which is false and judged by us heretical, since according to the testimony of Moses, it is not in the beginnings but in the beginning that God created heaven and earth [Gen 1:1]. Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff."

https://www.papalencyclicals.net/bon08/b8unam.htm

1 John 2

1599 Geneva Bible

2 1 He declareth that Christ is our mediator and advocate, 3 and showeth that the knowledge of God consisteth in holiness of life, 12 which appertaineth to all sorts, 14 that depend on Christ alone: 15 Then having exhorteth them to contemn the world, 18 he giveth warning that Antichrists be avoided, 24 and that the known truth be stood unto.

1 My [a]little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not: and if any man sin, we have an [b]Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ, the Just.

2 And he is the [c]reconciliation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the [d]whole world.

3 [e]And hereby we are sure that we [f]know him, [g]if we keep his commandments.

4 [h]He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

5 [i]But he that keepeth his word, in him is the [j]love of God perfect indeed: hereby we know that we are in [k]him.

6 [l]He that saith he remaineth in him, ought even so to walk as he hath walked.

7 [m]Brethren, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment, which ye have had from the beginning: this old commandment is that word, which ye have heard from the beginning.

8 [n]Again, a new commandment I write unto you, that [o]which is true in him: and also in you: for the darkness is past, and that true light now shineth.

9 [p]He that saith that he is in that light, and hateth his brother, is in darkness, until this time.

10 He that loveth his brother, abideth in that light, and there is no occasion of evil in him.

11 But he that hateth his brother, is in darkness, and walketh in darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because that darkness hath blinded his eyes.

12 [q]Little children, [r]I write unto you, because your sins are forgiven you for his [s]Name’s sake.

13 [t]I write unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. [u]I write unto you, young men, because ye have overcome that wicked one. [v]I write unto you, little children, because ye have known the Father.

14 [w]I have written unto you fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I have written unto you, young men, because ye are strong, and the word of God abideth in you, and ye have overcome that wicked one.

15 [x]Love not this [y]world, neither the things that are in this world. If any man love this world, the [z]love of the Father is not in him.

16 For all that is in this world, (as the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life) is not of the Father, but is of this world.

17 [aa]And this world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that fulfilleth the will of God, abideth ever.

18 [ab][ac]Little children, [ad]it is the last time, [ae]and as ye have heard that Antichrist shall come, even now there are many Antichrists: whereby we know that it is the last time.

19 [af]They went out from us, but they were not of us: for if they had been of us, [ag]they should have continued with us. [ah]But this cometh to pass, that it might appear, that they are not all of us.

20 [ai]But ye have an [aj]ointment from that [ak]Holy one, and know all things.

21 [al]I have not written unto you, because ye know not the truth: but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth.

22 [am]Who is a liar, but he that denieth that Jesus is [an]that Christ? the same is that Antichrist that denieth the Father and the Son.

23 [ao]Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father.

24 [ap]Let therefore abide in you that same which ye have heard from the beginning. If that which ye have heard from the beginning, shall remain in you, ye shall also continue in the Son, and in the Father.

25 And this is the promise that he hath promised us, even that eternal life.

26 [aq]These things have I written unto you, concerning them that deceive you.

27 But that [ar]anointing which ye received of him, dwelleth in you: and ye [as]need not that any man teach you: but as the same [at]anointing teacheth you of all things, and it is true and is not lying, and as it taught you, ye shall abide in him.

28 [au]And now, little children, abide in him, that when he shall appear, we may be bold, and not be ashamed before him, at his coming.

29 [av]If ye know that he is righteous, know ye that he which doeth righteously, is born of him.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20John%202&version=GNV

JESUIT AND ROSICRUCIAN TRAINING

GA 131

This lecture is in the collected edition of Rudolf Steiner's works; the volume containing the German texts is entitled, Von Jesus Zu Christus, From Jesus to Christ (Vol. 131 in the Bibliographic Survey, 1961). It is the first lecture in this series of ten lectures.

5 October 1911, Karlsruhe

Translator Unknown

The object of these lectures is to place before you an idea of the Christ Event in so far as it is connected with the historical appearance of the Christ in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. So many questions of the spiritual life are bound up with this subject that the choice of it will enable us to make a wide survey of the realm of Spiritual Science and its mission, and to discuss the significance of the Anthroposophical Movement for the spiritual life of the present time. We shall also have the opportunity of learning what the content of religion is. And since this content must spring from the common heritage of mankind, we shall seek to know it in its relation to the deeper sources of religious life, and to what the sources of occult science have to tell us concerning the foundation of all religious and philosophic endeavors. Much that we shall have to discuss will seem to lie very far from the theme itself, but it will all lead us back to our main purpose.

We shall best come to a more precise understanding of our subject — modern religious life on the one hand and the spiritual-scientific deepening of spiritual life on the other — if we glance at the origins both of religious life on the one hand and of occult spiritual life in recent centuries, for as regards spiritual development in Europe during this period, we can discern two directions of thought which have been cultivated with the utmost intensity: on the one hand an exaggeration of the Jesus-Principle, and on the other a most careful, conscientious preservation of the Christ-Principle. When we place before our minds these two recent streams, we must see in the exaggeration of the Jesus-Principle a great and dangerous error in the spiritual life of those times, and on the other side a movement of deep significance, a movement which seeks above all the true paths and is careful to avoid the paths of error. From the outset, therefore, in our judgment of two entirely different spiritual movements, we have to ascribe serious error to one of them and most earnest efforts after truth to the other.

The movement which interests us in connection with out spiritual-scientific point of view, and which we may call an extraordinarily dangerous error in a certain sense, is the movement known in the external world as Jesuitism. In Jesuitism we encounter a dangerous exaggeration of the Jesus-Principle. In the other movement, which for centuries has existed in Europe as Rosicrucianism, we have an inward Christ-movement which above all seeks carefully for the ways of truth.

Ever since a Jesuitical current arose in Europe, much has been said and written in exoteric life about Jesuitism. Those who wish to study spiritual life from its deeper sources will thus be concerned to see how far Jesuitism signifies a dangerous exaggeration of the Jesus-Principle. If we wish to arrive at a true characterisation of Jesuitism, we must get to know how the three chief principles of world-evolution, which are indicated in the most varied ways in the different world-outlooks, find practical statement in human life, including exoteric life. Today we will first of all turn quite away from the deeper significance and characterisation of these 3 fundamental streams, which run through all life and all evolution, and will review them from an external point of view.

First of all we have the cognitional element in our soul-life. Now, whatever may be said against the abstractions of a one-sided intellectual search for truth, or against the alienation from life of many scientific, philosophical and theosophical endeavors, anyone who is clear in his own mind as to what he wills and what he can will, knows that Cognition belongs to the most deeply rooted activities of the soul. For whether we seek knowledge chiefly through thinking, or more through sensation or feeling, Cognition always signifies a taking account of the world around us, and also of ourselves. Hence we must say that whether we are satisfied for the moment with the simplest experiences of the soul, or whether we wish to devote ourselves to the most complicated analysis of the mysteries of existence, Cognition is the primary and most significant question. For it is basically through Cognition that we form a picture of the content of the world — a picture we live by and from which our entire soul-life is nourished. The very first sense-impression, in fact all sense-life, must be included in the realm of Cognition, along with the highest formulations of the intellect.

Under Cognition we must include also the impulse to distinguish between the beautiful and the ugly, for although it is true in a certain sense that there is no disputing about taste, yet cognition is involved when someone has adopted a certain judgment in a question of taste and can distinguish between the beautiful and the ugly. Again, our moral impulses — those which prompt us to do good and abstain from evil — must be seen as moral ideas, as cognition, or as impulses to do the one and avoid the other. Even what we call our conscience, however vague the impulses from it may be, comes under the heading of Cognition. In short, the world we are consciously aware of, whether it be reality or maya; the world we live in consciously, everything we are conscious of — all this can be embraced under the heading: cognitive spiritual life.

Everyone, however, must acknowledge that under the surface of this cognitive life something else can be discerned; that in our everyday existence our soul-life gives evidence of many things which are not part of our conscious life. When we wake up in the morning, our soul-life if always strengthened and refreshed and newly born from sleep. During the unconsciousness of sleep we have gained something which is outside the realm of conscious cognition, but comes from a region where our soul is active below the level of consciousness.

In waking life, too, we must admit that we are impelled by impulses, instincts and forces which throw up their waves into our conscious life, while they work and have their being below it. We become aware that they work below the conscious when they rise above the surface which separates the conscious from the subconscious soul-life of this kind, for we can see how in the moral realm this or that ideal comes to birth. It takes only a little self-knowledge to realise that these ideals do rise up into our soul-life, but that we are far from always knowing how our great moral ideals are connected with the deepest questions of existence, or how they belong to the will of God, in which they must ultimately be grounded. We might indeed compare our soul-life in its totality with a deep ocean. The depths of this oceanic soul-life throw up waves to the surface, and those that break out into the realm of air, which we can compare with normal consciousness, are brought within the range of conscious cognition. All conscious life is rooted in a subconscious soul-life.

Fundamentally, the whole evolution of mankind can be understood only if a subconscious soul-life of this kind is acknowledged. For what does the progress of spiritual life signify save that many things which have long dwelt down below take form for the first time when they are brought to surface level? So it is, for example, when an inventive idea arises in the form of an impulse towards discovery. Subconscious soul-life, as real as our conscious life, must therefore be recognized as a second element in our life of soul.

If we place this subconscious soul-life in a realm that is at first unknown — but not unknowable — we must contrast it with a third element. This element is immediately apparent to external, exoteric observation, for if we turn our attention to the outer world through our senses, or approach it through our intellect or any form of mental activity, we come to know all sorts of things. But a more exact consideration of every age of cognition compels us to realise that behind everything we can know about the world at large something else lies hidden: something that is certainly not unknowable but in every epoch has to be described as not yet known. And this not-yet-known, which lies below the surface of the known in the mineral, plant and animal kingdoms, belongs as much to ourselves as it does to external nature. It belongs to us in so far as we absorb and work up in our physical organism the materials and forces of the outer world; and inasmuch as we have within us a portion of nature, we have also within us a portion of the unknown in nature. So in the world wherein we live we must distinguish a triad: our conscious spiritual life; our subconscious soul-life below the threshold of consciousness; and that which, as the unknown in nature and at the same time in man, lives in us as part of the great unknown Nature.

This triad emerges directly from a rational observation of the world. And if looking away from all dogmatic statements, from all philosophical or theosophical traditions, in so far as these are clothed in conceptual definitions or formulations, we may ask: How has the human mind always expressed the fact that this triad is present not only in the immediate environment, but in the whole world to which man himself belongs? We must then reply: Man gives the name of Spirit to all that can be known within the horizon of the conscious. He designates as the Son or the Logos that which works in the subconscious and throws up only its waves from down below. And to that which belongs equally to the unknown in Nature, and to the part of our own being which is of one kind with Nature, the name of the Father-Principle has always been given, because it was felt to express the relation of the third principle to the other two.

Besides what has now been said concerning the Spirit, the Son and the Father-Principle, it can be taken for granted that other differentiations we have formerly made, and also the differentiations made in this or that philosophy, have their justifications. But we can say that the most widely accepted idea of this differentiation corresponds with the account of it given here.

Now let us ask: How can we characterise the transition from that which belongs to the Spirit, and so plays directly into the conscious life of the soul, to the subconscious element which belongs to the Son-Principle? We shall best grasp this transition if we realise that into ordinary human consciousness there plays quite distinctly the element we designate as Will, in contrast to the elements of ideations and feeling. If we rightly interpret the Bible saying, ‘The Spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak’, it indicates that everything grasped by consciousness lies in the realm of the Spirit, whereas by ‘the flesh’ is meant everything that lies more in the subconscious. As to the nature of the Will, we need only think of that which plays up from the subconscious and enters into our consciousness only when we form concepts of it. Only when we transform into concepts and ideas the dark impelling forces which are rooted in the elemental part of the soul — only then do they enter the realm of the Spirit; otherwise they remain in the realm of the Son-Principle. And since the Will plays through our feelings into the life of ideas, we see quite clearly the breaking out into the conscious of the waves from the subconscious ocean. In our threefold soul-life we have two elements, ideation and feeling, which belong to conscious life, but feeling descends directly into the realm of the Will, and the nearer we come to the impulses of Will, the further we descend into the subconscious, the dark realms into which we sink completely when consciousness is engulfed in deep, dreamless sleep.

Thus we see that the Will-element, because it descends into the realm of the subconscious, stands towards the individual being of man in a relationship quite different from that of cognition, the realm of the Spirit. And so, when we differentiate between Spirit and Son, we may be impelled to surmise that man's relationship to the Spirit is different from his relationship to the Son. How is this to be understood?

Even in exoteric life it is quite easy to understand. Certainly the realm of cognition has given rise to all kinds of debate, but if people would only come to understand one another concerning the concepts and ideas they formulate for themselves, controversy over questions of cognition would gradually cease. I have often emphasised that we no longer dispute over mathematics, because we have raised mathematics entirely into consciousness. The things we dispute about are those not yet raised into consciousness: we still allow our subconscious impulses, instincts and passions to play into them.

So we see that in the realm of cognition we have to do with something more universally human than anything to be found in the subconscious realm. When we meet another human being and enter into the most varied relationships with him, it is in the realm of conscious spiritual life that understanding should be possible. And a mark of a healthy soul-life is that it will always wish and hope to reach an understanding with the other person concerning things that belong to conscious spiritual life. It will be unhealthy for the soul if that hope is lost.

On the other hand, we must recognise the Will-element, and everything in another person's subconscious, as something which should on no account be intruded upon; it must be regarded as his innermost sanctuary. We need consider only how unpleasant to a healthy soul-life is the feeling that the Will of another man is being put under compulsion. It is not only aesthetically but morally unpleasant to see the conscious soul-life of anyone eliminated by hypnotism or any other powerful means; or to see the Will-power of one person working directly on the Will of another. The only healthy way to gain influence over another person's Will is through Cognition. Cognition should be the means whereby one soul comes to an understanding with another. A person must first translate his wishes into a conceptual form: then they may influence another person's cognition, and they should touch his Will only by this indirect route. Nothing else can be satisfactory in the highest, most ideal sense to a healthy life of soul. Every kind of forcible working of Will upon Will must evoke an unpleasant impression.

In other words, human nature strives, in so far as it is healthy, to develop in the realm of the Spirit the life it has in common with others, and to cherish and respect the realm of the subconscious, in so far as it comes to statement in the human organism, as an inviolable sanctuary that should rest in the personality, the individuality, of each man and should not be approached save through the door of conscious cognition. So at least a modern consciousness, attuned to our epoch, must feel if it is to know itself to be healthy.

In later lectures we shall see whether this was so in all periods of human evolution. What has been said today will help us to think clearly about what is outside us and what is within us, at least for our own period. This leads to the conclusion that fundamentally the realm of the Son — embracing everything that we designate as the Son or Logos — must be awakened in each individual as a quite personal concern; and that the realm of common life, where men may be influenced by one another, is the realm of the Spirit.

