WHO IS A MUSLIM HERETIC?

WHO IS A MUSLIM HERETIC?

By: Daniel Matin Varisco

(Daniel Martin Varisco (b 1951) is an anthropologist and historian. He has published on the history of Orientalism, the anthropology of Islam, the history of Islamic agronomy and astronomy, agriculture and water rights in Yemen, and international development and the anthropology of cyberspace. He has presented papers at the annual meetings of the American Anthropological Association, Middle East Studies Association, and universities and international forums around the world in English and Arabic. He was the Professor of Anthropology at Hofstra University in New York)

The history of Islam, like that of any religion, is littered with heretics. When you start with a divine revelation, revealed only in an Arabic dialect understandable to a seventh century illiterate Prophet alone in a cave with an archangel, add a cult of personality adoration for this Prophet and then acknowledge a cycle of violence and assassinations within the emerging Muslim community, heresy is inevitable. So who were the heretics over the fourteen centuries of the Islamic ummah? In a sense, everybody. Certainly every single sect calling itself Muslim has been attacked by some other sect. It is not just the majority Sunni vs. the marginalized Shi’a, nor the rational Mutazilites vs. the hardline literalists, nor the Arabs vs. the non-Arab converts, nor the trained clerics vs. the itinerant dervishes, nor simply the women-can’t drive Wahhabis of Saudi Arabia, the Buddha-bashing Taliban or those brave souls who pursue Queer Jihad. Simply put, the heretic is the person who does not take your truth as his or her own.

When Islam first appeared, Christians had good reason to brand it a heresy, just as devout Jews before the Roman destruction of the temple in Jerusalem saw Christ as another false messiah. The Quran, after all, did not say Christians and Jews were infidels; these People of the Book worshipped the same one true God, but had been led astray. The prophets in the earlier sacred writings were not the heretics. Abraham and Jesus were good Muslims, as Muhammad saw for himself in his Night Journey to the heavens; it was precisely because the Islamic dimension of sacred history as carried on by Jews and Christians had become “heretical” that God sent a final revelation and last prophet. Muhammad’s triumph signaled an end to heresy, a starting point that all Muslims would no doubt agree upon, but the minute Muhammad died, heresy was born again. How else can you explain the rebellion of the pacified tribes, the murder of caliphs Umar, Uthman and Ali and the killing of Muhammad’s grandson on the plain of Karbala? How else can anyone, Muslim or not, come to terms with the continued violence and internal strife between individuals and peoples claiming to be the true Muslims?

But if every Muslim is potentially a heretic for some other Muslim, in another sense it becomes problematic to call any particular Muslim or any specific difference in interpretation heretical. Were Muhammad to return to earth today (which is, of course, a heretical thought for most Muslims), what particular kind of Islam would he approve? Would he dine with the Ayatollahs in Qum or break the fast with the royal sons of Ibn Saud in Taif? Would he say “Salam aleikum” to Salman Rushdie or would he help strap on the suicide bomb to the muhajibah-fashion waist of a retarded Iraqi girl so she could blow up a Shi’a shrine? What would the Prophet do? And what if, heaven forbid, no one recognized him as the Prophet? What if he was clean shaven and wore no turban? What if Muhammad came back and he was branded a heretic?

Obviously, heresy is dangerous. Some Muslims reading the paragraphs above would no doubt stop here and brand me a heretic. But wait. I have in front of me a book by a Moroccan Muslim intellectual, Anouar Majid; the title is A Call for Heresy: Why Dissent is Vital to Islam and America. And I just spent the last two days in Atlanta at a conference of Muslims titled “A Celebration of Heresy Conference: Critical Thinking for Islamic Reform.” I say “wait,” because the subtitles carry the message. The problem facing Muslims today is not the proliferation of heretics within the faith, but the assumption that only one kind of Islam is not heretical. The problem is confusing dissent and debate with apostasy and unbelief. The problem is failing to think critically. “It was not for no reason,” argues Majid (p. 16) with sound logic overriding a double negative, “ that Al-Jahidh, the great ninth-century Arab philosopher, remarked that ‘the piety of theologians consists of hastening to denounce dissidents as unbelievers.’” Thus, there is good reason to reject the Sysiphean treadmill of perpetual blame. Thinking critically means thinking before criticizing, seeking knowledge rather than advocating superiority. If that mote in your brother’s or sister’s eye strikes you as heretical, then what do you think they will think of the beam in your own?

