Web         Gaudiya Discussions
Gaudiya Discussions Archive » OTHER TOPICS
The ultimate nowhere-land. Whatever doesn't seem to fit in any of the other categories, post it in here. For example, discussions on Mahatma Gandhi and the latest news on CNN should go here.

Jesuits/opus Dei - Split from Holy Rock and Rollers

dirty hari - Tue, 27 Apr 2004 03:02:53 +0530
This topic was split of from the Holy Rock and Rollers discussion. (Jagat)


Whenever Madonna is on a talk show she always talks about yoga, yet the media always reports that she is into Kabbalah. She studies a bit of Kabbalah, but always speaks about yoga and rarely about Kaballah. My belief is that there are many Jews in the media who try and portray her as a convert to Judaism when in fact it is just a hobby. Her real passion is yoga.

Teilhard de Chardin is an icon in the Jesuit Society today. Go to their website and see how he is venerated as some kind of apostle. This shows the peculiar position of the Jesuits in Catholicism today. De Chardin preached a kind of Buddhist gnosticism that made books like the Celestine Prophecy bestsellers. It's strange to consider that an atheist scoundrel like de Chardin (who was implicated in several famous archealogical scandals, Piltdown Man and Peking Man: he was involved with both hoaxes to try and prove his evolutionary theories) is a hero to arguably the most powerful "religious" organization in the world. For all of the Vatican's dirty laundry I can't fault them from distancing themselves from de Chardin.

In fact the Catholic world is split in two: the right wing Opus Dei Vaticanites versus the left wing quasi Mayavada/atheist Jesuits and other Catholic orders like the Maryknolls as well. Essentially, the Jesuits are partial to esoteric Mayavadism (they own some of the most prestigious universities in the world and dominate Catholicism in India) while the Vatican and Opus Dei have the traditional pope as God-on-earth rhetoric. Their battles play out especially in the Third World where the Jesuits have been the financial backers and key players in Communist uprisings fighting against Vatican-backed regimes.

As far as Scientology goes, I am perplexed. If anyone does even a little bit of research they will be repelled by that cult. It only shows how foolish some celebrities can be, or how cynical they are. I suspect that most celebrities are there because they can get close to Tom Cruise, who ain't so bright.

Michael Jackson has only ever quoted Vedic religion in his works.

Terence Trent D'Arby changed His name to Sananda Maitreya.

Carlos Santana got initiated as Devadwip from Sri Chimnoy.

Grateful Dead put a deity of Narasingha on their first album cover and supported Srila Prabhupada and were probably the main cause of the 60's enthusiasm along with the Beatles and Alan Ginsberg for the interest in eastern religions.

Deadsy, a popular band among the rich and spoiled and avante garde rock world today, is headed by Elijah Blue Allman, Hare Krishna and son of Cher and Gregg Allman.

Of course the biggest Hare Krishna in the rock world since Harrision is Crispian Mills, a Narayana Maharaja initiate (son of Hare Krishna actress Hayley Mills) and leader of defunct band Kula Shaker and now leader of the Jeevas. Kula Shaker, while only making a quick smash and grab in the U.S with a big hype, were like gods in England, where they were second in sales only to Oasis.
Jagat - Tue, 27 Apr 2004 04:05:30 +0530
I wonder if you can back up any of the claims you make above.

The Peking Man is nowhere claimed to be a hoax. The famous Piltdown Man may have been a hoax, but de Chardin's involvement is a bit farfetched, as far as I can see. Have you read the case for the defense? Perhaps you should read some of these articles: Defending Teilhard de Chardin.

There are a lot of buzzwords--Jesuits financing Communist revolutions? Vatican-backed regimes? And what does "Mayavadi" mean exactly in relation to the Jesuits? Where are you getting your information? Jews in the media portraying Madonna as a convert? (As if they would want her!)

That's a lot of shooting from the hip, Dirty Hari.
dirty hari - Tue, 27 Apr 2004 05:57:33 +0530
Jagat Maharaj I am quite suprised that you are so quick to denounce something that you clearly have not studied in depth in regards to the Jesuits and de Chardin, don't you think some reasearch would be in order before wholesale condemnation ?

Piltdown Man hoax

The principle characters in this fraudulence were Charles Dawson (who found the first part of the skull), Sir Arthur Smith Woodward of the British Museum and a student priest - Father Teilhard de Chardin. In December, 1912, Dawson and Woodward told a distinguished audience that over a period of four years they had found strange fossils at Piltdown, namely the upper part of a skull which was human and nearby a broken lower jaw bone.