We see this expressed in the grandest, most significant way in the New Testament accounts of the attitude of Christ Jesus towards His first disciples and followers. ====================== From all that is told concerning the Christ-Event we can gather that the followers who had hastened to Jesus during his life-time were bewildered when His life ended with the crucifixion; with that form of death which, in the land where the Christ Event took its course, was regarded as the only possible expiration for the greatest crimes. And although this death on the cross did not affect everyone as it did Saul, who later became Paul, and as Saul had concluded that someone who suffered such a death could not be the Messiah, or the Christ — for the crucifixion had made a milder impression on the disciples, one might say — yet it is obvious that the writers of the Gospels wished to give the impression that Christ Jesus, through his subjection to the shameful death on the cross, had forfeited some of the effect He had had on the hearts of those around Him.

But with this account something else is connected. The influence that Christ Jesus had acquired — an influence we must characterise more exactly during these lectures — was restored to Him after the Resurrection. Whatever may be our present thoughts about the Resurrection, we shall have to discuss it here in the light of occult science; and then, if we simply go by the Gospel narratives, one thing will be clear: for those to whom Christ appeared after the Resurrection He had become someone who was present in a quite special way, different entirely from His previous presence.

In speaking on the Gospel of St. John I have already pointed out how impossible it would have been for anyone who knew Jesus not to regognise Him after 3 days, or to confuse Him with someone else, if He had not appeared in an altered form. The Evangelists wish particularly to evoke the impression that the Christ appeared in this altered form. But they also wish to indicate something else. For the Christ to exert influence on human souls, a certain receptivity in those souls was necessary. And this receptivity had to be acted on not merely by an influence from the realm of the Spirit but by the actual sight of the Christ-Being.

If we ask what this signifies, we must realise that when a person stands before us, his effect upon us goes beyond anything we are conscious of. Whenever a human being or other being works upon us, unconscious elements affect our soul-life; they are produced by the other being indirectly through consciousness, but he can produce them only if he stands before us in actuality. What the Christ brought about from person to person after the so-called Resurrection was something that worked up from the unconscious soul-powers of the disciples into their soul-life: an acquaintance with the Son. Hence the differences in the portrayal of the risen Christ; hence, too, the variations in the accounts, showing how the Christ appeared to one or other person, according to the disposition of the person concerned. Here we see the Christ-Being acting on the subconscious part of the souls of the disciples; hence the appearances are quite individual, and we should not complain because they are not uniform.

If, however, the significance of the Christ for the world was to be His bringing to all men something common to all of them, then not only this individual working of the Son had to proceed from the Christ, but the element of Spirit, which can encompass something that belongs to all men, had to be renewed by Him. This is indicated by the statement, that after the Christ had worked upon the Logos-nature of man, He sent forth the Spirit in the form of the renewed or ‘holy, Spirit’. Thus was created that element common to all men which is characterised when we are told that the disciples, after they had received the Spirit, began to speak in the most diverse tongues. Here we are shown how the common element resides in the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. And something else is indicated; how different is this out-pouring of the Spirit from the simple imparting of the power of the Son, for in the Acts of the Apostles we are told that certain persons to whom the apostles came had already received the Jesus-baptism, and yet they had now to receive for the first time the Spirit, symbolically indicated by the laying on of hands. In the characterisation of the Christ-working, which acts upon the subconscious impulses of the soul and so must have a personal, inward character, and the Spirit-element, which represents something common to all mankind.

It is this Spirit-element that those who have named themselves ‘Rosicrucians’ have sought to preserve most carefully, as far as human weakness permits. The Rosicrucians have always wished to adhere strictly to the rule that even in the highest regions of Initiation nothing must be worked upon except the Spirit-element which, as common between man and man, is available in the evolution of humanity. It was never an Initiation of the Will, for the Will of man was to be respected as a sanctuary in the innermost part of the soul. Hence the individual was led to those Initiations which were to take him beyond the stage of Imagination, Inspiration, and Intuition, but always so that he could recognise within himself the response which the development of the Spirit-element was to call forth. No influence was to be exerted on the Will.

We must not mistake this attitude for one of indifference towards the Will. The point is that by excluding all direct working upon the Will, the purest spiritual influence was imparted indirectly through the Spirit. When we come to an understanding with another man with regard to entering on the path of knowledge of the Spirit, light and warmth are radiated from the spiritual path, and they then enkindle the Will, but always by the indirect path through the Spirit — never otherwise.

In Rosicrucianism, therefore, we can observe in the highest sense that impulse of Christianity which finds twofold statement: on the one hand in the Son-element, in the Christ-working which goes down deeply into the subconscious; on the other, in the Spirit-working which embraces all that falls within the horizon of our consciousness. We must indeed bear the Christ in our Will; but the way in which man should come to an understanding with each other in life concerning the Christ can be found only — in the Rosicrucian sense — through a conscious soul-life which penetrates ever more deeply into the occult.

In reaction against many other spiritual streams in Europe, the opposite way was taken by those who are usually called Jesuits. The radical, fundamental difference between what we justifiably call the Christian way of the Spirit and the Jesuit way of the Spirit, which gives a one-sided exaggeration to the Jesus-Principle, is that the intention of the Jesuit way is to work directly, at all times upon the Will. The difference is clearly shown in the method by which the pupil of Jesuitism is educated. Jesuitism is not to be taken lightly, or merely exoterically, but also esoterically, for it is rooted in esotericism. It is not, however, rooted in the spiritual life that is poured out through the symbol of Pentacost, but it seeks to root itself directly in the Jesus-element of the Son, which means in the Will; and thereby it exaggerates the Jesus-element of the Will.

This will be seen when we now enquire into the esoteric part of Jesuitism, its various spiritual exercises. How were these exercises arranged? The essential point is that every single pupil of Jesuitism goes through exercises which lead into the occult life, but into the Will, and within the field of occultism they hold the Will in severe discipline; they ‘break it in’, one might say. And the significant fact is that this discipline of the Will does not arise merely from the surface of life, but from something deeper, because the pupil has been led into the occult, in the way just indicated.

If now, leaving aside the exercises of prayer preparatory to all Jesuit exercises, we consider these occult exercises, at least in their chief points, we find that the pupil has first to call up a vivid Imagination of Christ Jesus as the King of the Worlds — mark this carefully: an Imagination. And no one would be received into the degrees of Jesuitism who had not gone through such exercises, and had not experienced in his soul the transformation which such psychic exercises mean for the whole man. But this Imaginative presentation of Christ Jesus as King of the Worlds has to be preceded by something else. The pupil has to call up for himself, in absolute solitude and seclusion, a picture of man as he was created in the world, and how by falling into sin he incurred the possibility of most terrible punishments. And it is strictly prescribed how one must picture such a man; how if he were left to himself he would incur the utmost of torturing penalties. The rules are extraordinarily severe. With all other concepts or ideas excluded, this picture must live uninterruptedly within the soul of the future Jesuit, the picture of the God-forsaken man, the man exposed to the most fearful punishments, together with the feeling: ‘That am I, since I have come into the world and have forsaken God, and have exposed myself to the possibility of the most fearful punishments.’ This must call forth the fear of being forsaken by God, and detestation of man as he is according to his own nature.

Then, in a further Imagination, over against the picture of the outcast, God-forsaken man, must be set the picture of the God full of pity who then became Christ, and through His acts on earth atones for what man has brought about by forsaking the divine path. In contrast to the Imagination of the God-forsaken man, there must arise that of the all-merciful, loving Being, Christ Jesus, to whom alone it is due that man is not exposed to all possible punishments working upon his soul. And, just as vividly as a feeling of contempt for the forsaking of the divine path had first to become fixed in the soul of the Jesuit pupil, so must a feeling of humility and contrition now take hold of him in the presence of Christ.

When these 2 feelings have been called forth in the pupil, then for several weeks he has to practise severe exercises, picturing to himself in Imagination all details of the life of Jesus from his birth to the Crucifixion and Resurrection. And all that can arise in the soul emerges when the pupil lives in rigorous seclusion and, except for necessary meals, lets nothing else work upon his soul than the pictures which the Gospels give of the compassionate life of Jesus. But these pictures do not merely appear before him in thoughts and ideas; they must work upon his soul in vivid, living Imaginations.

Only someone who really knows how the human soul is transformed through Imaginations which work with full living power — only he knows that under such conditions the soul is in fact completely changed. Such Imaginations, because they are concentrated in the most intense, one-sided way, first on sinful man, secondly on the compassionate God, and then only on the pictures from the New Testament, evoke precisely, through the law of polarity, a strengthened Will. These pictures produce their effect directly, at first hand, for any reflection upon them must be dutifully excluded. It is solely a matter of holding before one's mind these Imaginations, as they have been described.

What then follows is this. In the further exercises Christ Jesus — and now we may no longer say Christ, but exclusively Jesus — is represented as the universal King of the Worlds, and thereby the Jesus element is exaggerated. Because Christ had to be incarnated in a human body, the purely spiritual took part in the physical world; but over against this participation stand the monumental and most significant words: “My kingdom is not of this world.” We can exaggerate the Jesus element by making Jesus into a king of this world, by making Him that which He would have become if He had not resisted the tempter who wished to give Him ‘all the kingdoms of the world and the glory thereof’. Then Jesus of Nazareth would have been a king who, unlike other kinds who possess only a portion of the earth, would have had the whole earth under his sway. If we think of this kind portrayed in this guise, his kingly power so increased that the whole earth is his domain, then we should have the very picture that followed the other exercises through which the personal will of each Jesuit pupil had been sufficiently strengthened.

To prepare for this picture of “King Jesus”, this Ruler over all the kingdoms of the earth, the pupil had to form an Imagination of Babylon and the plain around Babylon as a living picture, and, enthroned over Babylon, Lucifer with his banner. This picture had to be visualized with great exactitude, for it is a powerful imagination: King Lucifer, with his banner and his hosts of Luciferic angels, seated amidst fire and dense smoke, as he sends out his angels to conquer the kingdoms of the earth. And the whole danger that issues from the ‘banner of Lucifer’ must first of all be imagined by itself, without casting a glance upon Christ Jesus. The soul must be entirely engrossed in the Imagination of the danger which issues from the banner of Lucifer. The soul must learn to feel that the greatest danger to the world's existence that could be conjured forth would be a victory for the banner of Lucifer. And when this picture has had its effect, the other Imagination, ‘The banner of Jesus’, must take its place. The pupil must now visualise Jerusalem and the plain around Jerusalem; King Jesus with His hosts, how he conquers and drives off the hosts of Lucifer and makes Himself King of the whole earth — the victory of the banner of Jesus over the banner of Lucifer.

These are the strength-giving Imaginations for the Will which are brought before the soul of the Jesuit pupil. This is what completely changes his Will; makes him such that in his Will, because it is trained occultly, he turns away from everything else and surrenders absolutely to the idea: ‘King Jesus must become the Ruler upon earth, and we who belong to His army have to employ every means to make Him Ruler of the earth. To this we pledge ourselves, we who belong to His host assembled on the plain of Jerusalem, against the host of Lucifer assembled on the plain of Babylon. And the greatest disgrace for a soldier of King Jesus is to forsake His banner.’

These ideas, gathered up into a single resolution of the Will, can certainly give the Will immense strength. But we must ask: what is it in the soul-life that has been directly attacked? The element that ought not to be touched — the Will-element. In so far as this Jesuit training lays hold of the Will-element, while the Jesus-idea seizes the Will-element completely, in so far is the concept of the dominion of Jesus exaggerated in the most dangerous way — dangerous because through it the Will becomes so strong that it can work directly upon the Will of another. For where the Will becomes so strong through Imaginations, which means by occult means, it acquires the capacity for working directly upon the Will of another, and hence also along all the other occult paths to which such a Will can have recourse.

Thus we see how in recent centuries we encounter these two movements, among many others: one has exaggerated the Jesus-element and sees in ‘King Jesus’ the sole ideal of Christianity, which the other looks solely at the Christ-element and carefully sets aside anything that could go beyond it. This second outlook has been much calumniated because it maintains that Christ has sent the Spirit, so that, indirectly through the Spirit, Christ can enter into the hearts and minds of men. In the development of civilisation during the last few centuries there is hardly a greater contrast than that between Jesuitism and Rosicrucianism, for Jesuitism contains nothing of what Rosicrucianism regards as the highest ideal concerning human worth and human dignity, while Rosicrucianism has always sought to guard itself from any influence which could in the remotest sense be called Jesuitical.

In this lecture I wished to show how even so lofty an element as the Jesus-Principle can be exaggerated and then becomes dangerous, and how necessary it is to sink oneself into the depths of the Christ-Being if we wish to understand how the strength of Christianity must reside in esteeming, to the very highest degree, human dignity and human worth, and in strictly refraining from groping our clumsy way into man's inmost sanctuary. Rosicrucianism, even more than Christian mysticism, is attacked by the Jesuit element, because the Jesuits feel that true Christianity is being sought elsewhere than in the setting which offers merely ‘King Jesus’ in the leading role. But the Imaginations here indicated, together with the prescribed exercises, have made the Will so strong that even protests brought against it in the name of the Spirit can be defeated.

https://rsarchive.org/Lectures/19111005p01.html

Luke 13:3; Luke 13:5; Luke 15:10; Luke 24:47; Matthew 4:17; Matthew 11:20; Mark 1:15; Acts 5:31

3 No, I tell you; but unless you rrepent, you will all likewise perish.

5 No, I tell you; but unless you rrepent, you will all likewise perish.”

10 Just so, I tell you, there is joy before lthe angels of God over one sinner who repents.”

47 and that qrepentance for1 the forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed rin his name sto all nations, tbeginning from Jerusalem.

17 xFrom that time Jesus began to preach, saying, z“Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”1

Woe to Unrepentant Cities

20 zThen he began to denounce the cities where most of his mighty works had been done, because they did not repent.

15 and saying, e“The time is fulfilled, and fthe kingdom of God is at hand;1 grepent and believe in the gospel.”

31 God exalted lhim at his right hand as mLeader and nSavior, oto give prepentance to Israel and oforgiveness of sins.

https://www.esv.org/Luke+13:3;Luke+13:5;Luke+15:10;Luke+24:47;Matthew+4:17;Matthew+11:20;Mark+1:15;Acts+5:31/

List of youngest killers

This is a list of children confirmed by reliable sources to have deliberately killed another human being. Individuals in this list are documented to be younger than age 13.

List

Name Age at time of killing(s) Date of killing(s) Country Location Killed Injured Note(s) and citation(s)

Carl Newton Mahan 6 years, 7 months, 26 days[1] May 18, 1929 United States Paintsville, Kentucky 1 0 Mahan shot eight-year-old Cecil Van Hoose.[2] He was sentenced to 15 years in a reformatory, but his sentence was later overturned.[3]

Unnamed boy 6 years February 29, 2000 United States Mount Morris Township, Michigan 1 0 He shot his six-year-old classmate, Kayla Rolland, at Buell Elementary School. His uncle, the gun owner, was charged with involuntary manslaughter.