Heresy is not something to celebrate, at least not the way the Inquisitors spin it. Overcoming the tendency to condemn someone you do not agree with as a heretic is well worth celebrating. Over the past two days I heard a number of different voices, male and female, Egyptian, Iranian, Pakistani, Sudanese, Turkish, Dutch, American, shaykh and shabab. Some of what they were saying would indeed be considered heretical in some mosques or even at a distinguished center of learning like al-Azhar? There was debate and there was disagreement. Quranic verses were quoted from memory, history was spun, passionate concerns about problems facing Muslims today were raised. Yet there were no fist fights, no hurling of hate speech, no outbursts of intolerant rants, and no restrictions placed on free speech. If this kind of forum is a nest of heresy, let God be the judge.

So what did the heretics say? The Quran-only enthusiasts, suspicious of the self-serving duplicity of those who cite hadiths to haram and halal virtually every imaginable act a Muslim could do, would sound heretical to most Muslims I know. One of the speakers spent time in an Egyptian prison for daring to think outside the approved clerical box, even though he had a shaykhly diploma from al-Azhar. As several speakers noted, the thoughts expressed in this forum could not be made openly in virtually any Muslim majority country in the world (certainly with a few exceptions). Other issues would not shock reform-minded Muslims, such as the call for equality of Muslim women and men; not forcing Muslim women and men into a single mode, but allowing each to be independent agents of worshipping Allah without imposed cultural constraints. As one sister eloquently phrased it, why should women be forced to pray behind the men and look at their bottoms?

Among those present was Irshad Manji, author of The Trouble with Islam, a widely read book that has brought her a lot of trouble among most Muslims in America. As a self-styled “refusenik,” Irshad’s frequent appearances in the media have made her a prime target for heretic-bashing. But as Irshad explained, the trouble she has is not with Islam as such, not with what she sincerely hopes Islam can become, but with what often passes for Islam today, the intolerance that is widespread and furthers the gap between the aspirations of Muslims and the global concerns for human rights. I did not hear one person at the conference attack Islam. Any stray Islamophobe would have walked out, shaking his or her head at such a misnomer of a name for a conference of Muslims talking theology and trying to find ways to be more socially responsible citizens and family members.

Simply speaking one’s mind, as personally cathartic and communally therapeutic as such an opportunity provides, is not critical just because it is open-ended. While there were differences in interpreting the Quran and assessing the Middle Eastern origin rules for Muslims living in contemporary America, this was a conference that would have made the French philosopher Descartes proud. Similar to many of the participants, and certainly to the organizers of the conference, there was a distinct interest in using “reason” to advance the faith. In his famousMeditiations, Descartes attempted to use natural reason to prove that God and the human soul exist. He was willing to doubt everything his senses told him, even his own existence independent of his ability to think, but Descartes as a self-proclaimed Catholic refused to be a skeptic of the very thing he was trying to prove existed to the satisfaction of the atheists of his day. For Descartes, proto-Deist and timeworn philosopher that he was, God had to exist in order for him to exist as a finite thinking being. And that God had to be good. None of the Muslim heretics, if you can believe conference labels, I heard or talked with would disagree with Descartes. If there was an unbeliever, infidel, or atheist in the room, he or she kept very still.

And this brings me to a heretical thought of my own. Unlike Descartes, I do not think that human reason can ever prove in a meaningful way that God, however defined, exists. All human beings I know about have something any rational person would have to call “religion.” Not every society believes in an all-powerful God (Descartes was wrong about that, but then he never had the opportunity to take an anthropology of religion course); nor is there any religion where everyone is in total agreement on who and what God is. Most believers, no matter what the religion, believe they have the true religion. There is no rational way to line up all the prophets, document all the doctrines, and weigh all the good deeds against the bad and calculate the one true religion. Most of us practice the religion we are brought up in. Even when a person converts, the mother religion is never totally extinguished. So ultimately the only viable way to accept a revelation is by faith, not the ordinary means of proof we manage our daily affairs by, but an emotional and inner directed willingness to, as Muslims says. submit.

There were no real heretics at the conference. I doubt there have ever been any heretics willing to accept the brand of heretic as a sign of not knowing the truth. Yes, there was thinking, and much of it was critical. But thinking is like opening a door. Whether or not there is really something on the other side of that door is the critical question. I suspect that everyone present already had an idea of what they would see by opening the door. That is very much the stuff truth is made out of, at least the kind of truth individuals can grasp. What if there is nothing to see, once the door is opened? Closing it would be closing your mind. Staring into the unknown may just be the most blinding light of all. Now isn’t that a heretical thought?

IS CHRISTIANITY A RATIONAL RELIGION?

IS CHRISTIANITY A RATIONAL RELIGION?

A regular contributor to this Blog - Mourne Man Michael (MMM) - a man whom I have never met - but a man whose views I am very often in agreement with - left a comment on my Blog: "IS ISLAM A THREAT" that got me thinking.