The jaw-bone appeared quite ape-like except that the teeth had worn down similar to the way in which human teeth wear down. An important canine tooth was missing from the jaw-bone. Of all the scientists in the audience, only one of them doubted whether the skull belonged to the jawbone.

Thus, Piltdown Man had arrived. If the missing canine tooth were to be found and if it was worn like the molars in the jaw-bone, the case to support the ape man would be strengthened. The tooth was found eight months later, on the 29th August 1913. Teilhard returned from France and Dawson, Woodward and Teilhard went to the Piltdown pit to sieve the gravel. After a time, Teilhard called out that he had found the missing tooth. The tooth fitted the jaw exactly and Piltdown Man had made history. He was given the age of five hundred thousand years.

Eventually, sceptics insisted that the Piltdown Man's age be re-examined. He survived the first test whilst his age dropped from five hundred thousand years to fifty thousand years. Critics then demanded further tests and then came the disgrace. The skull belonged to modern man; the jaw-bone was from an ape that had recently died.

Furthermore, it became obvious under meticulous examination that the teeth had been filed to make them look human and the marks of the abrasive were visible. The jaw bone and teeth had been stained by chemicals to make them look like ape specimens. Why was the crudeness of this fake not detected earlier? Who was responsible? Well, opinions certainly differ. Nobody blames Woodward. Dawson lacked the skill and knowledge to perpetrate such a fantastic hoax. Few blame Dawson since he didn't have the special skills.

Speculation might therefore point towards de Chardin, who had the opportunity and the knowledge of anatomy. Australian anatomist Graffton Elliot Smith had some involvement with the Piltdown affair. It is worth noting at this juncture that both these men were later connected with the Peking Man of China.

Peking Man Hoax

We now come to Peking Man (Sinathropus Pekinesis and Dr Black. Dr Black believed that man began life in China. Black took charge of excavation work near the hill at Peking. In 1926, and on the evidence of one tooth, Black showed a great deal of confidence in finding an ape-man. There was also a Chinese scientist on the field-work, and the infamous Fr. Teilhard de Chardin, who acted as unofficial observer. Reporting to France in 1929, Dr. Black found something which made the first official Peking Man. Was it a skull, or just a skull-cap ?

Teilhard de Chardin reported finding a skull, which closely resembled the great apes, while Dr Black however, announced a skull-cap. Whatever it was, Black constructed a model; not a cast but a model of the supposed skull. It took two years to make the model and according to a Father O'Connell, Malcolm Bowden and other observers, Dr Black did not comply with appropriate guidelines when constructing the skull. Black made the skull represent what he wanted it to represent. As excavations continued, two great heaps of ashes were uncovered, and in the ashes were the bones of numerous animals. Also mixed in the ashes were monkey-like skulls and Black claimed the monkey-like skulls were more of his Peking men.

Immediately, the world was informed that traces of fire had been found, and the picture of Peking Man emerged as a transitional creature just across the dividing line. A man yes - but just an extremely primitive man using stone tools, walking upright, living in a cave and using a fire for cooking. To scrutinise Peking Man, a famous authority of that time, Professor Eva Breuil visited the spot on Teilhard's invitation. When Prof. Breuil returned to France, he published a controversial article, showing the 'so-called' traces of fire not to be traces of fire but actually the remains of great furnaces. Despite Breuil's findings, Dr Black, Teilhard de Chardin and Dr. Pei published their own book - 'Fossil man in China', omitting Breuil's comments. Referring to this deliberate omission, historian Francis Vere said:- "one can only conclude Breuil's discoveries, being inconvenient to the cause, were deliberately suppressed." These traces of fire were really two enormous heaps of ashes. The heap positioned at the lower level was not fully uncovered. The heap on the upper level had the length of a football field, half the width of a football field, and even after those long years of compression, its height was that of a two-storey building. These were the remains of industrial furnaces, used in an industry of limestone burning, presumably for the building of the ancient city of Cambriolet, where Peking now stands. There were thousands of court stones, which had been transported from some other region of China. Stones with soot on one side - no doubt used in the lime-kilns. The cave that Black had referred to did not exist. On the hillside there were two levels from which limestone had been extracted. A landslide had covered everything and thus they were now described as caves.
What became of the monkey-like skulls mixed up with other bones in the ashes ? Marcellin Boule, the leading authority, was invited to visit the site and that he did. Boule's reaction was one of annoyance at having his time wasted on monkey skulls. Boule rebuked Dr. Black's theory outright. He referred to it as a "fantastic hypothesis". Boule's opinion was that real men had been at work at these furnaces and that the monkey-like skulls and the other bones mixed up in the ashes were the remains of food eaten by the workmen who had thrown the bones and skulls into the ashes. However, Boule's voice was not in tune with the evolutionists and media of his time. Boule's voice would have caused great damage to the 'missing link' picture being painted by the evolutionists of his day. Peking Man was vital to the perpetuation of evolutionary thought. Peking Man was firmly established, and Boule's diametric opposition to Peking Man caused him to be the subject of scorn and ridicule within the scientific profession. Boule was branded as 'just another fanatic'. The excavations at Peking continued until 1934, when on one memorable day, the bones of several humans were found, apparently crushed to death by a landslide.