Lizzie Cook 6 years February 27, 1899 United States Birmingham, Alabama 1 0 Cook intentionally set her two-year-old brother's clothes on fire while she was babysitting. The fire burned through the fabric and he died.[4]

Unnamed boy 6 years June 2, 1910 Norway Oslo 1 0 [5]

Unnamed boy 7 years January 2022 United States Smiley, Texas 1 0 He shot 32-year-old Brandon Raspberry. He was not charged due to his age, but was instead sent to a psychiatric hospital.[6]

Virginia Hudson 7 years July 23, 1887 United States Butler Township, South Carolina 1 0 Hudson beat a one-year-old child to death with a board. She was charged with murder.[7]

Robert Robertson 7 years, 6 months June 1907 Australia Forest, Tasmania 1 0 Robertson beat his two-year-old brother with a piece of wood while he was babysitting. He was charged with murder, then put into state care.[8]

Amarjeet Sada 8 years 2007 India Begusarai 3 0 He killed his eight-month-old sister, his nine-month-old cousin, and an unrelated six-month-old baby. He was not charged due to his age, but instead sent to a remand home in Munger.[9]

Unnamed girl 8 years July 4, 1867 United States Cassville, Missouri 1 0 She killed her four-year-old brother and was declared insane.[10]

Unnamed boy 8 years February 7, 2014 Chile Padre Hurtado 1 0 He stabbed his seven-year-old cousin. He was not charged due to his age.[11]

Patrick Knowles 8 years May 1903 United Kingdom Stockton-on-Tees, England 1 2 Knowles buried one-year-old Frederick Hughes and Hughes died of suffocation. Knowles also attempted to drown one-year-old Fanny Lynas,[12] as well as burying another child.[13] He served nine years in prison under His Majesty's pleasure.[14]

Unnamed boy 8 years, 10 months November 5, 2008 United States St. Johns, Arizona 2 0 He shot his 29-year-old father, Vincent Romero, and his father's coworker.[15] He was arrested and pled guilty to negligent homicide. He was sentenced to an indefinite stay at a youth treatment center near Phoenix. He later moved to a group home and then a foster home.[16]

Carroll Cole 9 years 1947 United States Richmond, California 1 0 Cole drowned a nine-year-old boy. The murder was initially ruled an accident until he confessed in adulthood after killing five women. He was executed by lethal injection on December 6, 1985.

Mary Cooper 9 years 1885 United States Scottsville, Virginia 1 0 Cooper hung and beat her seven-year-old cousin Melville Barrett.[17]

Unnamed boy 9 years May 6, 2019 United States Fawn River Township, Michigan 1 0 He shot his 51-year-old adoptive mother.[18]

Cayetano Santos Godino 9 years, 4 months, 29 days – 16 years, 1 month, 3 days March 29, 1906 – December 3, 1912 Argentina Buenos Aires 4 0 The first murder was not discovered until Santos Godino later confessed. He was arrested several times.

Unnamed boy 10 years September 2022 China Haicheng Township 1 0 He strangled his grandmother to death on video.[19]

William York 10 years May 13, 1748 United Kingdom Eyke, England 1 0 York attacked five-year-old Susan Matthew with a knife, killing her. He was sentenced to death, but later pardoned.[20]

Hubbard Harrell 10 years February 3, 1888 United States Savannah, Georgia 3 0 Harrell burned his six-year-old nephew and two unrelated children with boiling water.[21]

James Osmanson 10 years April 12, 1994 United States Butte, Montana 1 0 Osmanson shot his 11-year-old classmate Jeremy Bullock at Margaret Leary Elementary School.[22] He was sent to a residential treatment facility.[23]

Joseph McVay 10 years January 2, 2011 United States Big Prairie, Ohio 1 0 McVay shot his 46-year-old mother Deborah McVay. He was charged with "delinquency by virtue of committing murder."[24] He was sentenced to a juvenile detention center, then a residential treatment facility.[25]

Unnamed girl 10 years September 18, 2010 United States Sandy Springs, Georgia 1 0 She beat two-year-old Zyda White, who she was babysitting. White fell unconscious and later died.[26]

Jane Walker 10 years 1886 United States Aiken County, South Carolina 1 0 Walker poisoned the younger relative she was babysitting. She was charged with murder.[27]

James Arcene 10 years 1872 United States Fort Gibson, Oklahoma 1 0 Arcene, alongside a man named William Parchmeal, shot and beat William Feigel. Arcene was convicted of robbery and murder, then executed.

Robert Thompson 10 years, 5 months, 20 days February 12, 1993 United Kingdom Liverpool, England 1 0 Thompson and Venables abducted two-year-old James Bulger from a shopping center in Bootle. They tortured Bulger before laying him across railway tracks, where he was hit by a train. They both spent eight years in a young offenders' institution. In 2017, Venables was re-incarcerated for possessing child sexual abuse material.

Jon Venables 10 years, 5 months, 30 days

Unnamed boy 10 years August 21, 2013 Canada Broadview 1 0 He beat six-year-old Lee Bonneau to death.[28] He was not charged due to his age.[29]

Joseph Hall 10 years, 10 months, 12 days May 1, 2011 United States Riverside, California 1 0 Hall shot his 32-year-old father, neo-Nazi leader Jeff Hall. He was sentenced to juvenile detention until the age of 23. His stepmother Krista McCary was charged with criminal storage of firearms and child neglect.

Mary Bell 10 years, 11 months, 30 days – 11 years, 1 month, 7 days May 25 – July 31, 1968 United Kingdom Newcastle upon Tyne, England 2 0 Bell strangled four-year-old Martin Brown and three-year-old Brian Howe, killing them both. She served 12 years in prison under Her Majesty's pleasure.

Anton Wood 11 years November 1892 United States Denver, Colorado 1 0 Wood shot Joseph Smith. He was charged with second-degree murder and sentenced to either 25 years of hard labor or life in prison.[30]

Nellie Cornelison 11 years January 15, 1902 United States Wichita, Kansas 1 0 Cornelison slit the throat of her sister Laura Cornelison. She was not charged due to her age.[31]

Nathaniel Jamar Abraham 11 years, 9 months, 10 days[32] October 29, 1997 United States Pontiac, Michigan 1 0 Abraham shot an 18-year-old man. He was tried as an adult and convicted of second-degree murder.[33][34]

Andrew Golden 11 years, 9 months, 27 days March 24, 1998 United States Jonesboro, Arkansas 5 10 Golden, alongside 13-year-old Mitchell Johnson, shot one of their teachers and four of their classmates at Westside Middle School. They were both imprisoned until the age of 21, with Golden serving 9 years and 2 months.

Unnamed girl 11 years June 1, 2004 Japan Sasebo 1 0 She killed her 12-year-old classmate Satomi Mitari at Okubo Elementary School. She was not charged, instead being institutionalized in a reformatory.

Nathan Daniel Faris 12 years, 10 months, 10 days[35] March 2, 1987 United States De Kalb, Missouri 1 0 Faris shot his 13-year-old classmate Timothy Perrin at De Kalb High School. He then committed suicide.[23]

Unnamed boy 12 years January 2000 United Kingdom Bristol, England 1 0 He stabbed his six-month-old brother, cutting off his left hand. He was charged with manslaughter but found unfit to stand trial.[36]

Piedad Martínez del Águila 12 years December 4, 1965 – January 4, 1966 Spain Murcia 4 0 Martínez del Águila poisoned her four brothers.[37][38]

Mary Maher 12 years August 21 – September 8, 1906 Ireland Dunkitt, County Kilkenny 3 1 Maher poisoned her three sisters. She then committed suicide.[39]

Jose Reyes 12 years, 3 months, 19 days October 21, 2013 United States Sparks, Nevada 1 2 Reyes shot one of his classmates and one of his teachers at Sparks Middle School. He then committed suicide.

Lionel Tate 12 years, 5 months, 28 days July 28, 1999 United States Broward County, Florida 1 0 Tate battered his six-year-old cousin Tiffany Eunick to death. He was charged with first-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison. The sentence was later reduced to one year of house arrest and 10 years of probation. As an adult he was sentenced to 30 years imprisonment for armed robbery.

Kristen Pittman 12 years, 7 months, 19 days November 28, 2001 United States Chester, South Carolina 2 0 Pittman shot her grandparents. She was tried as an adult and sentenced to 30 years in prison. Her sentence was later reduced by five years.

Hannah Ocuish 12 years, 9 months July 21, 1786 United States New London, Connecticut 1 0 Ocuish's guilt is disputed. She was hanged for the murder of six-year-old Eunice Bolles.

Evan Savoie 12 years, 3 months, 24 days February 15, 2003 United States Ephrata, Washington 1 0 Savoie and Eakin stabbed and beat their 13-year-old friend Craig Sorger to death. Savoie was convicted of first-degree murder and Eakin was convicted of second-degree murder. Both Savoie and Eakin have since been released.

Jake Eakin 12 years, 3 months, 1 day

Jasmine Richardson 12 years, 6 months, 2 days April 23, 2006 Canada Medicine Hat 3 0 Richardson and her 23-year-old boyfriend Jeremy Steinke stabbed three of her family members. Richardson was charged with first-degree murder. In 2020 her criminal record was expunged.

Unnamed boy 12 years December 2, 2018 China Yuanjiang 1 0 He stabbed his mother. He was not charged due to his age.[40]

Curtis Jones 12 years, 1 month and 6 days January 6, 1999 United States Port St. John, Florida 1 0 Jones and his 13-year-old sister Catherine Jones were charged with second-degree murder. They were both sentenced to 17 years in prison.

Unnamed boy 12 years September 29, 2019 Brazil São Paulo 1 0 He was sentenced to three years in prison.[41][42]

Alex King 12 years November 26, 2001 United States Cantonment, Florida 1 0 King and his 13-year-old brother Derek King killed their father. Alex served six years of his eight year sentence.

Danny Preddie 12 years November 27, 2000 United Kingdom London, England 1 0 Preddie and his 13-year-old brother Ricky Preddie attacked 10-year-old Damilola Taylor with a glass bottle. Danny was sentenced to eight years in prison, but served four additional years for violating his parole.

Unnamed girl 12 years July 15, 2024 United States Humboldt, Tennessee 1 0 She smothered her eight-year-old cousin. She was charged with murder and tampering with evidence.[43]

Unnamed boy 12 years October 18, 2019 Brazil Curitiba 1 0 He stabbed an elderly woman and was temporarily detained for 45 days.[44]

Howard Lang 12 years November 18, 1947 United States Chicago, Illinois 1 0 Lang killed seven-year-old Lonnie Fellick.[45] He was sentenced to 22 years in prison. His sentence was later overturned due to his age. This case was cited in Frederic Wertham's Seduction of the Innocent.[46]

Edwin Carl Debrow Jr. 12 years September 21, 1991 United States San Antonio, Texas 1 0 Debrow shot a man. He was sentenced to 27 years in prison and released in 2019.[47][48][49]

Bailey Kurariki 12 years, 3 months, 28 days September 12, 2001 New Zealand Papakura 1 0 Kurariki killed 40-year-old Michael Choy alongside seven accomplices. He was charged with manslaughter and released on parole in 2008. In 2011, he was sentenced to 14 months in prison for assault and domestic violence.

Jonah Louis Iverson[50] 12 years August 29, 1995 United States Laredo, Texas 1 0 Iverson shot his 12-year-old classmate Lizzy Rivera at Memorial Middle School. He served ten years, firstly in a Texas Youth Commission facility and then in a state prison.[51]

See also

Age of criminal responsibility

Capital punishment for juveniles in the United States

Gun violence in the United States

Gun violence in U.S. schools

Murder in United States law

Trial as an adult

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

Representing the Best Interests of Brainwashed and Programmed Children in High-Conflict Child Custody Cases

Ashish S Joshi

Oct 24, 2023 19 min read

Child Advocacy Child Welfare Family Law & Children’s Rights Parental Alienation

Summary

A brainwashed child works simultaneously with one parent and against the other parent.

in cases of parental alienation, suspending contact between the child and the target parent often makes the situation worse.

Courts have recognized that in an alienation setting, children are impressionable, have social deficits, and could be manipulated.

Representing the Best Interests of Brainwashed and Programmed Children in High-Conflict Child Custody Cases

Irina_Zholudeva via Getty Images

Jump to:

Brainwashing and Programming: Not Quite Cricket

Brainwashing and Programming Detection Factors

Ten Tips on Interviewing Brainwashed and Programmed Children

Conclusion

Consider this scenario: You are appointed as the guardian ad litem (GAL) in a high-conflict child custody litigation. The nine-year-old child has aligned with her father and is refusing to spend any time with her mother. Despite a significant history of maternal love and care, the child claims that the mother has “abandoned us” and, with no evidence in support, alleges that her mother has a “drinking problem.” When speaking of her mother, the child, who is otherwise polite, respectful, and well behaved, uses words like “slut,” “whore,” and “sinner.” Court-ordered parenting time and visitation with the mother are routinely and consistently violated. Child-exchange transitions between the parents turn into nightmarish scenarios as the child demonstrates hysterical behavior and refuses to go with the mother. There is a history of multiple police interventions and child protective services investigations. The frustrated mother keeps demanding court intervention, and the court appoints you to investigate the matter and advocate for the child’s best interests.

During your interview of the child, she tells you sordid tales about her mother in an uncharacteristic, unchildlike manner: Mom is “abusive,” “never cared for ‘us’,” yells “for hours,” “drinks like a fish,” “violates my boundaries,” and “sins.” You spend significant time reviewing the child protective services’ reports, which have found no evidence to substantiate abuse allegations against the mother. You review the records of the child’s therapy—session after session spent in “therapy” with the therapist listening to the child’s tirades against her mother. You wade through the maze of legal filings that the parties have filed, with the father accusing the mother of being abusive and the mother accusing the father of alienating, brainwashing, and programming the daughter. Legal fees and costs have spiraled out of control. Something must give. Amid this chaos, given the child’s adamant refusal to see her mother, the father requests that you listen to the “voice of the child” and recommend to the court a “cooling off” period; that is, to suspend the mother’s parenting time and give the child some space to process her feelings and emotions. The suggestion, as innocuous it sounds, appears reasonable to you and you are seriously thinking of making that recommendation to the court.

Guardian, be careful. Be very careful. You could be dealing with a brainwashed and programmed child; and as every cricket afficionado knows, you could be playing on a dangerously deceptive sticky wicket—the damp, slippery pitch on which the ball bounces in front of the batsman in unpredictable ways.

Brainwashing and programming are the processes that may lead to parental alienation, the result of such processes. Parental alienation is a form of emotional abuse and a result of tactics and strategies employed by one parent trying to undermine and destroy to varying degrees the relationship that the child has with the other parent. It is an unjustified campaign of denigration against a parent, often referred to as the “target parent.” Alienation is not the same as estrangement, where the child’s rejection of a parent is due to the parent’s abusive, neglectful, or seriously deficient parenting. The critical factor that separates alienation from estrangement is that the child’s rejection of the target parent is based on a false or unreasonable belief that is significantly disproportionate to the child’s actual experience.