MMM basically questioned if, in stating that Islam is "not a religion that is moderated by rationality"-  I was inferring that Christianity is a religion moderated by rationality. If that was my inference MMM said that he did not agree with me.

This was a very good and welcome challenge to me - a challenge I wish to address in this Blog - "Is Christianity a religion moderated by rationality"?

I think that my answer to this question cannot not be simple "yes" or "no".

For me the honest answer is:

CHRISTIANITY HAS BEEN / IS SOMETIMES A RELIGION MODERATED BY RATIONALITY AND VERY OFTEN AN IRRATIONAL RELIGION.

The thinking behind happenings like The Crusades, The Inquisition, The Counter Reformation and the early 20th century war on so called "Modernism" was definitely irrational and clearly psychotic.

The History of The Catholic Church and its popes shows out of control irrationality and the madnesses of fundamentalism, hatred, bigotry and murder.

The right wing fundamentalism and gun love of American Christianity is absolutely irrational.

The ignorance and fundamentalism of much that passes for Christianity in modern Africa is shockingly irrational.

The historic and current displays of bigoted "Protestantism" in Northern Ireland is patently irrational. 

These are but a few examples. So much of Christian religion has been and is as irrational as many expressions of Islam.

But looking back over the history of Christianity there are also examples of rational Christianity. 

In the beginning of Christianity there were many rational and free thinkers, who treasured their spirituality but opposed and rejected imposed dogmas and were either written off as "heretics" or even tortured and killed.

There were those who opposed the imperialisation of Christianity.

And throughout the Christian era there were people who rationally opposed the abuse and the spoiling of genuine Christian spirituality. 

Galileo

We can think of Francis of Assisi, John of the Cross, Teresa of Avila, Galileo, George Tyrrell, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Maximilian Kolbe, Teil de Chardin, Hans Kung and many others who fought for religious integrity. 

Of course one has to admit that the numbers of those fighting for integrity within the Christian Church have always been small - and they have been up against the unthinking Christianity of the masses - the masses of "the opium of the masses" variety.

My thinking about Christianity is that it must involve both the HEART and the HEAD. I also believe that the HEART should be in the driving seat but that the HEAD is a vital navigator, sitting in the front passenger seat - advising the heart.

Maybe I am more ignorant of Islam than I should be but I am not aware of a strong intellectual opposition is Islam - whereas there has always been a strong, if small, opposition in Christianity.

Having said that I am a great devotee of the Islamic poet Hafiz who gloried wine and women in his writings and pointed to them as a way to God.

Hafiz

But I do not know if Hafiz ever challenged unthinking Islam?

+Pat Buckley
30.1.2015.

*********** ALSO PUBLISHED ON www.christianityasap.com

RESPONSE TO BLOG ON ISLAM

In the name of God, the Beneficent the Merciful

To the Youth in Europe and North America,

The recent events in France and similar ones in some other Western countries have convinced me to directly talk to you about them. I am addressing you, [the youth], not because I overlook your parents, rather it is because the future of your nations and countries will be in your hands; and also I find that the sense of quest for truth is more vigorous and attentive in your hearts.

I don’t address your politicians and statesmen either in this writing because I believe that they have consciously separated the route of politics from the path of righteousness and truth.

I would like to talk to you about Islam, particularly the image that is presented to you as Islam. Many attempts have been made over the past two decades, almost since the disintegration of the Soviet Union, to place this great religion in the seat of a horrifying enemy. The provocation of a feeling of horror and hatred and its utilization has unfortunately a long record in the political history of the West.

Here, I don’t want to deal with the different phobias with which the Western nations have thus far been indoctrinated. A cursory review of recent critical studies of history would bring home to you the fact that the Western governments’ insincere and hypocritical treatment of other nations and cultures has been censured in new historiographies.

The histories of the United States and Europe are ashamed of slavery, embarrassed by the colonial period and chagrined at the oppression of people of color and non-Christians. Your researchers and historians are deeply ashamed of the bloodsheds wrought in the name of religion between the Catholics and Protestants or in the name of nationality and ethnicity during the First and Second World Wars. This approach is admirable.

By mentioning a fraction of this long list, I don’t want to reproach history; rather I would like you to ask your intellectuals as to why the public conscience in the West awakens and comes to its senses after a delay of several decades or centuries. Why should the revision of collective conscience apply to the distant past and not to the current problems? Why is it that attempts are made to prevent public awareness regarding an important issue such as the treatment of Islamic culture and thought?