By now Dr. Black was world- famous. The fossilised remains were delivered to Black's laboratory and he duly entered his laboratory to examine them. Later that day in March 1943, Black was found dead amongst the human bones.

Teilhard de Chardin sent a report to France. He confirmed that human skulls and bones had indeed been found on the site despite the fact that three years later he then sent a second report, stating that no trace of real men had been found. (Teilhard de Chardin later abandoned his vocation as a Catholic Priest). He thereby flatly contradicted his earlier report. Why? It is quite certain that the bones of real men were found. Dr Black's position was filled by a Professor Weidenreich, who continued the excavation work. Weidenreich published a full account five years later on the findings of the human remains. Photos of the human skulls have been published.

Incidentally, every fossil bone of Peking Man has disappeared. Apparently, just after the war, the fossils were put on board an American ship and then disappeared. Another version is that the invading Japanese destroyed the fossils. However, Fr. Patrick O'Connell who was resident in China at that time and who made a special study of the Peking affair, wrote that that Dr. Pei carried on his work during the Japanese occupation and says that Dr. Pei had very good reason to destroy the fossils.

Fr O,Conell wrote, "The skulls were, therefore, destroyed before the Chinese government returned to Peking in order to remove the evidence of fraud on a large scale". The fossils are gone, and all that remain are the imaginative models of Peking Man. After the communists took over, Dr. Pei used the models to teach the Chinese people that they are born of monkeys....

Both excerpts written by Henry James Creechan are based upon a series of lectures by the late James Wallace Godschall Johnson.

Some links on the jesuits "liberation theology" and their marxist attempts at a hegemony in South and Central america.
in Vietnam

America magazine (November 18, 2000, pp. 4-5), organ of the North American Jesuits.

The head of Vietnam's Communist Party lauded Catholics for their "significant contributions" to nation-building since the country began opening to the outside world more than a decade ago. "The Party and the State wish to warmly express gratitude to Catholic individuals and communities for their great services, not only to Catholic compatriots but also to the entire nation," party secretary-general Le Kha Phieu told some 150 priests, religious and lay people October 25, according to UCA News. The party chief also observed that social evils are virtually nonexistent in areas with a high proportion of Catholics.

It generally known that the Jesuits embrace "modernism" ( See Malalchi Martins "The Jesuits" ), Jesuits created this philosophy and promoted it and even though offically they don't promote these ideas, in fact they do, What is modernism ? It is a kind of Pantheistic mish mosh that has its roots in the gnostic and occult popularity of it's day ( late 19th century-early 20th century ), while some claim it is inclusive to all faiths there is a high regard for Teilhard de Chardins version within the Jesuits, the evolution of the universe and humanity to the "Omega Point".

Book Review of The Vatican Moscow Washington Alliance by Avro Manhattan

By Avro Manhattan, an Italian Roman Catholic who fled Italy before WWII, because he would not kowtow to Mussolini.  He lived in exile for most of the rest of his life--which was to 1990--in London.  There, he befriended several Cardinals, priests, and KGB, who kept him fully apprised of matters in the Vatican.  Plus, he traveled to the Vatican after WWII, and was privy to a lot of information.  His documentation on the Marxist takeover of the Vatican with John XXIII is unparalleled.  (By the way, I do not believe that Manhattan remained Roman Catholic.  I'm virtually certain he did not.  But he always maintained very cordial relations with his Vatican contacts--many of whom were "conservatives" who were appalled at the Marxist takeover of the Vatican, and who wanted that news to get out.)