Professional literature, clinical experience, and judicial case law all teach us that in cases of parental alienation, suspending contact between the child and the target parent often makes the situation worse. With a “cooling off” period, the child ceases to have contact with the target parent and is completely vulnerable to the insidious influence of the alienating parent. Under the influence of the alienator, the child may not be cognitively or psychologically able to express a custodial preference in his or her best interests. Courts have recognized that in an alienation setting, children are impressionable, have social deficits, and could be manipulated. See Harner v. Harner, 2018 Mich. App. LEXIS 184 (Mich. Jan. 23, 2018). In such cases, a GAL, prior to making a recommendation to the court, should strive to assess whether the child’s perception of the target parent is a result of brainwashing and programming by the alienating parent or based on the child’s own experience with the target parent.

Brainwashing and Programming: Not Quite Cricket

The terms “brainwashing” and “programming,” like the related term “alienation,” have been acknowledged and used by courts. See Bhama v. Bhama, 169 Mich. App. 73 (1988). The term “brainwashing” originates from the words “hsi nao”—which means “to wash the brain”—used by a Chinese informant who spoke of mind control tactics employed in China following the Communist takeover. In their informative and insightful book, Children Held Hostage, Dr. Stanley Clawar and Brynne Rivlin discuss the concepts and processes of “brainwashing” and “programming,” along with their findings from studying over 1,000 families over 20 years. The authors—a forensic sociologist and a clinical social worker—describe the processes of brainwashing and programming whereby a parent attempts to limit, damage, and interfere with the love, contact, and image of the target parent. See Clawar & Rivlin, Children Held Hostage: Identifying Brainwashed Children, Presenting a Case and Crafting Solutions (ABA 2d ed. 2013). The processes are socio-psychological in scope, could be intentional or not, and where employed, could result in severe social, cognitive, and emotional distortion in the child’s perception and experience of the target parent. Let’s look at how the process works.

In programming a child, the parent provides a “program”—a set of instructions or directions to assist the child in organizing and interpreting the “data” he or she is perceiving. For instance, a programmed child observing a dad who is late for pickup may perceive him as “uncaring” or “incompetent” and not be open to other possibilities, such as rush-hour traffic or a stop on the way to fill up the car’s gas tank. Brainwashing, in contrast, involves the action component: techniques, processes, and methods to reinforce the “program.” To continue with the above example, it may involve the mom telling the child, “I hate it how he’s always late in picking you up. Just shows how uncaring he is. He doesn’t deserve you.” Together, these processes involve the rewriting of history, the reorganization of experiences, and ultimately, the remaking of the person—the child, who slowly but steadily loses the ability to think critically and rely on his or her own experience of the target parent. The attempt is to remake the thought process of the child in a way that the child becomes ideologically aligned with the brainwashing and programming parent and perceives the target parent in a false, skewed, and distorted light.

Brainwashed and programmed children mimic signs and behaviors of victims of religious cults who have been stripped of their identity and independent thought, and indoctrinated into a mindset that is conducive to the goals and objectives of the programmer parent. Brainwashing results in the three Ds: debility, dependency, and dread. See Joel Dimsdale, Dark Persuasion: A History of Brainwashing from Pavlov to Social Media 77 (Yale 2021). Brainwashed children end up having diminished capacity because they are dependent on the brainwashing and programming parent, deprived of neutral social support. They come to dread contact with the target parent.

Brainwashing and programming processes occur over time and involve repetitious use of particular techniques, procedures, and methods until the child begins to reinterpret reality and comes to question his or her original understanding, thoughts, feelings, emotions, and experience of the target parent. Clawar and Rivlin describe eight stages in the process of brainwashing and programming, which begins with an ideological component and ends with maintenance, tweaking and reinforcement of the brainwashing and programming techniques once the child has succumbed to the process. A brainwashed and programmed child puts a GAL on the back foot and poses a dilemma for this professional who is entrusted with the job of speaking with the child, investigating the controversy, and thereafter making recommendations to a family judge. GALs are required to consider a child’s custodial preference and the child’s perception, feelings, and experiences of the parents. But how to differentiate between a child whose perception of a parent is based on his or her own experience and a brainwashed and programmed child? How to figure out whether the angry nine-year-old sitting in your office, with the flushed face and carrying on a campaign of denigration against a parent, has been subjected to brainwashing and programming processes?

You start by taking baby steps: by having a conversation with the child.

Brainwashing and Programming Detection Factors

Interviewing a child reveals valuable information that could help detect whether the child has been subjected to brainwashing and programming tactics. Clawar and Rivlin have identified 25 detection factors from their detailed and repeated observations of children in forensic, clinical, and therapeutical settings. Of these 25, below are some of the detection factors that I have repeatedly encountered when litigating cases involving brainwashed and programmed children in family courts across the country.

Contradictory statements or behaviors. Brainwashed children often represent confused thinking: The child’s ideas, desires, feelings, and emotions are at odds and in conflict. For instance, a child who says that she “hates” a parent and “would rather kill myself than go and live with the parent,” but then runs over to hug the parent, is exhibiting contradictory words and behavior. It is important that the GAL pay careful attention to what the child does in the presence of the target parent versus what the child says about the parent. Is the child who complains of the parent being a “tyrant” and “abusive” relaxed and at ease with the parent during a home visit—even to the extent that the child feels comfortable in teasing or challenging the allegedly “abusive” parent? Is there contradiction between what the child says to one parent versus the other? For example, a conflicted child could ask the target parent, “Can we order a pizza and have a movie night,” but later report to the negative or hostile parent that the other parent “made” her eat “junk food” and “watch boring TV all evening.”

Privy to inappropriate information. Human nature being what it is, it is not uncommon for divorcing parents to occasionally slip and make some unflattering comments about the other parent. In fact, as observed by an experienced domestic relations judge in New York, in the real world of post-divorce parenting, a parent who always takes the high ground, without ever succumbing to an occasional temptation to criticize the other parent, is worthy of “mythical ex-spousal sainthood.” J.F. v. D.F., 61 Misc. 3d 1226(A), 112 N.Y.S.3d 438, at *25 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2018). But a brainwashing parent is a zebra of a different stripe. That parent engages in a consistent pattern of disseminating inappropriate, harmful information, true or false, without any sense of boundaries. That parent insists on brutal and total honesty, regardless of how it may affect a vulnerable child devoid of the emotional maturity needed to process such “honest” information. And often the insistence on honesty is a self-serving rationale to assuage guilt or shift blame. In a case in which I represented a target father, the mother testified that she had discussed her extramarital affair with her teenage son to “take that issue away from him [the father].” She confided in her son about her search for a “strong man” and why she “built relationships with other men while still married” to his father. Her son reported to the therapist that his mother “was looking for love,” as he was becoming aligned with his mother in her vendetta against the father.

Collusion or a one-sided alliance. A brainwashed child works simultaneously with one parent and against the other parent. The child is simply unable to see anything positive in the target parent. The child views the broken, divorced family in terms of “us” versus “him” or “her.” Any positive gesture from the target parent is rebuffed, distorted, and ascribed to nefarious motives. A Christmas or birthday present is characterized as a “bribe.” An offer to go to the mall for shopping together prompts a statement such as “Why are you wasting my college tuition on such frivolous expenses?” Time spent together planting tomatoes in the garden is later described as “Mom ordered us to work in the garden like slaves. She just had us so that she can get free labor.”

Spying on the target parent. Brainwashers overtly request that a child spy on the other parent. It could be to retrieve financial information, confidential legal communications, or social information that could be used against the parent, such as information about the parent’s romantic or dating partners. The child spy secretly examines the handbag; opens mail; looks through checkbooks; scrolls through emails, text messages, and photographs saved in a smartphone; and dutifully reports back to the other parent. I have watched home security video footage of children going through the target parent’s bedroom closet and drawers while the other parent was on a speaker phone providing step-by-step instructions on what exactly to look for and photograph for use in litigation.

Unchildlike statements. Brainwashed children make statements that are at odds with their cognitive and emotional maturity. For instance, an eight-year-old spoke of his mom’s “sinning” and used words such as “whore,” “slut,” and “promiscuous.” Another young child claimed his dad is a “pathological liar” and utters “lies after lies after lies.” When questioned further as to what these words mean, these children avoid eye contact, lack emotion, and cross their hands in front of their chest. Their interest in the conversation veers away. Brainwashed children also demonstrate black-and-white thinking and polarization. They have an unusually rigid, all-encompassing negative view of the target parent. They refuse to see anything good or positive in the target parent. When shown photographs of his dad coaching his middle school soccer team, a 12-year-old left me stumped by dismissing it as “fake evidence.” Also indicative of programming is the use of adult language that is not consistent with the child’s normal choice of words. So, where most young children would use the words “hit,” “spank,” or “push” to describe an incident of parental discipline, a programmed child may speak of how the parent “abused me” or “violated my boundaries” but without being able to provide detail.

The martyr parent. Here, the child is brainwashed and programmed into viewing one parent as being more aggrieved and as a victim, which creates a sympathetic alliance with the parent. The brainwashing parents portray themselves as selfless martyrs who have “sacrificed” their lives to prioritize the child’s needs. So, if the father chooses to remarry, the mother is the one who has made the child “life’s priority” (never mind that the mother may be embittered, obsessed with the post-divorce litigation, may suffer from chronic depression, or may be a workaholic incapable of engaging in enriching social interactions). These “martyrs,” unable to maintain boundaries and separate their identify from the child’s, portray the other parent as having not only hurt the brainwasher but also the child—“if he really loved us, he wouldn’t have divorced us.” The child’s repeated use of the words “we,” “us,” “them,” and “ours” when speaking of the favored parent and the other parent is a cause for concern and should be carefully explored in the interviews. It could be an indicator of the loyalty bind that the child faces.

Irrational fear of the other parent. A GAL should carefully investigate the validity of a child’s fearfulness of a parent and its antecedents, and should juxtapose them with the historical relationship that the child has had with that parent. Some fears have no basis and are irrational and induced through brainwashing and programming tactics. It is not necessary that the brainwashing parent intentionally or consciously cause a child to make statements indicating fearfulness of the other parent. Children are highly suggestible and can be influenced to behave in a way that will please a parent and meet his or her needs. For instance, in reviewing the therapy records of a child who had expressed a strong fear of her father in a post-divorce custody dispute case, I came across multiple session notes where the mother had brought the child to the therapist and told the therapist—in front of the child—“Little Susie has tremendous anxiety and fear about seeing her dad. What can we do to help her?” It was not surprising that once the mother left the child with the therapist, having set the stage, Little Susie played to the mother’s expectations and spoke of her fear of her father and how “traumatic” it was to spend the weekend with him.

Borrowed scenarios or scripted views. An eight-year-old “remembered” how his father locked him a dark bathroom, refused to give him food, and yelled at him “for hours.” He had made these same complaints to his therapist, who had accepted the narrative without any inquiry or corroboration. But when I gently tried to go beyond the superficial but emotionally powerful narrative of the father’s abusive parenting, the child was unable to give specific detail. When did the father do this? “I don’t know.” How often did he do this? “I don’t know.” Was anyone else present in the home when this happened? “I don’t remember.” Finally, the child blurted out, “I know this happened because my mom told me all about it and I have it written down somewhere!” Brainwashed children convincingly speak of incidents that they have never witnessed or experienced but have repeatedly been told about. On the flip side, children who have witnessed scenes that they have described in detail later express doubt and assert a new narrative of the original scenario after the brainwashing. A five-year-old reported to the police that she had witnessed her father push her mother to the ground. A few weeks later, the child reported that she had witnessed the mother slip and fall to the ground and that the father was nowhere around. Further questioning revealed that the father had convincingly confused his daughter by rewriting history and telling her that she was too far away from the incident and upset by the mother’s “accident” to remember anything. And, for a good measure, he had added, “You don’t want Daddy to go jail, do you? You will never see me again.”

Inexplicable unmanageability. Brainwashed and programmed children demonstrate unmanageability for no apparent reason. The brainwasher parent may overtly give a child permission not to obey the rules or expectations of the target parent. These children are shockingly rude and disrespectful toward the target parent, refuse to follow the house rules, engage in name calling, and create overall chaos in the parent’s home. But outside of the target parent’s home, the child appears to be well adjusted, conforms to the norms of society, and rescues little kittens. The unmanageability and the borderline sociopathic behaviors happen only at the target parent’s home, which then leads the brainwasher to come to the rescue by saying, “This never happens at my house,” and offering a solution: Give the child a break and suspend visitation with the target parent. Suspending contact between the child and the target parent entrenches alienation further: The child is left with the brainwasher to continue to be exposed to the propaganda and is bereft of any contact with the target parent, who is then unable to try to counter the negative propaganda of the brainwashing parent. Nevertheless, the target is caught in a “damned if I do, damned if I don’t” dilemma. An attempt to discipline the unmanageable child is seen as “authoritarian” parenting, but ignoring the child’s behavior is seen as too lenient or enabling.

Evidence of brainwashing and programming could be gleaned from a thorough and systematic review of the case file, which could include legal pleadings, audio and video recordings, emails and text communications, photographs, witness interviews, therapy records, police and protective services reports, medical records, and children’s interviews. But the most persuasive evidence of brainwashing and programming can be obtained by comprehensive and careful interviews with and observations of the child.

Ten Tips on Interviewing Brainwashed and Programmed Children

As you walk out to bat on a sticky wicket, here are 10 tips on interviewing children suspected of being brainwashed and programmed.

Avoid getting clean bowled in the very first over of the match. A brainwashed and programmed child is a loyal foot soldier of the hostile, negative parent. Your interview style should be nonconfrontational, nonjudgmental, supporting, and matter-of-fact. More along the lines of “Can you help me understand why you said . . . ?” rather than “You are too young to understand. Don’t you see . . . ?” Do not attempt to convince the child how he or she has it all wrong. That will almost always result in the child reporting the content to the brainwasher/programmer, who may sabotage the investigation or contaminate the process.

Do not skimp on net practice. Skilled batsmen and bowlers who shine in the field spend countless hours perfecting their cricketing techniques. Prepare thoroughly for the interview. Do not let the fact that you are interviewing “just a child” lull you into complacency. Before your interview, read the relevant case material. If the child’s statements against the target parent have been memorialized in third-party reports, such as police reports or therapy notes, it is important to review them prior to the interview. Try to learn about the “baseline” relationship that the child had with the parent who is now being rejected. Did the child always have a tension-filled or fractured relationship with the parent? Or was the relationship normative and “good enough” prior to the separation or divorce of the parents?

Do not try to hit for six on the first ball. Get to know the child gradually to build trust and rapport. These interviews are stressful and strange experiences for the child, who may be under tremendous pressure to make a case against the target parent. Sharpen your listening and observational skills when interviewing children. What they say can be revealing and provide clues to overt and covert brainwashing and programming techniques at play. But also watch out for nonverbal communication: the child’s body language, affect, presence or absence of eye contact, shift in mood, sensitivity toward certain issues or topics.