You know well that humiliation and spreading hatred and illusionary fear of the “other” have been the common base of all those oppressive profiteers. Now, I would like you to ask yourself why the old policy of spreading “phobia” and hatred has targeted Islam and Muslims with an unprecedented intensity. Why does the power structure in the world want Islamic thought to be marginalized and remain latent? What concepts and values in Islam disturb the programs of the super powers and what interests are safeguarded in the shadow of distorting the image of Islam? Hence, my first request is: Study and research the incentives behind this widespread tarnishing of the image of Islam.

My second request is that in reaction to the flood of prejudgments and disinformation campaigns, try to gain a direct and firsthand knowledge of this religion. The right logic requires that you understand the nature and essence of what they are frightening you about and want you to keep away from.

I don’t insist that you accept my reading or any other reading of Islam. What I want to say is: Don’t allow this dynamic and effective reality in today’s world to be introduced to you through resentments and prejudices. Don’t allow them to hypocritically introduce their own recruited terrorists as representatives of Islam.

Receive knowledge of Islam from its primary and original sources. Gain information about Islam through the Qur’an and the life of its great Prophet. I would like to ask you whether you have directly read the Qur’an of the Muslims. Have you studied the teachings of the Prophet of Islam and his humane, ethical doctrines? Have you ever received the message of Islam from any sources other than the media?

Have you ever asked yourself how and on the basis of which values has Islam established the greatest scientific and intellectual civilization of the world and raised the most distinguished scientists and intellectuals throughout several centuries?

I would like you not to allow the derogatory and offensive image-buildings to create an emotional gulf between you and the reality, taking away the possibility of an impartial judgment from you. Today, the communication media have removed the geographical borders. Hence, don’t allow them to besiege you within fabricated and mental borders.

Although no one can individually fill the created gaps, each one of you can construct a bridge of thought and fairness over the gaps to illuminate yourself and your surrounding environment. While this preplanned challenge between Islam and you, the youth, is undesirable, it can raise new questions in your curious and inquiring minds. Attempts to find answers to these questions will provide you with an appropriate opportunity to discover new truths.

Therefore, don’t miss the opportunity to gain proper, correct and unbiased understanding of Islam so that hopefully, due to your sense of responsibility toward the truth, future generations would write the history of this current interaction between Islam and the West with a clearer conscience and lesser resentment.

Seyyed Ali Khamenei
21st Jan. 2015

IS ISLAM A THREAT?

Is ISLAM a threat to the world? Is it PC to even ask such a question?

I am a great believer in the saying: “It is by their fruits that you shall know them”.

When we look around the world what are the “fruits” of Islam? The attack in Paris? The attack in Belgium? The attacks in London? The kidnapping of locals and foreigners in various places including Africa? Syria? 

How can we be criticised for thinking that the most common fruits of Islam are strife, division, fundamentalism, hatred, fighting and killing?

They tell us that the vast majority of truly religious Muslims do not agree with all these horrible things. I am open to that argument. But I want to know where all these Muslims are. Why are they not more vocal? Why are they not banning and expelling the”fundamentalists” from their mosques and communities?

Is it just a coincidence that you cannot build a Christian church in Saudi Arabia but you can build all the mosques you want in Ireland, the UK, the USA and Europe?

Is it just a coincidence that women are not allowed to drive cars in Saudi and in other “Muslim” countries?

GAY MEN BEING THROWN FROM THE ROOF OF THE MOSQUE IN NINEVEH

Is it a coincidence that gay people are tortured and killed in “Muslim” countries?

I’m sorry if I am not being PC. But I am coming to the conclusion that Islam is a fundamentally flawed religion – a religion that is not moderated by rationality and a religion where the vast majority of its adherents are uneducated and are manipulated by a relatively small number of religious leaders who are fundamentalist at heart and who enjoy the power they have over their masses.

I was shocked to learn yesterday that 70% of those in prison in Denmark are from the Muslim community!

I do believe that Islam wants to dominate the world. I do believe that such domination would be dangerous and that it would lead to democratic regimes being replaced by Sharia Law!

I want the country I live in to be a modern, pluralist and secular democracy. I do not want my country to be run by any religion – the Muslim religion or the religion of the Vatican.

Maybe in our trojan efforts to be PC we are ignoring the threat that Islam poses to democracy.

At the very least we should think deeply about this issue – before it is too late!

+Pat Buckley 

STEPHEN FRY'S WEDDING

SEE BISHOP PAT'S OTHER BLOG: christianityasap.blogspot.com

STEPHEN FRY AND HIS WEDDING

I had the pleasure and privilege of spending a few hours in the company of Stephen Fry in Dublin one evening some years ago - at the Dublin premiere of the film WILDE.