But of course, modern-day Communism originated with the Jesuit organization of the Paraguayan Empire.  But then, the Jesuits themselves are communistic in their organization.  Though none of the members own personal riches, yet the "organization" is one of the wealthiest organizations in the world.  In fact, they are noted for the fact that they take no funds from the Pope whatever.  They are totally self-sufficient, economically. 

Two conditions promised by Loyola gained official sanction for his order from the Papacy: 1) that it would always be totally self-sufficient, 2) that they would give the Pope total and unlimited obedience.  (No other order had ever promised that.)

Beginning with Pius XII--the Nazi Pope--there was an internecine strife in the Church of Rome itself between the Fascists and the Communists.  The "worker priests" favored the socialists.  They were caught up in the socialist/labor movement.  And of course, the Jesuits have characteristically been socialist/communist, at the lower levels, at least.

But the university Jesuits in Germany, France, and Italy, along with Pius XII and the Curial Cardinals, became Fascistic after the fall of the Papal States in 1871.  The Pope was very much at a loss after that event as to how to regain his temporal power--even how to protect himself, in the event that Italy should begin criminal prosecutions against the Vatican for its many conspiratorial and criminal activities.

Consequently, Pius IX began to groom Wilhelm I to be the next Holy Roman Emperor.  One who would be the "Defender of the Faith."  Of course, the Hapsburgs were carefully plumed also for all that, along with the Jesuit plot that resulted in the assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand--so that a war would break out that would establish Germany and Austria-Hungary as the Catholic superpowers of Europe.

The Vatican is never in full control of the political movements it seeks to infiltrate and control--and many of the Communistic movements were also populist, which worked against the Papacy, because of its condemnation of freedom of speech, of the press, and of liberty of conscience.  For a time, many of the socialist movements were rather democratic also.  Somewhat like the French Revolution.  So, even though the Jesuits created Communism, it had gone momentarily out of control.  That's why the Vatican, and the university Jesuits, began to rally behind the Fascist banner.

Of course, after WWI, the Jesuits were already plotting WWII.  They signed the Concordat with Mussolini in 1929.  Mussolini gave the Church an incredible dowry--the equivalent of $500 million dollars.  It was then that the Vatican Bank was created.

However, throughout this whole period, through WWII, there was a strong, Communist, anti-Fascist movement within the Church itself--amongst the "worker priests."  And I think that this internecine strife split even the Jesuits.  Many of the lower Jesuits strongly sympathized with the Communists.  Especially in France.  In fact, it was in France and Italy that the division was most acute.

Hence, all throughout the reign of Pius XII--the Nazi Pope--there was a muted but strong current of opposition to him and to his policies. 

And thus, the election of Pope John XXIII was a reaction the other way.  John XXIII was decidedly a pro-Socialist, pro-Moscow Pope.  He really dissented with Pius XII's policies all throughout Pius' reign.  Pius XII ended up appointing John (Roncalli) as Patriarch of Venice, primarily to consign him to oblivion.  Venice is the Italian equivalent of Siberia.

And the opposition between Paul VI (Montini) and Pius XII was even more acute.  (Under Paul VI, Rome got a Communist mayor and city council!)  For one thing, Montini was Pius XII's Secretary of State.  When Pius offered to make him a cardinal, Montini refused.  He would not accept a cardinal's hat from Pius XII--that's how acute the strife between them was.  Montini ended up taking a minor bishopric somewhere.

Anyway: after Pius' death, John XXIII and Pius VI radically changed the whole political thrust of the Vatican in favor of Communism.  In fact, they basically set Castro up.  Castro was trained at two Jesuit schools (so was Stalin).  And Alberto Rivera says that Castro is a Jesuit under oath--and I tend to believe it.

Anyway: under John XXIII and Paul VI, the Jesuits changed.  They also, under Pedro Arrupe, their new Secretary General, became radical "Liberation Theology" Marxists.  Many Jesuit priests in Latin America had machine guns and bullet belts under their cassocks.  Literally.  Fighting for Castro.

But the CIA was always pro-Pius XII and pro-Fascist.  That's where Opus Dei comes into the picture--and P2, the Masonic lodge that is so prevalent in Vatican City itself.  They are Fascists.  Many former Nazis, Parnell, were even brought over after WWII into the CIA, by Cardinal Spellman, himself a CIA agent, who was very close to Pius XII.