Ask open-ended questions. If the child is resistant to having contact with the target parent and complains of that parent’s parenting style or home environment, ask the child to tell you about the child’s routine, day-to-day experience with the parent. “Tell me about your day when you last saw your dad” or mom. What did the child do throughout the day or weekend? Were there any good interactions? Any fun activity? Any meaningful engagement between the child and the parent? Will the child acknowledge that some part of the visit was good?

If an opportunity presents, go for the pull shot—one of the deadliest shots played by batsmen when the ball delivery is between waist and shoulder height. Depending on the age of the child and the rapport that you have built, it may be helpful to ask pointedly, “Is there anything you were told to tell me [or not tell me]?” The child’s answer or nonverbal communication may expose the loyalty bind that the child is experiencing as a result of brainwashing and programming.

Watch out for shutdown messages. Clawar and Rivlin describe these as “messages implanted by the programming/brainwashing parent in order to prevent deprogramming.” They include ideas such as “Don’t let anybody tell you. . . ,” or “If you tell anybody that I said or did this, I could be in serious trouble.” You can tell that a shutdown experience is taking place when the child is willing to talk but abruptly shuts down for no apparent reason. The child avoids talking about a particular incident or issue. Identify the issue for the child, and then invite the child to gently explore it together.

Be careful to maintain neutrality regarding both parents. Adopt a problem-solving attitude, instead of finding who is at fault. Clawar and Rivlin provide an insightful example of an interview between a judge and a 10-year-old child, in which the judge tells the child that “sometimes it’s helpful to play detective to kind of figure things out,” and requests the child’s help rather than forcing a position.

Observe the child with each parent in each parent’s home. Take note of the child’s nonverbal communication with the target parent. Is the child who alleges fear of the parent at ease with the parent outside of the other parent’s presence? Watch what parents say (or don’t say) about each other in the child’s presence. Look for nonverbal communication as well. Does the dad turn away from the child when the child speaks of the mom, or does the mom have a facial expression of disgust, anger, or anxiety when the child speaks of the dad? Does the child’s room have photos with, mementos of, or gifts from parent A at parent B’s home and vice versa?

Watch out for a googly—a deceptive delivery, where the ball spins after pitching and goes in a different direction than where the batsman was expecting. If the favored parent makes claims of encouraging and facilitating the child’s relationship with the rejected parent, are such claims supported by evidence? Ask to see texts, emails, voicemails between the child and the parents. You may find, as did a Tennessee trial judge, that a father’s claims to foster a relationship between the child and the mother was disingenuous and duplicitous, where the father sent texts to the child stating the mother was “mentally ill,” that “nobody likes her,” “the bible tells us clearly that mental illness is a spiritual problem,” and “you have a right to be ugly to her.” McClain v. McClain, 539 S.W.3d 170, 194–95 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2017).

Avoid being duped by a yorker—a ball that hits the pitch around the feet of the batsman, making it difficult for the batsman to play the delivery. Look closely at what may superficially appear to be a close parent-child relationship but may be a sign of enmeshed parent-child dyad. Enmeshment leads to a breakdown of healthy parent-child boundaries, role corruption, and role reversal. It may take form of parentification, in which the parentifying adult enlists the child to fulfill his or her need to be cared for. For instance, a nine-year-old child being visibly upset during a home visit by a GAL because her mother has not taken her daily dose of medicine. Or it may take the form of adultification, which is characterized by a parent’s enlistment of a child in a partner-like role in which the child becomes the parent’s “buddy,” confidant, and ally. Such as a father sharing the details of the mother’s extramarital affair with the children because he believes in “honesty” and that the “children have a right to know the truth.” Both parentification and adultification are forms of child psychological maltreatment.

Conclusion

Brainwashing and programming cases, like those involving parental alienation, are hard to litigate. As a GAL, you will not only have to learn the science but also be prepared to educate the court and debunk several fallacies and misconceptions that prevail in these cases. See Richard Warshak, Ten Parental Alienation Fallacies That Compromise Decisions in Court and in Therapy, 46 Prof. Psychol.: Res. & Prac., no. 4, 235, passim (Aug. 2015). Your job is to make recommendations in the best interests of the child, not based on what the child wishes for or appears to want. Your recommendations to the court could result in major life-altering decisions for a child, save a precious parent-child relationship, and help the child get appropriate mental health treatment. The wicket is sticky, but with preparation, practice, and perseverance, you will hit the ball for a six and knock it beyond the boundary.

Author

Profile Picture

Ashish S Joshi

I am a litigator, author, and an educator. My work focuses in the areas of complex child custody, child psychological maltreatment, intimate partner violence / domestic violence, child abuse, and international child...

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/litigation/resources/litigation-journal/2023-fall/on-sticky-wicket-representing-best-interests-brainwashed-and-programmed-children-highconflict-child-custody-cases/

https://www.facebook.com/HisHolyChurchofAnonymous/posts/pfbid0oXESULnAYtvSizCcGosjjsg2tz2Sbu6Naa9rdQ5pDuEXn3Tt1xVcVzLNfKARMNxvl

How do we honor an abusive parent?

Answer

It would be so much easier if God had asked only that we honor our parents if they are good, kind and loving to us, but the command of Exodus 20:12 is “Honor your father and mother,” period. Ephesians 6:1 says to “obey” them. There are many hurt and damaged people who find these commands nearly impossible to obey. Should we honor and obey an abusive parent? Where do we draw the line?

Abuse comes in many forms. A child can be brought up well clothed and fed with all his needs supplied except for the all-important need for love and approval. No physical harm is ever done to him, yet, as each year goes by, his spirit shrivels up inside him more and more, as a plant will shrivel without sunlight, desperate for the smallest demonstration of affection. Eventually, he grows to adulthood; everything seems to be normal, yet he is crippled inside by the indifference of his parents.

Then again, a child’s spirit may be broken at an early age—even though he suffers no physical abuse—by being constantly told that he is useless and a waste of space. Everything he attempts is sneered at until he gives up trying to do anything at all. Because very young children naturally believe what their parents say about them, the child who suffers this treatment will gradually withdraw into himself, retiring behind an invisible wall and simply existing rather than living. These children grow up never suffering physically at the hands of their parents but nevertheless crippled in their spirits. As grown-ups, they find it difficult to make friends and are unable to relate normally to other adults.

So, child abuse can be subtle. There is, of course, the more obvious kind—when a child is neglected, kicked and beaten and, worse still, sexually abused. The damage such abuse causes can last a lifetime. Now for the big question: how do we obey God’s commandment to honor parents who behave with such cruelty toward their own children?

Those who have trusted Jesus as their savior have a real Heavenly Father who desires only our good and never to harm us (Jeremiah 29:11). He is “a father to the fatherless” (Psalm 68:5). The Lord will use everything, even horrible acts, for good for those who love Him (Romans 8:28). When we surrender our will to Him, we will see His work in our life. Trusting God may feel disconnected or impossible for those who have never known what it is to love and trust. Someone in this position need only take one small step toward God saying, “I want to learn to love and trust you—please help me.” Jesus is “meek and lowly in heart” (Matthew 11:29), and we can confidently go to Him and pour out our problems, knowing that He will hear and answer (1 John 5:14-15). It will not be long before any child of God willing to trust Him will begin to sense the Holy Spirit at work in his heart. God will take the heart that has been turned to stone by an abusive childhood and replace it with one of flesh and feeling (Ezekiel 36:26).

The next step for someone who has been abused is to be willing to forgive. This, too, will seem to be utterly impossible, especially for those who have suffered the worst kinds of abuse. Bitterness can sink into their souls, weighing them down like iron, yet there is nothing the Holy Spirit cannot soften and cleanse. With God all things are possible (Mark 10:27). Our Lord understands our pain; He “was crucified in weakness, yet he lives by God’s power” (2 Corinthians 13:4).

There is no need to fear being honest with God. If you find it difficult to forgive the wickedness of a parent’s behavior, talk to God about it. It is true that unforgiveness is sin, but only deliberate unforgiveness, where we have set our hearts like flint and vowed that never again will we even consider forgiveness for those who have hurt us so badly. A child of God going to his Father for help with something he cannot do for himself will find not an angry, threatening God waiting to punish him, but a Father with a heart full of overwhelming love, compassion, mercy and a desire to help.

So, what does honoring an abusive parent look like in real life? Here are some practical tips: by the grace of God, be willing to forgive. A willingness to forgive honors both God and the parent. Pray for your abuser. Let go of expectations that your parent will ever be the parent you want him or her to be; replace your disappointment and sadness with acceptance of who the person is. Cultivate an attitude of compassion for the things your parent did right, and express gratitude for even slight efforts to show love. Refrain from making disparaging remarks about your parent. If it is safe to be in communication with your parent, establish wise boundaries to reduce sinful temptations for you and your parent.

One thing forgiveness and honor are not, though, is a permanent submission to parental authority. The Bible commands honor but not remaining a prisoner in a dysfunctional family. Families with a destructive cycle of sin are dangerous, and children who break free need to find safety in the family of God—which is every Christian’s true family (Matthew 10:35–38). Dysfunctional families are fraught with codependence, addiction, violence, and an absence of safe boundaries. These traits will be like a millstone around the neck, dragging the child toward the same sinful patterns. Removing oneself from an abusive situation is much like overcoming addiction; when a person desires sobriety, he cannot associate with people who abuse drugs (Proverbs 13:20).

Also, in cases in which the grandchildren are exposed to the threat of physical harm or sexual assault, it becomes the adult child’s responsibility to protect their own children. There is no guilt in keeping one’s distance from abusive parents, as long as the separation is not motivated by vengeance. You can honor your parents from afar. Sadly, some parents do not value their children enough to maintain a relationship. The void left by a broken relationship should be filled by Christ rather than pining for a parental relationship that will never be.

By focusing on your own relationship with Christ, you can experience real healing. Without salvation there is no hope for anyone, but in Christ we are new creations able to do anything He calls us to do (2 Corinthians 5:17). It is also possible that the parent will repent; thus, a relationship could be formed based on Christ’s abundant love and grace. You could be the light that leads your unsaved or wayward parent to repentance and salvation (1 Corinthians 9:19).

Just as Jesus loved us in our sinful state, we can honor an abusive parent. It means showing grace and compassion to those who don’t deserve it so that God is glorified and the obedient are blessed and rewarded (Matthew 5:44-48; 1 John 4:18-21). Remember, “Make every effort to live in peace with all men and to be holy; without holiness no one will see the Lord” (Hebrews 12:14).

https://www.gotquestions.org/honor-abusive-parent.html

I'm adopted. My adopted father walked away from my adopted mother and me, a year after my adoption. An utter schlump and weak selfish man. No honor. No backbone. A bum is a bum. A stiff is a stiff. I don't appreciate what my birth parent's did either. They were married and no honor between them and they adopted my sister and I, out. Split us up. Selfish all unto themselves. I feel exactly like this young man feels. The shame is not in us. It's in the one's that walked away from us for their own selfish gains. I get plenty ticked at those who cannot owe up to their obligations and responsibilities. And then strut around this planet saying I am the greatest among you. They don't deserve to be in power and leadership roles.

Pope Francis (Latin: Franciscus; Italian: Francesco; Spanish: Francisco; born Jorge Mario Bergoglio;[b] 17 December 1936) is the head of the Catholic Church and sovereign of the Vatican City State. He is the first pope from the Society of Jesus (the Jesuit Order), the first from the Americas and the Southern Hemisphere, and the first born or raised outside Europe since the 8th-century papacy of the Syrian pope Gregory III.

Born in Buenos Aires, Argentina, Bergoglio worked for a time as a bouncer and a janitor before training to become a chemist and working as a technician in a food science laboratory. After recovering from a severe case of pneumonia and cysts, he was inspired to join the Jesuits in 1958. He was ordained a Catholic priest in 1969; from 1973 to 1979, he was the Jesuit provincial superior in Argentina. He became the archbishop of Buenos Aires in 1998 and was created a cardinal in 2001 by Pope John Paul II. He led the Argentine Church during the December 2001 riots in Argentina; the administrations of Néstor Kirchner and Cristina Fernández de Kirchner considered him to be a political rival.

Following the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI on 28 February 2013, a papal conclave elected Bergoglio as his successor on 13 March. He chose Francis as his papal name in honour of Saint Francis of Assisi. Throughout his public life, Francis has been noted for his humility, emphasis on God's mercy, international visibility as pope, concern for the poor and commitment to interreligious dialogue. He is known for having a less formal approach to the papacy than his predecessors by, for instance, choosing to reside in the Domus Sanctae Marthae guest house rather than in the papal apartments of the Apostolic Palace used by previous popes.[2]

Francis has made women full members of dicasteries in the Roman Curia.[3][4] He maintains that the Catholic Church should be more sympathetic toward members of the LGBT community and has stated that while blessings of same-sex unions are not permitted, the individuals can be blessed as long as blessings are not given in a liturgical context.[5] Francis is a critic of unbridled capitalism, consumerism, and overdevelopment;[6] he has made action on climate change a leading focus of his papacy.[7] He is widely interpreted as denouncing the death penalty as intrinsically evil[8] and has termed it "an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person" and "inadmissible", stating additionally that the Catholic Church is committed to its abolition.[9] There can be "no going back from this position", he observed.[10]

In international diplomacy, Francis has criticized the rise of right-wing populism, called for the decriminalization of homosexuality (though still considering same-sex acts as sinful),[11] helped to restore full diplomatic relations between the United States and Cuba, negotiated a deal with China to define how much influence the Communist Party has in appointing Chinese bishops, and has supported the cause of refugees during the European and Central American migrant crises. He has called on the Western world to increase immigration levels significantly.[12][13] In 2022, he apologized for the Church's role in the "cultural genocide" of the Canadian indigenous peoples.[14] On 4 October 2023, Francis convened the beginnings of the Synod on Synodality which was described as the culmination of his papacy and the most important event in the Catholic Church since the Second Vatican Council.[4][15][16] Pope Francis is the first pope to publish a memoir, Hope, which was released on 14 January 2025.[17]

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

Matthew 23:9

1599 Geneva Bible

9 And call no man your [a]father upon the earth: for there is but one, your father which is in heaven.

Read full chapter

Footnotes

Matthew 23:9 He shooteth at a fashion which the Jews used, for they called the Rabbis, our fathers.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2023%3A9&version=GNV

CERTIFICATE OF FOSTER PARENTHOOD

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT SUE DUNN

HAS BECOME A FOSTER PARENT ON THIS DAY DEC. 25, 1986 OF A BOWLSIE CREATION OF LITTLE PEOPLE.

Frances & Bowles

FRANCES A. BOWLES

A SPECIAL CREATION FOR A SPECIAL FRIEND SUSAN GEANI LITTLE SU SU)

HAS BEEN CREATED ESPECIALLY FOR YOU BY

FRANCE A. BOWLES

Susan Jean Lohrey Dunn's original name was Louvinia and Susan's adopted mother's name is Louesa. Susan is having an identity crisis implying neighbor's gender isn't what they say but Susan's gender and identity is genuine!

REGISTRATION DISTRICT NO

PART 1:

610

REGISTRAR'S NUMBER

CERTIFICATE OF ADOPTION

The information in this section must be given as it was before adoption. It is needed to locate and seal the original certificate of birth. Without this data it may be impossible to file an amended certificate of birth for this child.