We watched the film together in Dublin's Savoy Cinema and then went to the Dublin Gallery of Modern Art for a drinks reception.

On that evening I found Stephen Fry to be a thoroughly nice man - courteous, unassuming and very pleasant company.

I had always taken an interest in him and his work but since that meeting I took a special interest in him and his career.

A his current age of 57 - like all of us - his outward beauty is of course not what it was but when it comes to real beauty - INNER BEAUTY - I think that Stephen Fry has aged very finely indeed. 

The younger Stephen

In one sense he has taken over from the late, great Quinter Crisp as Britain's "finest stately homo" :-)

He is highly intelligent. He is greatly cultured. He is amazingly funny and is a very rational thinker and debater. 

He also has other very important qualities that come from the fact that he has suffered. For many years he has had to battle with a bipolar condition and with depression. This makes him a very sensitive person and hugely compassionate to others who have suffered. 

If YOU had been given his hand could you have achieved so much with it? I think I could have not!

This past week or so Stephen has been criticised in parts of the press because he married a man 30 years his junior.

What is this nonsense about? His new partner - Elliott Spencer is 27 years old - hardly a child?

They have known and loved each other for 2 years.

Elliott's parents are more than happy with the situation.

The most important thing is that two consenting adults have found special love in each other.

We all have different attractions - emotional, physical and sexual. Some younger women and men are attracted to more mature men or women. Some more mature women and men are attracted to younger women and men. So what?

I think that a lot of the negative mumblings about Stephen and Elliott's wedding come from people who resent their love or resent Stephen Fry's greatness and success. In Ireland we call these people "begrudgers". 

Other negative comments are coming from people who are openly or secretly homophobic. 

These people need to be told: "Get a life"!

Personally I wish Stephen Fry every possible happiness, good health and strength.

I hope he lives for many years and continues to favour us with his profound insights, his humour and his obvious talent.

+Pat Buckley

  

DOWN AND CONNOR - THE FINAL SOLUTION"

NACH UNTEN und CONNOR - DIE ENDLOSUNG

(Down and Connor - The Final Solution)

The new symbol for the Gottes Reich shows how Christianity can be remodeled and reshaped for the purpose of The Final Solution

A priest member of the Down and Connor Resistance Movement (DCRM) has leaked information to this Blog about the plans that are currently being made at Gottes Reich (God's Realm) headquarters at Somerton Strass 73, Belfast, that will be imposed on all Roman Catholics - practising and lapsed - on April 1st 2015.   

Herr BishofFuhrer

The first leaked piece of information is that the name of the headquarters is to changed, from that date, to "Bishofbunker". The city of Belfast will be changed to Noelburg.

The second leak is that the "bishop" is - from April 1st - to be called: "BishofFuhrer". All correspondence to him should be addressed as follows:

Seine Excellenz Herr BishofFuhrer

Somerton Strass 73,
Noelburg.

NG14 4DJ.

The Diocese - Diozese von Nach Unten und Connor - is to introduce its own currency called the "Gottes Mark" (God's Mark) or GM. One GM will be worth Sterling £1 or Euro 1.30.

The current 87 parish councils will have their name changed to "Gemendie".

In time these Gemendie will be disbanded and one member from each Gemendie will join the newly created "Moderatorat" or Moderator's Council. A priest in good standing will be appointed by the BishofFuhrer to be the leader of the Moderatorat and he will be called the "moderatorent". There will be 15 Moderatorats and 15 Moderatorents. Each Moderatorent will be responsible for 25,000 lay people and whatever number of assistants the BishopFuhrer appoints to each Moderatorat. 

The first task of each Moderatorat will be to reduce the number of Masses that are celebrated on Sundays and weekdays in the territory covered by the Moderatorat. They will infiltrate the laity and through carefully prepared propaganda persuade them that these reductions and changes are God's will (Gottes Willen)  and the will of the BishofFuhrer. 

Gottes Willen

Having achieved that first goal the Moderatorat will begin its second great task - the closure of as many churches as possible in it's territory. 

This will be achieved in three phases:

PHASE 1: 

The removal of canonically impure priests to a new holding camp on Rathlin Island called the PRIESTER KAMPF. This camp will be commanded by EmeritusFuhrer von Valshman. The deputy camp commander will Hoch Moderator ( High Moderator) Johan Roganstrut. 

Badge for homosexual priests (75%)

In this camp homosexual priests (who will be the majority) will sport a pink triangle on their uniform; active heterosexual priests will wear a black triangle; and heterosexual celibate priests will wear a white triangle. 

Active heterosexual priests (5%_

Trouble maker priests will wear a red triangle. 

Mentally ill priests will wear glow in the dark triangles in case they escape and are knocked down by marauding goats, passing ferries or low flying aircraft. 