Well, after the murder of John Paul I--who appeared would continue as another Socialist in the vein of Paul VI--the pro-Fascist CIA basically bribed the Latin American cardinals with millions of dollars to vote for Karol Wojtlya.  Wojtlya is a Marxist, but with heavy Fascist tendencies.  (Fascistic in that he is more of a church traditionalist.)

The CIA basically promised Wojtlya several things:

1) a financial bailout for the Vatican bank.
2) a nuncio in Washington, D C.
3) millions of US aid for Latin America
4) increased globalization of the Western Hemisphere, of Europe, behind a Vatican-controlled Pan-American Congress, NATO, and UN
5) Financial aid, in the millions, for Solidarity in Poland--and with it, the overthrow of the Russian Communist empire, and along with it, Russian Orthodoxy.
6) Protection from the Communist Jesuits.  (The CIA can supply that.)

In return Wojtlya promised:

1) that he would squelch the Jesuits in Latin America.
2) that he would stir up revolution in Poland.

The problem is: when the Jesuits got squelched, John Paul II basically disabled his own SS.  But there was a remedy for that.  Fall back on another organization--an even more diabolical one.  One that is so secret, its members are not even known.  And most of its members being also members of the Freemasons.  Probably a number of them Mafiosi and CIA.

Opus Dei.

I'm sure that there are Jesuits who are still in line with the new Pope's agenda.  But they are probably members of Opus Dei, too.
Jagat - Tue, 27 Apr 2004 06:20:02 +0530
So you read a case for the prosecution. Did you read the case for the defense?

So what's your agenda? What's your point?
adiyen - Tue, 27 Apr 2004 11:20:22 +0530
Watch out, Harry. I have Opus Dei links too (truly!). I could report you.

Really though this stuff you have posted is a big kichari, many interesting smaller issues with no provable link to each other.

De Chardin was involved with the Piltdown excavations as a very young student. He may have created the hoax as a simple student prank. Then the thing took off with an overpowering momentum, other's careers were based on it. It was too late to admit the joke.

The Jesuits are and always were committed intellectuals.

That's it.
dirty hari - Tue, 27 Apr 2004 13:25:44 +0530
Watch out, Harry. I have Opus Dei links too (truly!). I could report you.

I'll call your opus dei links and then I'll raise with my "ask me if I care" , read em and weep gentlemen. biggrin.gif

De Chardin was involved with the Piltdown excavations as a very young student. He may have created the hoax as a simple student prank. Then the thing took off with an overpowering momentum, other's careers were based on it. It was too late to admit the joke.

de Chardin was intent on proving evolution to the church, the evidence points to him, the people who say He is innocent have no evidence, what can they say ? Everything points to him in Peking as well,they have a great deal invested in the myth of de Chardin (the Jesuits that is).

The Jesuits are and always were committed intellectuals.

Thats an oxymoron, by definition an intellectual relies on the intellect, the Jesuits may be well educated but they are a cult interested in Power, I surely wouldn't put them on some kind of platform as being "the good guys".

That's it.

Whats what ? Jesuits Good me bad ?
vamsidas - Tue, 27 Apr 2004 14:57:16 +0530
QUOTE(dirty hari @ Apr 26 2004, 08:27 PM)
don't you think some reasearch would be in order before wholesale condemnation ?

What an odd way to begin a post that consists, for the most part, of "wholesale condemnation" of large and diverse groups!

In your post, you tell us:

the Jesuits embrace "modernism" ( See Malalchi Martins "The Jesuits" ), Jesuits created this philosophy and promoted it...

Pius XII--the Nazi Pope...

the Jesuit plot that resulted in the assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand...

the Jesuits created Communism...

after WWI, the Jesuits were already plotting WWII....

John XXIII and Pius VI... basically set Castro up.... Castro is a Jesuit under oath...

Wojtlya is a Marxist, but with heavy Fascist tendencies....

another organization--an even more diabolical one.  One that is so secret, its members are not even known.  And most of its members being also members of the Freemasons.  Probably a number of them Mafiosi and CIA.

Opus Dei.

I am beginning to suspect that you don't consider your "signature" lines a joke:

Oh, no! Aliens, bioduplications, nude conspiracies.
Oh, my God! Lyndon LaRouche was right!