1A. NAME OF CHILD-FIRST NAME

CHILD'S PERSONAL DATA

Susan

2. SEX

3. DATE OF BIRTH

Female

5/25/51

5A. NAME OF FATHER-FIRST NAME

NATURAL PARENTS DATA

Orville

6A. MAIDEN NAME OF MOTHER-FIRST NAME

Dorothy

118. MIDDLE NAME

Louvinia

4. PLACE OF BIRTH-CITY OR TOWN. COUNTY

Greensburg

158. MIDDLE NAME

Rural

Gerald

168. MIDDLE NAME

11c. LAST NAME

Emery

Kentucky

15c. LAST NAME

Emery

16c. LAST NAME

PART II:

Crouch

Adopting parents must furnish the following information concerning themselves as it was at the time of birth of the above child. This information is used in preparation of the amended certifi- cate of birth.

7A. NAME OF FATHER-FIRST NAME

178. MIDDLE NAME

17c. LAST NAME

Melvin

FOSTER OR NATURAL FATHER

8. DATE OF BIRTH

11. OCCUPATION

8/25/24

Warehouseman

9. PLACE OF BIRTH

Rocky Ford, Colorado

12. INDUSTRY

Lohrey

10. COLOR OR RACE

White

13A. MAIDEN NAME OF MOTHER-FIRST NAME

1138. MIDDLE NAME

Thompson Diggs Company

13c. LAST NAME

Louesa

FOSTER OR NATURAL MOTHER

Jane

Manier

14. DATE OF BIRTH

15. PLACE OF BIRTH

16. COLOR OR RACE

9/12/27

Three Rivers, Michigan

White

VERIFICATION OF PART II AGENCY OR DEPARTMENT HANDLING CASE

17. USUAL RESIDENCE-STREET ADDRESS. CITY OR TOWN. AND STATE

2200 S Street, Sacramento, California

18. SIGNATURE OF PARENT VERIFYING DATA IN PART II

Melvin Loures

20. NAME OF AGENCY OR DEPARTMENT WHICH INVESTIGATED OR HANDLED CASE

State Department of Social Welfare

19. PRESENT ADDRESS OF VERIFYING PARENT

Same

21. ADDRESS OF AGENCY OR DEPARTMENT WHICH INVESTIGATED OR HANDLED CASE

1530 Capitol Avenue, Sacramento 1

The County Clerk should require that as much of the information as is available in Part I and II, above, be furnished before he completes Part III and forwards the certificate to the State Registrar of Vital PART III: Statistics. (The County Clerk may complete or verify any of Items 1 through 21 from the court record of adoption.)

COUNTY CLERK

22. I hereby certify that the child described above was adopted by the above named foster parent(s) on the. and is now to bear the name of SUSAN JEAN LONREY

23. SIGNATURE AND SEAL OF COUNTY CLERK

C. C. La RUE

CLERK IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF

STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH

SACRAMENTO

BY:

29th

day of

June

Las set forth in the decree of adoption made on that date, in Case No. DATE SIGNED

Conga

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

34984

DATE REPORT SENT TO STATE REGISTRAR

June 29, 1953

(REV. 7-1-49)

FORM RAS-44

Depart

Mean, Franki

No.

82497

CERTIFIED PHOTOSTATIC COPY OF

RECORD of BIRTH

orm V. S. No. 2-A

HS-796 (VS)

EV. 4-48

EDERAL SECURITY AGENCY

PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE

PLACE OF BIRTH

a. COUNTY

Green

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY

Registration District No.

Department of Health

BUREAU OF VITAL STATISTICS

FILE NO. 116 28364

CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH REGISTRAR'S NO. 610

b. CITY (If outside corporate limits, write RURAL and give township)

TOWN

c. FULL NAME OF (If NOT in hospital or institution, give street address or HOSPITAL OR location)

INSTITUTION

CHILD'S NAME

(Type or Print)

a. (First)

4. SEX

Female

5a. THIS BIRTH SINGLE X

TWIN

TRIPLET

7. FULL NAME

a. (First)

SUSAN

Primary Registration District No.

5561

2. USUAL RESIDENCE OF MOTHER (Where does mother live?) a. STATE b. COUNTY

c. CITY (If outside corporate limits, write RURAL and give township) OR TOWN

d. STREET ADDRESS

b. (Middle) JEAN

(If rural, give location)

c. (Last)

LOHREY

6. DATE

Melvin

2ND

3RD

5b. IF TWIN OR TRIPLET (This child born) 1ST FATHER OF CHILD b. (Middle)

OF BIRTH

HOUR OF BIRTH c. (Last) Lohrey

9. AGE (At time of this birth) 10. BIRTHPLACE (State or foreign country) 11a. USUAL OCCUPATION

YEARS

Colorado

Warehouseman

MOTHER OF CHILD b. (Middle)

Louesa

Jane

12. FULL MAIDEN NAME a. (First)

14. AGE (At time of this birth) 15. BIRTHPLACE (State or foreign country)

17. INFORMANT

YEARS

I hereby certify that his child was born alive n the date stated above.

19. DATE REC'D BY LOCAL

6-15-1951

REG.

Michigan Mother

18a. ATTENDANT AT BIRTH

M. D. X 18c. ADDRESS

MIDWIFE

20. REGISTRAR'S SIGNATURE

M.M.Lingle

FAR ME

c. (Last) Manier

(Month) (Day) (Year)

May 25 1951 7:20 AMM

8. COLOR OR RACE White

11b. KIND OF BUSINESS OR INDUSTRY

Thompson Diggs Co.

13. COLOR OR RACE White

16. CHILDREN. PREVIOUSLY BORN TO THIS MOTHER (Do NOT include this child)

a. How many

OTHER children

are now living?

b. How many OTHER children were born alive but are now dead?

18b. SIGNATURE

OTHER (Specify)

c. How many children, were stillborn (born dead after 20 week of pregnancy?)

R. M. Dishmane

18d. DATE SIGNED

44347-50

7-N-53

21. DATE ON WHICH GIVEN NAME ADDED BY

(Registrar)

I, Lewis C. Bush, State Registrar, hereby certify that the above is a true and correct photostatic copy of the certificate of birth of the person therein named, and that the original certificate is registered under the above file number.

In testimony whereof I have hereunto subscribed my name and caused the official seal of the State Department of Health to be affixed at Frankfort, Kentucky, day of

this

TATE

1969

ENT

Lewis C. Bush

Lewis C. Bush, State Registrar

AI Overview

Learn more

Both "Evan" and "Jean" are variations of the name "John" and ultimately derive from the Hebrew name "Yochanan," meaning "God is gracious"; "Evan" is a Welsh variation while "Jean" is the French version, essentially sharing the same core meaning of "God is gracious.".

Breakdown:

Evan: A Welsh form of "John," meaning "God is gracious".

Jean: The French version of "John," also signifying "God is gracious".

Key points:

Origin: Both names stem from the Hebrew name "Yochanan".

Language variations: "Evan" is Welsh, while "Jean" is French.

Meaning: Both names essentially mean "God is gracious".

Generative AI is experimental.

Evan Wyman

in Dayton, NV (Nevada)

Age 27

Current Address (Since January 2020)

2033 Lonnie Ln

Dayton NV 89403

Jean Rae Malone's Nevada Voter Registration

Dayton, Nevada

Jean Rae Malone (age 66) is listed at 2030 Lonnie Ln Dayton, Nv 89403 and is affiliated with the Non-Partisan Party. Jean is registered to vote in Lyon County, Nevada.

Overview of Jean Rae Malone

Lives in: Dayton, Nevada

Phone: View phone number Ad

Age: 66

Jean Malone's Voter Registration

Party Affiliation: Non-Partisan

Registered to Vote In: Lyon County, Nevada

Registration Date: 12/18/2023

Voter Status: ActivePrecinct: 13.00

Congressional District: Cd2

House District: Ad39

Senate District: Sd17

School Board District: Ed2

https://voterrecords.com/voter/129532222/jean-malone

9:14

Jean>

Hi how you doing I have a favor to ask you could you tell Billy to take my info off his wall it really upset me that my kids names were all there even Shay no one cares who I am but I do l cried when I saw my boys name on there I haven't done anything to him I am only asking once if he won't take it off I will file a police report on him I don't think he will want that they can come and go thru his phone and computer so can you at least ask him thanks we tried to help you but you just ignored us so you are on your own to deal with him we're all done trying to help anymore so please see what you can do

iMessage

CERTIFICATE OF FOSTER PARENTHOOD

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT SUE DUNN

HAS BECOME A FOSTER PARENT ON THIS DAY DEC. 25, 1986 OF A BOWLSIE CREATION OF LITTLE PEOPLE.

Frances & Bowles

FRANCES A. BOWLES

A SPECIAL CREATION FOR A SPECIAL FRIEND SUSAN JEANI LITTLE SU SU)

HAS BEEN CREATED ESPECIALLY FOR YOU

Susan Lohrey Dunn's Nevada Voter Registration

Dayton, Nevada

Susan Lohrey Dunn (age 73) is listed at 2031 Lonnie Ln Dayton, Nv 89403 and is affiliated with the Republican Party. Susan is registered to vote in Lyon County, Nevada.

Overview of Susan Lohrey Dunn

Lives in: Dayton, Nevada

Phone: View phone number Ad

Age: 73

Susan Dunn's Voter Registration

Party Affiliation: Republican Party

Registered to Vote In: Lyon County, Nevada

Registration Date: 05/28/2015

Voter Status: ActivePrecinct: 13.00

Congressional District: Cd2

House District: Ad39

Senate District: Sd17

School Board District: Ed2

https://voterrecords.com/voter/124466056/susan-dunn

2030-2031 APPARITION CHARACTERISTICS

Another general rule for predicting oppositions of Mars is from the following: the planet has an approximate 15.8-year periodic opposition cycle, which consists of three or four Aphelic oppositions and three consecutive Perihelic oppositions. Perihelic oppositions are also called "favorable" because the Earth and Mars come closest to each other on those occasions. We sometimes refer to this as the seven Martian synodic periods. This cycle is repeated every 79 years (± 4 to 5 days) and, if one were to live long enough, one would see this cycle nearly replicated in approximately 284 years. The 2031 Mars apparition is considered Transitional (between Aphelic and Perihelic) because the orbital longitude at opposition will be 68.4° from the aphelion longitude of 70° Ls and 111.6° Ls from perihelion (250° Ls).

NOTE: Ls is the planetocentric longitude of the Sun along the ecliptic of Mars’ sky. 0° Ls is defined as that point where the Sun crosses the Martian celestial equator from south to north, that is the planet’s northern hemisphere vernal equinox. The other Ls values that define the beginnings of Martian northern hemisphere seasons are: summer, 90° Ls; autumn, 180° Ls; and winter, 270° Ls. For Mars’ southern hemisphere these values represent the opposite seasons. Distance (A.U.) - Distance from Earth to Mars in astronomical units, where one (1) A.U. equals 92,955,807.267 miles or 149,597,870.691 km.

Opposition occurs 11 months after conjunction when Mars is on the opposite side of the Earth from the Sun. At that time, the two planets will lie nearly in a straight line with respect to the Sun, or five weeks after retrogression begins. Opposition will occur at 1157 UT on May 04, 2031 (138.4° Ls) with an apparent planetary disk diameter of 16.7 arcsec. Mars will remain visible for more than twelve months after opposition and then become lost in the glare of the Sun around May 31, 2032 as it approaches the next conjunction (July 11, 2032). The cycle is complete in 780 Earth days.

Closest approach occurs at 0350 UT on May 12, 2031 (142.1° Ls) with an apparent planetary disk diameter of 16.9 at a distance of 0.5533578 astronomical units (AU) or 51,437,823 miles (82,781,152 km). During closest approach in 2031 the apparent diameter of Mars will be 2.4 arcsec larger than it was at the same period in 2029; however, it will be 17.1 degrees lower in the sky - not quite as good for observing the Red Planet for observers in the northern hemisphere. It should also be noted that closest approach between Earth and Mars is not necessarily coincident with the time of opposition but varies by as much as two weeks.

https://www.alpo-astronomy.org/jbeish/2031_MARS.htm

Grammar - Conjunction Junction - Schoolhouse Rock

With lyrics by Bob Dorough, Jack Sheldon providing lead vocal and Terry Morrell backing vocal, "Conjunction Junction" is another great "Schoolhouse Rock!" short animated musical that entertains while educating about the importance of "hooking up words and phrases and clauses" with and, but, or. The leading character is a train conductor who has those words printed on the side of the train cars.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjdCFat9rjI

Philalethes, who in his Entrke ouverte au Palais ferd du Roi has dealt at greatest length on the practice of the Work, mentions the hermetic star and infers the cosmic magic of its appearance.

'It is the miracle of the world, the assembly of superior virtues in the inferior ones. That is why the Almighty has marked it with an extraordinary sign. The Wise Men saw it in the east, were struck with amazement and knew at once that a King most pure had been born into the the world.

'As for you, as soon as you see his star, follow it to the Cradle, where you will see the lovely Child." Then the Adept reveals the manner of operating :

'Let four parts be taken of our fiery dragon, which hides our Preface to the Second Edition 15 magic steel in its belly, and nine parts of our lodestone; mix them together, by burning Vulcan, in the form of mineral water, on which a scum will float which must be removed. Throw away th crust, take the inner part, purge three times, by fire and by salt, which will be done easily if Saturn has seen his image in the mirror of Mars.'

Finally Philalethes adds :

'And the Almighty sets his royal seal on the Work and adorns it specially therewith.'

Fulcanelli

Mystery of the Cathedrals

http://www.mtanthony13.org/library/Fulcanelli%20-%20The%20Mystery%20of%20the%20Cathedrals.pdf

Fire as the agent of Truth

Asha Vahishta is closely associated with fire. Fire is "grandly conceived as a force informing all the other Amesha Spentas, giving them warmth and the spark of life."[27] In Yasht 17.20, Angra Mainyu clamours that Zoroaster burns him with Asha Vahishta. In Vendidad 4.54-55, speaking against the truth and violating the sanctity of promise is detected by the consumption of "water, blazing, of golden color, having the power to detect guilt."

This analogy of truth that burns and detecting truth through fire is already attested in the very earliest texts, that is, in the Gathas and in the Yasna Haptanghaiti. In Yasna 43–44, Ahura Mazda dispenses justice through radiance of His fire and the strength of aṣ̌a. Fire "detects" sinners "by hand-grasping" (Yasna 34.4). An individual who has passed the fiery test (garmo-varah, ordeal by heat), has attained physical and spiritual strength, wisdom, truth and love with serenity (Yasna 30.7). Altogether, "there are said to have been some 30 kinds of fiery tests in all."[28] According to the post-Sassanid Dadestan i denig (I.31.10), at the final judgement a river of molten metal will cover the earth. The righteous, as they wade through this river, will perceive the molten metal as a bath of warm milk. The wicked will be scorched. For details on aṣ̌a's role in personal and final judgement, see aṣ̌a in eschatology, below.