Glow In The Dark triangles for mentally ill priests

Alcoholic priests will wear a brown triangle and priests addicted to gambling will wear a green triangle.  

Kampf Commandant von Valshman

Commandant von Valshman and Deputy Commandant Roganstrut will have the permission of the BishofFuhrer to carry out any experiment on any priest that will benefit the Gottes Reich.  

Kampf Deputy Commandant Rogenstrut

PHASE 11:

Each Moderatorat will pursue the closing down of as many churches as possible in their area and sell these buildings off and send all proceeds to the BishofFuhrer for the furtherance of the aims of the Gottes Reich. 

PHASE 111:

In the vicinity of each closed church the Moderatorat will erect secure structures known as GG's (Gottes Geldautomat) (God's ATM's) measuring 10 feet by 6 feet. Entry to these secure units will be by specially prepared plastic cards issued by Gotes Reich headquarters in Noelburg. Using these card a a 4 digit pin each practising Catholic can enter the GG. Inside the GG they will find the Geldautomat. 

They place their cards in the machine and will be asked for their pin. If successful the Geldautomat will offer them options:

Option A: A consecrated Host for Holy Communion - 5 GM (Gottes Mark)
Option B: A consecrated Capsule of Precious Blood - 5 GM.

Option C: A voucher for the forgiveness of a Venial Sin - 5GM.
Option D: A voucher for the forgiveness of a Mortal Sin - 20 GM.
Option E: A voucher for a sin reserved to the BishofFuhrer - 100 GM.
Option F: A voucher for a sin reserved to the Holy See - 500 GM.
Option G: A home use Baptism Kit - 50 GM.

Option H: A home use Confirmation Kit - 60 GM.
Option I: A Home use Last Rites Kit - 100 GM.

Option J: A voucher for a Marriage Centre - 300 GM.
Option K: A voucher for a Funeral Centre - 500 GM.

The GG machine will take Sterling / Euro notes, Debit and Credit Cards. 10 GM will applied for the use of a Credit Card.

The diocese is also introducing the role of "HOCH MODERATOR" or High Moderator. These Hoch Moderators will be senior to Moderators and will work from the Gottes Reich headquarters. Hoch Moderators will use the letters HM after their names to signal their rank. Current Hoch Moderators are:

HM Eugen Haganer - Gottes Reich Chancellor (ad interim).

Hoch Moderator Eugen Haganer

HM Timo Barker - HM for Education and Public Affairs.

HM Anton Devlinburg - HM for Control of the Reich's Schools, School Principals and Teachers.

HM Anton Devlinburg - HM for Control of Schools, School Principals and Teachers

HM Lieber Peter Owensmann - HM for the Reich's Kinder.

HM Michel Spencburher - HM for the Reich's priests and spiritual director to the Priester Kampf.

This is all the information released so far by the DCRM to this Blog. But further information is expected and will be published upon receipt.

THE DESTRUCTION OF A DIOCESE FROM WITHIN

THE DESTRUCTION OF A DIOCESE FROM WITHIN

DOWN AND CONNOR IN MELTDOWN

Treanor's "Creating Pastoral Communities"

The Roman Catholic Bishop of Down & Connor - Noel Treanor - is planning and executing the destruction of the ancient Diocese of Down and Connor and no one is raising a voice against him!

Noel Treanor

Treanor, a European bureaucrat, who shows little or no emotion, is sitting in his recently renovated palace (which cost millions to renovate) on Belfast's Somerton Road and planning the destruction of the ancient parish system which goes back hundreds if not a thousand years.

He is achieving his goal by producing expensive colourful reports and studies full of statistics and information. His latest document can be seen on the Down and Connor web site under the misleading heading: CREATING PASTORAL COMMUNITIES.

He is planning to turn the diocese of 87 ancient parishes into 15 pastoral areas - each area being run by a priest "moderator" and a number of assistant priests.

These "moderatorships" (a presbyterian term) will contain 25,000 Catholics.

He gives two main reasons for his historic "reshuffle":

1. The fact that by 2024 there will only be 91 priests in the diocese under 75. But that means that even in 10 years time there will be more priests than parishes!

2. The fact that some 80 - 84 % of Catholics are no longer attending Sunday Mass.

Mind you, one wonders if it has not more to do with the fact that he, as bishop, will only have to celebrate Confirmation ceremonies on 15 days per annum instead of 87?

He is not famous for being an enthusiastic "confirmer".

He appears to be happier at his antique desk or indeed travelling abroad at every available opportunity. 

His plans do not make spiritual or pastoral sense. 