Fire is moreover the "auxiliary of the truth," "and not only, as in the ordeal, of justice and of truth at the same time."[11] In Yasna 31.19, "the man who thinks of aṣ̌a, [...] who uses his tongue in order to speak correctly, [does so] with the aid of brilliant fire". In Yasna 34-44 devotees "ardently desire [Mazda's] mighty fire, through aṣ̌a." In Yasna 43–44, Ahura Mazda "shall come to [Zoroaster] through the splendour of [Mazda's] fire, possessing the strength of (through) aṣ̌a and good mind (=Vohu Manah)." That fire "possesses strength through aṣ̌a" is repeated again in Yasna 43.4. In Yasna 43.9, Zoroaster, wishing to serve fire, gives his attention to aṣ̌a. In Yasna 37.1, in a list of what are otherwise all physical creations, aṣ̌a takes the place of fire.

Asha Vahishta's association with atar is carried forward in the post-Gathic texts, and they are often mentioned together. In Zoroastrian cosmogony, each of the Amesha Spentas represents one aspect of creation and one of seven primordial elements that in Zoroastrian tradition are the basis of that creation. In this matrix, aṣ̌a/arta is the origin of fire, Avestan atar, which permeates through all Creation. The correspondence then is that aṣ̌a/arta "penetrates all ethical life, as fire penetrates all physical being."[12]

In the liturgy Asha Vahishta is frequently invoked together with fire. (Yasna l.4, 2.4, 3.6, 4.9, 6.3, 7.6, 17.3, 22.6, 59.3, 62.3 etc.). In one passage, fire is a protector of aṣ̌a: "when the Evil Spirit assailed the creation of Good Truth, Good Thought and Fire intervened" (Yasht 13.77)

In later Zoroastrian tradition, Asha Vahishta is still at times identified with the fire of the household hearth.

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

The Art of War is an ancient Chinese military treatise dating from the late Spring and Autumn period (roughly 5th century BC). The work, which is attributed to the ancient Chinese military strategist Sun Tzu ("Master Sun"), is composed of 13 chapters. Each one is devoted to a different set of skills or art related to warfare and how it applies to military strategy and tactics. For almost 1,500 years, it was the lead text in an anthology that was formalized as the Seven Military Classics by Emperor Shenzong of Song in 1080. The Art of War remains the most influential strategy text in East Asian warfare,[1] has influenced both East Asian and Western military theory and thinking, and has found a variety of applications in myriad competitive non-military endeavors across the modern world including espionage,[2] culture, politics, business, and sports.[3][4][5][6]

The book contains a detailed explanation and analysis of the 5th-century BC Chinese military, from weapons, environmental conditions, and strategy to rank and discipline. Sun also stressed the importance of intelligence operatives and espionage to the war effort. Considered one of history's finest military tacticians and analysts, his teachings and strategies formed the basis of advanced military training throughout the world.

The book was translated into French and published in 1772 by the French priest Jesuit Jean Joseph Marie Amiot; it was re-published in 1782. A partial translation into English was attempted by British officer Everard Ferguson Calthrop in 1905 under the title The Book of War. The first annotated English translation was completed and published by Lionel Giles in 1910.[7] Military and political leaders such as the Chinese communist revolutionary Mao Zedong, Japanese daimyō Takeda Shingen, Vietnamese general Võ Nguyên Giáp, is cited along with American military generals Douglas MacArthur and Norman Schwarzkopf Jr. as having drawn inspiration from the book.[8]

Outside of military use, The Art of War has also become a source of inspiration in business, politics, sports and esports, and its usage has extended to film and television.

History

Text and commentaries

The Art of War is traditionally attributed to an ancient Chinese military general known as Sun Tzu (pinyin: Sūnzǐ), meaning 'Master Sun'. Sun Tzu is said to have lived in the 6th century BC, but the earliest parts of The Art of War probably date to at least 100 years later.[9]

Sima Qian's Records of the Grand Historian, the first of China's 24 dynastic histories, records an early Chinese tradition that a text on military matters was written by one "Sun Wu" (孫武) from the State of Qi, and that this text had been read and studied by King Helü of Wu (r. 514–495 BC).[10] This text was traditionally identified with the received Master Sun's Art of War. The conventional view was that Sun Wu was a military theorist from the end of the Spring and Autumn period (776–471 BC) who fled his home state of Qi to the southeastern Kingdom of Wu, where he is said to have impressed the king with his ability to quickly train even court women in military discipline and to have made Wu's armies powerful enough to challenge their western rivals in the state of Chu. This view is still widely held in China.[11]

The strategist, poet, and warlord Cao Cao in the early 3rd century AD authored the earliest known commentary to the Art of War.[10] Cao's preface makes clear that he edited the text and removed certain passages, but the extent of his changes were unclear historically.[10] The Art of War appears throughout the bibliographical catalogs of the Chinese dynastic histories, but listings of its divisions and size varied widely.[10]

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

A famous Jesuit General Michael Angelo Tambourini once boasted, in 1720, to the Duke of Brissac: " See, My Grace [my Lord], from this room, I govern not only Paris, but China; not only China, but the whole world, without anyone knowing how it is managed."

"Andrew Steinmetz, History of the Jesuits, Vol. 1 (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Lea and Blanchard Publ.,/New York: Richard Bentley, 1848), pp.107, 168-169; see also, Constitution of the Jesuits, edited by Paris Paulin (1843); Eugene Sue (Marie Joseph), The Wandering Jew, (London: Chapman and Hall, 1844/ New York; Harper & Brothers,, 1845), Bk I, Chap. XV, P. 183; see also, p. 618, and Bk. II, p. 21; Abrige de I'Hist. Eccles. de Racine, Chap. xii. P. 77." page 129 Chapter XII "Unhesitating Obedience: The General And The Holy Office" Codeword Barbelon book One by P.D. Stuart

"Steinmetz was fourteen years a Jesuit; see also, Constitutions of the Jesuits, ed. by P. Paulin (1843); Morale Pratique Des Jesuites: Histoire De La Persecution De deux Saints, Vol. I (Cologne, 1669), pp. 50 and 51." "Epilogue-For Such A Time As This"

Pope Francis Lord of the World by P.D. Stuart

Jean Joseph Marie Amiot (Chinese: 錢德明; pinyin: Qián Démíng; February 8, 1718 – October 8, 1793) was a French Jesuit priest who worked in Qing China, during the reign of the Qianlong Emperor.

Born in Toulon, Amiot entered the novitiate of the Society of Jesus at the age of 19. After he was ordained in 1746, he aspired to serve in an overseas mission. Eventually, he was assigned a mission in China and left France in 1749. He arrived at Beijing in 1751 and remained there for the rest of his life.

Amiot served as an intermediary between the academics of Europe and China. His correspondence provided insight on the culture of China to the Europeans. He translated Chinese works into French. Most notably, his translation of Sun Tzu's The Art of War is the first rendition of the work into a Western language.

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

In 1748 the Rite de Veilla Bru, or Faithful Scotsman, was established at Toulouse with nine degrees, the first three Symbolic, followed by the Secret Master, four Elu degrees, and the Ninth degree ' Scientific Masonry.^" " In 1750 and 1751, a Lodge styled ' St. Jean de Ecossais ' was established at Marseilles, which afterwards assumed the style of ' Scottish Mother Lodge of France.' Its regime finally consisted of Eighteen degrees, of which the Scottish Mother Lodge of France at Paris afterwards borrowed Eight."

" In 1752 a power of the High degrees was established under the pompous title of * Sovereign Council, Sublime Scotch Mother Lodge of the Grand French Globe.' It afterwards called itself* Sovereign Council, Sublime Mother Lodge of the Excellents of the Grand French Globe.' The ' Council of the Emperors of the East and West ' assumed that title also on the 22d January, 1780. — Ragon."

"In 1754, The Chevalier de Bonneville established a chapter of the High degrees at Paris, styled the ' Chapter of Clermont.' In it the Templar system was revived, and the Baron de Hund received the High degrees, there and thence derived the principles and doctrines of his ' Order of Strict Observance ' —Thory and Leveque—Ragon says, The regime of the Chapter of Clermont at first comprised only three degrees, viz., the three Symbolic, followed by the Knight of the Eagle or Master Elect, Illustrious Knight or Templar, and Illustrious Sublime Knight—but that they soon became more numerous."

" In the same year Martinez Pascalis established his rite of ' Elus C'dens ' with nine degrees. He did not carry it to Paris until 1767, where Martinism in ten degrees grew out of it." — Clavel.

" In 1757 M. de St. Gelaire introduced at Paris the ' Order of Noachites.' ^'

page 50

THE ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED SCOTTISH KITE, IN THIRTY-THREE DEGREES. KNOWN HITHERTO UNDER THE NAMES OF THE " RITE OF PEEPECTION" ^THE " EITE OF HEEEDOM" THE " ANCIENT SCOTTISH rite"—THE " RITE OF KILWINNING" AND LAST, AS THE " SCOTTISH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED." A FULL AND COMPLETE HISTORY, WITH AN APPENDIX, CONTAINING NUMEROUS AUTHENTIC DOCUMENTS, RELATING TO THE ORIGIN, PKO- OB£SS AND ESTABLISHMENT OP THE EITE—EDICTS, CIRCULARS, PATENTS, REGISTERS, AND THE OPINIONS OF NUMEROUS AUTHORS — ILLUSTRATED WITH "TABLETS," / BY ROBERT B. FOLGER, M. D., Past Master, 33d., iJi-SECRETARY GENERAL, &0. SECOND EDITION. ,c ^ j ;^ NEW YORK: PUBLISHED BY THE AUTHOR.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d1/The_ancient_and_accepted_Scottish_rite%2C_in_thirty-three_degrees_%28IA_ancientaccepted00folg%29.pdf

On June 24, 1717, six months after the exile of the Stuarts, four lodges in London (names not given) met at Apple-Tree Tavern and united English Freemasonry under the name "United Grand Lodge," which has been nicknamed the Mother Grand Lodge, or Grand Mother Lodge.

The first French Templar Lodge was founded in 1725 by a contingent of exiled Stuart sympathizers. In 1745 Prince Charles Edward Stuart, the Young Pretender, attempted to regain

his Scottish throne and was soundly defeated in less than a year. Upon returning to France, the Scottish Templars founded the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, quickly

developing it to 32 degrees by 1755. In 1801 all French lodges accepted the Templar Scottish Rite degrees. That same year the Scottish Rite of Charleston, S.C., created the 33rd and final

degree in Templar Freemasonry.

On the continent of Europe, French Freemasonry is known as Scottish Rite, Grand Orient, French Grand Lodge, Continental, or Latin Freemasonry. The Templar York Rite in England was

transported to America, where it remains to this day. English Freemasonry continued with the three Craft Degrees UNTIL 1860, WHEN IT ADOPTED THE THIRTY ADDITIONAL DEGREES OF THE SCOTTISH RITE, but for competitive reasons refused to call it "Scottish."'

Scarlet and the Beast

by John Daniel

https://ia803001.us.archive.org/28/items/ScarletAndTheBeastJohnDaniel1995/Scarlet%20and%20the%20Beast,%20John%20Daniel%20(1995).pdf

What does it mean that Christians are adopted by God?

Answer

To adopt someone is to make that person a legal son or daughter. Adoption is one of the metaphors used in the Bible to explain how Christians are brought into the family of God. Jesus came “that we might receive adoption to sonship” (Galatians 4:5), and He was successful: “You received God’s Spirit when he adopted you as his own children” (Romans 8:15, NLT).

The Bible also uses the metaphor of being “born again” into God’s family (John 3:3), which seems to be at odds with the concept of adoption because, normally, either a person is born into a family or adopted, not both. We shouldn’t make too much of the difference, however, because both of these concepts are metaphors and should not be played against each other.

Adoption was not common in the Jewish world. A person’s standing was based on his birth. This is the reason that, if a man died, his brother was supposed to marry the widow. The first son to be born of the new marriage would be legally considered the son of the dead brother so that his family line would continue. There was never any thought of the widow adopting a son to carry on the family name. In John 3, Jesus is speaking to Nicodemus, a Jewish leader, and He uses the Jewish concept of being born again (or born from above) to explain how one is brought into God’s family.

In the Roman world, adoption was a significant and common practice. Today, we can write a will and leave our wealth and property to anyone we want, male or female. In the Roman world, with few exceptions, a man had to pass his wealth on to his son(s). If a man had no sons or if he felt that his sons were incapable of managing his wealth or were unworthy of it, he would have to adopt someone who would make a worthy son. These adoptions were not infant adoptions as is common today. Older boys and adult men were normally adopted. In some cases, the adoptee might even be older than the man who was adopting him. When the adoption was legally approved, the adoptee would have all his debts cancelled and he would receive a new name. He would be the legal son of his adoptive father and entitled to all the rights and benefits of a son. A father could disown his natural-born son, but an adoption was irreversible.

In the book Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ and the movie starring Charleton Heston, we see a vivid portrayal of Roman adoption. In the movie, Judah Ben-Hur (a Jew) has been imprisoned on a Roman galley ship as a rower. When the ship sinks in battle, Judah escapes and saves the life of a Roman commander, Arrius. Arrius’s only son has been killed, and he ultimately adopts Judah, who is pardoned for his supposed crimes. He is also given a new name, “young Arrius,” and has all the rights of inheritance. In the scene where the adoption is announced, Arrius takes off his ancestral signet ring and gives it to young Arrius. Young Arrius says that he has received “a new life, a new home, a new father.”

Paul, writing to Roman audiences, uses the metaphor of adoption, which a Roman audience would have understood. Galatians 4:3–7 says, “So also, when we were children, we were enslaved under the basic principles of the world. But when the time had fully come, God sent His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law, to redeem those under the Law, that we might receive our adoption as sons. And because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying out, ‘Abba, Father!’ So you are no longer a slave, but a son; and since you are a son, you are also an heir through God.” In this passage, Christians are born enslaved, but Jesus buys them out of slavery and they are adopted by the Father and given the Spirit, so now they are heirs.

When we come to faith in Christ, our debts are cancelled, we are given a new name, and we are given all the rights that heirs of God possess. One difference from Roman adoption is that Christians are not adopted because God thinks they will make worthy heirs. God adopts people who are completely unworthy, because He adopts on the basis of His grace.

So, Christians have been born into God’s family (using a Jewish metaphor) and adopted into God’s family (using a Roman metaphor). The end result is the same; Christians are forever part of God’s family.

https://www.gotquestions.org/Christian-adoption.html

MEMORANDUM FOR OO-ALC/CCD September 24, 2006

FROM: SUSAN L. DUNN

2995 N 1050 E

N. OGDEN, UTAH 84414

SUBJECT: EEO Complaint/reprisals

This EEO complaint is about reprisals due to a sexual harassment and hostile work environment suit, case number 8L1M06060 filed by me against my immediate supervisor 309 EMXG/Steven M. Thomas/QPC, this reprisal suit is also to include Buddy Paden/QPQ my 2nd line supervisor. The reprisal issues and dates are as followed: On Sept 21, 2006 someone changed my chart that I changed on Monday the 18th Sept. So the wrong (old) information was still on it for the bi weekly meeting. I think Steve did this because it was hi lighted in red font for everyone to see. I’m the only person he does this to. When other people numbers are wrong or information incorrect, he doesn’t hi light theirs in red. Showing prejudice, ostracizing and humiliating me in front of my peers. On or about Sept 12, 2006 Steve called an office meeting and when I went in and sat down he told me the meeting was about the Deficiency reporting problems and didn’t concern me and told me I should leave and said “Goodbye” with a big sneer on his face, as he shut the door behind me. As all my co workers were in attendance watching me be dismissed by Steve, I was feeling ostracized and demoralized and not a part of his group. On August 8, 2006 after the Quality Management Board dry run, I asked Buddy if I was going to talk at the QMB and he said no, that he was going to. I then gave him a copy of the MXW (Wing) Program Manager’s (Mr. Fred Smith) Executive Summary about the “Scrap Material Reclamation Function” surveillance in which I was given a noteworthy kudos for being the 309 EMXG group POC (I’ve done this for almost a year). Buddy Paden called me later that afternoon and told me that “I’m going to make your day” and told me to give my SMRF book and any other information I had and to catch Warren Ferree up and that Warren was going to be the Group’s POC now. When I talked to Warren he didn’t know why they passed the job to him. I was doing an excellent job and I feel that this was an act of reprisal. I enjoyed this job a lot and did very well at it. By taking this job away management can use this against me on my next appraisal. This is also age discrimination and sexism. On August 2, 2006, My boss Steve Thomas was talking to Mike Perez (who sits 4 feet from me in our cubicle), about the Quarterly Award Ceremonies and the people who were participating in the cheering competition were “faggots” . Since I attended also I felt Steve was calling me a faggot. He also was belittling us women in the office because we wouldn’t help carry in 40 lb. boxes of paper in from the dock. After I complained to

Col. Hoffman about this incident he asked me to send him a memo, and on Aug. 3, 2006 I did. Later on (that same day) after I sent the memo, Steve sent me a 192 page OC-ALC IG report which he got on July 25, 2006 FYI to him, and told me I had 3 days to get a draft on his desk. I also feel the August 2nd and August 3rd events were sexual harassment and reprisal. Since March 1, 2006 I have had such deterioration of my health, specifically of my heart, I’ve had to take time off to have many tests and procedures done, all because of the anxiety and hostile work environment created by Mr. Steven Thomas and now my temporary 2nd line supervisor is contributing also, with these reprisals based on my first EEO complaint. For this damage I’d like the remedy to be firing Steve Thomas from his supervising job and returning 175 hours of my sick leave. Buddy Paden told me once that they fire people downtown if they can’t meet their suspenses. Steve has said on more than one occasion that he would demote me if I couldn’t handle an 11’s job. He said that whatever I did over in Commodities as an 11 they don’t give people that grade over here in Electronics doing that. Possibly he will downgrade my position he always holds that over me. This is all part of my stress and anxiety levels. Another remedy I would like, is to be reassigned immediately into a Deficiency Reporting job outside Electronics, any action point, support point, single point of contact office, file manager office for the DR system. Possibly reassign me back into the 1910 series I came out of. And reassign me to a different Directorate. I would take a job at the Utah test training range as long as I didn’t lose pay. I think that is Civil Engineering outfit. I hereby designate William Dunn as my representative and he can be reached at 801-737-5932.

Signed___________________________________________________

Personal Representative______________________________________

Pope Francis apologizes for using homophobic slur in closed-door meeting with bishops

A Vatican spokesperson shared an apology from Pope Francis after Italian media reported he used a homophobic slur in a meeting with bishops.

Ryan Ross

published 4:42p.m. ET May 28, 2024

https://www.usatoday.com/videos/news/2024/05/28/pope-francis-apologizes-for-using-homophobic-slur-in-meeting/73883299007/

I found that some of the top level internationalists “swapped” wives during parties. Professor Raymond Boyer, top level scientist, and Canadian millionaire, and E V. Field, American millionaire, locked together in international intrigue and subversion as proved by both Canadian and American government investigating committees, carried this practice to the extent that they swapped each others’ wives for good, and made the exchange legal in the eyes of civil lay by going through a ceremony the new papers called “marriage.” What does God think of such practices? These people were all far too intelligent to be atheists. They know there is the supernatural as well as the natural, therefore, if they defect from God they automatically become Satanists as far as this world is concerned, and Luciferian as far as the next world is concerned. (For further details see pp. 212 and 213 Red Fog Over America.)

If these top level intellectuals who advocate the establishment of a One World Government intended to put God’s plan for the rule of the whole of the universe into effect upon this earth it hardly seems likely that they would pack the civil services of ALL remaining governments with homosexuals. Any person who has had to live in London, Ottawa and/or Washington knows that as far as homosexualism is concerned all three are modern cities like Sodom and Gomorrah. “Burgess and McLean Case” is typical of what I mean. Professor Pitrim Sorokin of Harvard University published an exposure of this angle of the Luciferian conspiracy in a book entitled The American Sex Revolution. The author states that perverted sexual behaviour plays a major part in modern U.S. political life and that sex bribery and blackmail are now as prevalent as monetary corruption. He states “sexually infamous persons, or their protege, are being appointed to ambassadorships and other high offices; profligates sometimes become popular mayors of metropolises, members of cabinets, or leaders of political parties. Among our political officials there is a vast legion of profligates both heterosexual and homosexual. Our morals have changed so notably that continency, chastity, and faithfulness are increasingly viewed as oddities."

Satan Prince of this World

by William Guy Carr

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Hw94yTrcRzvZjNQOo8T5_w-jqL8v5IMu/view?usp=sharing

https://www.facebook.com/billy.dunn.50767/posts/pfbid0fXxoBPZ6ZjPd9CPcdzXosCuXSzcgDjDRdH9JL3GfPv44gFaTSW9B8W5UAsX4ouSgl

What did Jesus mean when He instructed us to hate our father and mother (Luke 14:26)?

Answer

First, we must take this verse in the context of the chapter. Jesus is teaching His disciples, and, like any good teacher, He gets His students thinking. In this case, He begins with a truth statement that is hard to understand. Then He clarifies it with a metaphor. The truth statement is Luke 14:26, “If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple.” It seems that, if we don’t hate our family, we can’t be Jesus’ disciple. Or is there more to this issue?

Following the statement that we must “hate” our father and mother, Jesus relates a metaphor about a man who builds a house without first counting the cost (Luke 14:28–30). The man finds that he cannot follow through with what he set out to do. He leaves the house unfinished because he cannot pay what is required. Jesus’ illustration helps explain His difficult statement about hating our mother and father—namely, we must count the cost of being a disciple. There is a cost, and that is the point of the passage.

In order to be a disciple, we must be willing to give up everything for Jesus. Following Jesus requires commitment and faithfulness, even if our parents choose not to follow the Lord. If and when we are faced with the painful choice of loyalty to family versus loyalty to Jesus, we must choose Jesus. Even if our family members disown us—or worse—for being Christians, we must follow Christ. It is in this sense that we are “hating” our family. Jesus’ command to “hate father and mother” requires us to prioritize our relationship with Jesus over our relationship with parents, siblings, and other family members.

Of course, it is right to love our family members, and we want them to love and follow God. Elsewhere, Jesus confirmed the fifth commandment that we honor our fathers and mothers (Mark 7:9–13). And Paul sternly warned that “anyone who does not provide for their relatives, and especially for their own household, has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever” (1 Timothy 5:8). Jesus’ statement that we “hate” father and mother must be seen in relation to the whole of Scripture. His point is not that we are to be heartless toward our families, only that we must love Him more.

We must not forget that included in Jesus’ condition that a follower must “hate” his father and mother is the condition that he likewise hate “even his own life” (Luke 14:26, NAS). Jesus is not teaching an emotional hatred of one’s parents any more than He is teaching self-hatred. The emphasis is on self-denial and absolute surrender. Immediately following is Jesus’ instruction to “carry your own cross” (verse 27, NLT).

Some other translations make Jesus’ meaning a little clearer: “If you want to be my disciple, you must hate everyone else by comparison” (Luke 14:26, NLT, emphasis added), and the Amplified Bible says that a follower of Christ must “hate” his family members “in the sense of indifference to or relative disregard for them in comparison with his attitude toward God.” It is a “hatred” by comparison, not an absolute hatred.

The word hate in Luke 14:26 deserves a closer look. In the Hebrew Scriptures, the contrast between “love” and “hatred” is sometimes used to communicate preference. For example, in dealing with inheritances in polygamous marriages, the Mosaic Law referred to “two wives, one beloved, and another hated” (Deuteronomy 21:15, KJV). This is a good, literal translation. There was a “loved” wife and a “hated” wife. Other translations usually soften the “hated” wife to be “unloved” (CSB) or “less loved” (NET). The law was not indicating emotional hatred on the part of the husband, only preference. One wife was preferred over the other. We have a similar use of the love/hate idiom in Malachi 1:2–3 (cf. Romans 9:13).

Many Christians will never have to make the painful choice of turning their backs on their family in order to follow Christ. But, around the world, there are many other Christians who face shunning, disowning, or persecution from their families. These believers, if they are to be true to Christ, are forced to live in a way perceived as “hateful” toward their “father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters” (Luke 14:26). All believers are called to acknowledge the lordship of Christ and show Him preference over all earthly ties. Those who must sacrifice earthly relationships have this promise: “No one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age: homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and fields—along with persecutions—and in the age to come eternal life” (Mark 10:29–30).

https://www.gotquestions.org/hate-father-mother.html

Luke 14

1599 Geneva Bible

14 The dropsy healed on the Sabbath. 8 The chief place: at banquets. 12 The poor must be called to our feasts. 16 Of those that were bid to the great supper. 23 Some compelled to come in. 28 One about to build a tower.

1 And [a]it came to pass that when he was entered into the house of [b]one of the chief Pharisees on the Sabbath day, to eat bread, they watched him.

2 And behold, there was a certain man before him, which had the dropsy.

3 Then Jesus answering, spake unto the Lawyers and Pharisees, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath day?

4 And they held their peace. Then he took him, and healed him, and let him go,

5 And answered them, saying, Which of you shall have an ass, or an ox fallen into a pit, and will not straightway pull him out on the Sabbath day?

6 And they could not answer him again to those things.

7 ¶ [c]He spake also a parable to the guests, when he marked how they chose out the chief rooms, and said unto them,

8 When thou shalt be bidden of any man to a wedding, set not thyself down in the chiefest place, lest a more honorable man than thou be bidden of him,

9 And he that bade both him and thee, come, and say to thee, Give this man room, and thou then begin with shame to take the lowest room.

10 But when thou art bidden, go and sit down in the lowest room, that when he that bade thee, cometh, he may say unto thee, Friend, sit up higher: then shalt thou have worship in the presence of them that sit at table with thee.

11 For whosoever exalteth himself, shall be brought low, and he that humbleth himself, shall be exalted.

12 ¶ [d]Then said he also to him that had bidden him, When thou makest a dinner or a supper, call not thy friends, nor thy brethren, neither thy kinsmen, nor the rich neighbors, lest they also bid thee again, and a recompense be made thee.

13 But when thou makest a feast, call the poor, the maimed, the lame and the blind,

14 And thou shalt be blessed, because they cannot recompense thee: for thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just.

15 ¶ Now when one of them that sat at table heard these things, he said unto him, Blessed is he that eateth bread in the kingdom of God.

16 Then said he to him, A certain man made a great supper, and bade many,

17 And sent his servant at supper time to say to them that were bidden, Come: for all things are now ready.

18 [e]But they all with [f]one mind began to make excuse: The first said unto him, I have bought a farm, and I must needs go out and see it: I pray thee have me excused.

19 And another said, I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I go to prove them: I pray thee have me excused.

20 And another said, I have married a wife, and therefore I cannot come.

21 So that servant returned, and showed his master these things. Then was the good man of the house angry, and said to his servant, Go out quickly into the [g]streets and lanes of the city, and bring in hither the poor, and the maimed, and the halt, and the blind.

22 And the servant said, Lord, it is done as thou hast commanded, and yet there is room.

23 Then the master said to the servant, Go out into the highways, and hedges, and compel them to come in, that mine house may be filled.

24 For I say unto you, that none of those men which were bidden, shall taste of my supper.

25 [h]Now there went great multitudes with him, and he turned and said unto them,

26 If any man come to me, and [i]hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters: yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

27 [j]And whosoever beareth not his cross, and cometh after me, cannot be my disciple.

28 For which of you minding to build a tower, [k]sitting not down before, and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient to perform it,

29 Lest that after he hath laid the foundation, and is not able to perform it, all that behold it, begin to mock him,

30 Saying, This man began to build, and was not able to make an end.

31 Or what King going to make war against another King, sitteth not down first, and taketh counsel, whether he be able with ten thousand, to meet him that cometh against him with twenty thousand?

32 Or else while he is yet a great way off, he sendeth an ambassage, and desireth peace.

33 So likewise, whosoever he be of you, that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.

34 [l]Salt is good: but if salt have lost his savor, wherewith shall it be salted?

35 It is neither meet for the land, nor yet for the dunghill, but men cast it out. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Footnotes

Luke 14:1 The Law of the very Sabbath ought not to hinder the offices of charity.

Luke 14:1 Either one of the Elders, whom they called the Sanhedrin, or one of the chiefs of the Synagogue, John 7:48, for this word Pharisee was the name of a sect, though it appears by the whole history that the Pharisees were in great credit.

Luke 14:7 The reward of pride is ignomy and the reward of true modesty is glory.

Luke 14:12 Against them which lavish out their goods either ambitiously, or for hope of recompence, whereas Christian charity respecteth only the glory of God, and the profit of our neighbor.

Luke 14:18 The most part even of them to whom God hath revealed himself are so mad, that such helps as they have received of God, they willingly turn into lets and hindrances.

Luke 14:18 As of set purpose, and a thing agreed upon before, for though they allege several causes, yet all of them agree in this, that they have their excuses, that they may not come to supper.

Luke 14:21 Wide and broad quarters.

Luke 14:25 Even those affections, which are of themselves worthy of praise and commendation, must be ruled and ordered, that godliness may have the upper hand and preeminence.

Luke 14:26 If the matter stands between God and him, as Theophylact saith: and therefore these words are not spoken simply, but by comparison.

Luke 14:27 The true followers of Christ must at once build and fight, and therefore be ready and prepared to suffer all kinds of miseries.

Luke 14:28 At home, and casteth all his costs before he begin the work.

Luke 14:34 The disciples of Christ must be wise, both for themselves and for others: otherwise they become the most foolish of all.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2014&version=GNV

Search This Blog

Protestant Historical Institute of the Society of Jesus

Inside the Explosive Meeting Where Trump Officials Clashed With Elon Musk

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Fox News Host Faults 'The Native Americans' for California Fires

Raoul and The Kings of Spain

Why Trump can’t build iPhones in the US