1. Currently he has 199 priests in the Diocese between diocesan, religious and retired priests. That is more than 2 priests for every existing parish!

2. He is ignoring that fact that for hundreds of years many thousands of parishioners around the diocese have saved and scrimped to build churches, maintain churches and provide an income for priests.

3. If he begins to destroy parishes - which have the devotion and allegiance of parishioners - he is going to cause great hurt and resentment and those attending Sunday Mass will drop from the current 16 - 20 % to the low single figures.

4. The relationship between the people and their parish priest (when it is good) is the foundation rock of people's faith practice and having a remote priest "moderator" several parishes away will destroy the hard won pastoral relationship.

5. The introduction of these large areas with many churches in them is going to lead to the closure of churches that people love and where they have worship for decades if not centuries. These closures are going to cause great anger and resentment.

Saint Macnissi

OTHER ALTERNATIVES:

There are many other alternatives to this proposed destruction of the diocese and parish structure.

1. All diocesan priests who are involved in non parish / pastoral work like teaching, canon law etc can be replaced by properly trained lay people and leave priests free to do the basic thing they were ordained for - be pastors of the flock. Good, believing and properly trained lay people can be secretaries, administrators, teachers, lectures and canon lawyers. They do not have to be priests to do these jobs. In Rome for instance there are many qualified lay canon lawyers.

2. The Church is Down and Connor can advance the training of Catholics ordained to the Permanent Diaconate and they can preside at Communion Services, Weddings, Baptisms and Funerals if priests are in short supply.

3. Universally the Catholic Church is going to have to address  the ordination of married men to the priesthood. This is happening in other ways with the admission of married Anglican priests in England to the priesthood. This practice can become more a rule than an exception.

4. The Catholic Church is going to have to seriously address the role of women in ministry. Noel Treanor's own report makes it clear that 56% of those attending Sunday Mass in the diocese are female. Here we have a whole untapped resource.

5. Since Vatican 11 some 250,000 priests have left active ministry to marry. Many of these priests are waiting on the sidelines and would be more than happy to return to ministry on a volunteer basis - a bit like the Anglican "Non Stipendiary Priest". These good men are waiting and all we need is a small change in man made Church law - not any God given rule. 

So there are many solutions before we even think of destruction or demolition.

There is a story told about one occasion when the Emperor Napoleon met a cardinal and said to him:

"Your Eminence, I am going to destroy the Church of Rome".

The cardinal smiled and replied: "You have no chance - we priests have been trying to destroy it for centuries".

FRANCE:

A few years ago I went to rural France to celebrate a wedding and a baptism in a small village. I used the 14th century parish church there which now belongs to the commune and the mayor.

The parish priest there is a "moderator" of 14 parishes and the parishioners have Mass once every three months!

It has led to the death of the parish and a near total lack of interest in the faith.

Is Ireland to become like France?

I hope that SOMEONE - or SOMETHING - will stop the Eurocrat - Noel Treanor - from destroying the ancient diocese of Saint Malachy and Saint Macnissi.

Saint Malachy

+Pat Buckley

19.1.2015. 

WITCHES, CHRISTIANS AND BISHOP PAT BUCKLEY

While surfing the Net yesterday I cam across the piece below from 

houndofhecate.blogspot.com

I found the piece interesting - not only because it refers to me - but because it makes a connection between all spiritual things - from witches to Christianity.

The writer is a very good thinker. All spirituality comes from ONE SOURCE.

We Christians call that GOD and JESUS.

Others have different names.

But as Jesus said: "He who is not against us is with us".

Witches & Christians, with reference to Bishop Pat Buckley

"The picture is actually of Pope St Pius X celebrating Low Mass. I have commented before that he was plainly a man who knew how to dress for church, but he was plainly also a man who knew the value of subtle.

I have a confession to make. It's something that is perhaps unusual among witches, it may even be surprising to anyone who knows me & my history, but I don't actually have a problem with Christianity, myself. I have a problem with certain Christians, their beliefs & actions, obviously, but my opinion is the Christianity is not *that* incompatible with a magical worldview or even a witchcraft milieu.

They don't like to talk about it, but the real reason Christians tend to in-fighting is that there have been two distinct strands to Christianity from the beginning. One I will call the charismatic one, which is (to over-simplify for the purpose of the argument) more spontaneous, inspired, seeks its authority within, & so on. The other is the authoritative strand, which is broadly more conservative, ordered, & seeks its authority outside itself, whether in scripture or church tradition.

What does this have to do with witchcraft? On the surface, nothing. However, when you translate the charismatics as hedgewitches, & the authoritarians as lineaged (or BTW, as they're called in the States), the similarity becomes apparent. The similarity to a magical world-view also becomes apparent when you consider that the two world views can rarely be clearly separated out, as I have above, one form often calls itself the other, & extremes at either end tend to flip over into the opposite, this situation will become familiar to any magical person reading this. In the interests of balance & upsetting everyone equally, the thing that Gardnerian witches don't talk about is that Gardner was also a Christian priest, or even bishop in a rather unusual independent Christian church!
Just in case there are Christians reading this who have not been exposed to a magical world view (welcome, whoever you are), we call this polarity. The entire aim of all magical systems everywhere & at all times has been the reconciliation of all opposites to the pursuit of balance. The nub here (where Christians will part company) is that actually the whole Judaeo-Christian tradition can be understood in magical terms. The best book on this is Morton Smith's Jesus the Magician; Islam has its own magical world that I don't know enough about to write on.

One of the tags on this blog that I find myself using the most often is 'the witch figure'; the fact that I find myself repeatedly chewing this over indicates the ambivalence & multi-faceted nature of the witch figure that we model ourselves on. Some of the characteristics of this figure carry heavy Christian theological ramifications, such as prophet, scapegoat, gathering, time (kairos). The only element which is almost completely missing from witchcraft is sin & redemption. The God of the Christians is plainly Y*hw*h, G*d of Israel, & Jesus is their messiah. We, if we don't have duotheistic views, have often several divinities or a henotheistic God and/or Goddess. I would recognise multiple Jesus figures (downplaying his divinity for Christians) as semi human/divine figures, including each witch herself. I've ignored the Holy Spirit so far, but I would equate the Spirit to any of the entities involved in witchcraft cosmology or even the reality that some witches recognise behind God & Goddess.

This is a roundabout way of saying that since we magical people understand thing happening on several planes of existence (the way things manifest for us represents patterns & systems of reality that we can't physically see on this plane) the way witches would understand this also to Christians, & the way things play out here are part of a cosmic drama representing the realities behind what we see.

St Patrick the "Druid"

Which brings me nicely to the subject of Bishop Pat Buckley (http://www.bishoppatbuckley.co.uk/), who is the bishop of what's called an Independent Catholic Church. He was ordained a Catholic priest in his twenties: up to there his career superficially embodies the authoritative side of Christianity. However when in the 1980s his bishop tried to suppress his views about the ordination of women & homosexuality, he felt he had no option to embark on an independent ministry, & ultimately sought consecration as a Bishop in the line of Archbishop Thuc, a bishop who performed many consecrations without the blessing of Rome. His status therefore, as far as Rome is concerned, is 'valid but irregular': no doubt they wouldn't want to regularise him given his history, but he is a bishop. Why I'm going into all this is that his career here tries to reconcile the two sides - charismatic & authoritative - of Christianity, a reconciliation of opposites that is exactly the aim of most magical practitioners.

St Patrick's Chair

I find it interesting also how his prophetic role may manifest energies that are unseen. His blog (http://wisecatholic.blogspot.co.uk - to which I subscribe, makes for interesting reading, not least for the prophetic criticism he makes of the church life which surrounds him, even attracting anonymous  comments from local priests. This may seem like a disaffected former priest attracting other malcontents but I don't think that's quite what's happening, in fact on a higher level it more manifests a) an ongoing argument in the religious world more generally, & b) when a culture of disaffection is fostered by heavy-handed authoritarianism, it actually creates its opposite (in a polarity philosophy), in this case clusters of people actively resisting the authority. In this case I have no doubt that the local 'proper' Catholic bishop considers him a thorn in his side, but if one were merely to call him a malcontent, in an attempt to make his existence insignificant, it is to ignore a whole layer of meaning, that we humans ignore at our peril.

And he certainly does seem to be filling the roles that are often reflected in the witch figure. Prophet, by his ongoing criticism of the Catholic church as it is. Sanctuary for those nobody else will care for, by his gay marriages & ordination of women. Confidant, in listening to those who also have an unwelcome story to tell. Scapegoat, by his existence as an object of blame for the local Catholic community & others. I feel he was also scapegoated when a local judge decided to divulge his HIV+ status in court (do privacy laws not count in Northern Ireland?). Incidentally he was in court for allegedly conducting sham marriages to enable foreigners to stay in the country. In fact he almost exactly embodies all the aspects of the witch figure despite being a Christian...

Or perhaps because of it. My point here is that if Christians follow where genuine discipleship leads them they will step on toes & upset apple carts. That's the point.

The other point is that from a witch point of view the things they do will have a broader, more cosmic vibrational aspect. In fact, they may have more in common with us than either of us likes to think, just another of those surprises that the universe likes to give us"!