I'm surprised that your ramblings didn't find room for Reptilians, Illuminati or fluoridation.

I am also surprised that you didn't mention how the Jesuits sought to take over American baseball, when they instructed Fidel Castro to try out for an American baseball team before he embarked on his revolutionary exploits.

Perhaps many of your points could be lucidly explained, but at times your post comes across as a self-contradictory hodgepodge. And what intellectual versatility you attribute to John Paul II, whom you describe as both a Marxist and a Fascist!

Your grasp of organizational dynamics seems shallow, and your knowledge of Opus Dei quite minimal. For example, you label "Opus Dei" as a "diabolical" organization, and you demonize all its members with one broad statement. Yet the reality is that there is great diversity among the 80,000+ Opus Dei members. Far from being "so secret, its members are not even known," its 1,800 or so priests (according to the Vatican Yearbook) are hardly secret. About a quarter of Opus Dei members are "numeraries" who have taken vows of celibacy, and typically live in Opus-maintained residences; far from being "secret," anybody who sees their mailing addresses or watches where they go home at night can readily discern their Opus Dei membership. It is these numeraries at whom most charges of "cultism" are directed.

However, the majority of Opus Dei members are the "supernumeraries" who lead secular lives and don't "trumpet" their membership loudly. Yet neither do they "hide" their membership. Just as you might not be able to go to a city and readily discern who are the "donors to public television," similarly you might not be able to discern who are the "Opus Dei supernumeraries." But if you get to know them, and such disclosure is appropriate, Opus Dei supernumararies are likely to tell you of their affiliation.

I don't tell everyone I meet that I am a Caitanyaite. But this doesn't mean that I'm a diabolical member of a secret society. Similarly, two of my friends (who, interestingly, don't know each other) don't tell many people about their Opus Dei membership, though they did tell me after I had known them for a while.

Upon reflection, it occurs to me that Paulist associates (a couple of whom I also know) are similarly "secretive" about their affiliation, just like Opus Dei supernumeraries. Why haven't you accommodated the Paulists in your conspiracy theories? Maybe you can work them into your next post?

DirtyHariji, you may personally be a thoughtful scholar who has thoroughly researched the points you raised in your last message, but your presentation is more typical of an irrational and ignorant bigot, who seeks to explain through irrational conspiracy theories those matters that his rational intellect cannot grasp. If you want us to take your opinions seriously, I suggest that you do a more careful job of documenting your points.
dirty hari - Tue, 27 Apr 2004 22:10:24 +0530
Malachi Martin and Avro Manhattan are considered by educated people as the two world leading experts on the catholic church and the Jesuits, I refer to them and quote them, I have studied their writings, If you want to seem knowledgable on these topics I refer you to them.

Martins homepage, He died under suspicious circumstances.

Baron Avro Manhattan

a must read

a must read

stuff on Vatican working with P2, mafia, opus dei, CIA etc.
This is all documented history by reputable authors, if anyone wants to use the "conspiracy" rhetoric all I can say is Foxnews is there for you. cool.gif
nabadip - Tue, 27 Apr 2004 22:29:13 +0530
Well well, dirty hari is back with his unbridled style of writing. Just be civilized, please.
jijaji - Tue, 27 Apr 2004 22:36:29 +0530
QUOTE(nabadip @ Apr 27 2004, 04:59 PM)
Well well, dirty hari is back with his unbridled style of writing. Just  be civilized, please.

Oh thats right..he knows the "real' inside scoop and his understanding places him above both camps...

dirty hari - Tue, 27 Apr 2004 22:54:44 +0530
Oh thats right..he knows the "real' inside scoop and his understanding places him above both camps...

So what ? Now there is going to be anti education ? If the topic doesn't interest you why demonize those who find it fascinating and have spent time and energy in reading ?

Can't a brother share some knowledge without being labeled some kind of propagandist ?
dirty hari - Tue, 27 Apr 2004 22:59:10 +0530
DirtyHariji, you may personally be a thoughtful scholar who has thoroughly researched the points you raised in your last message, but your presentation is more typical of an irrational and ignorant bigot, who seeks to explain through irrational conspiracy theories those matters that his rational intellect cannot grasp. If you want us to take your opinions seriously, I suggest that you do a more careful job of documenting your points.


Funny stuff, where is the bigotry in anything I wrote, it is all history written by authentic insiders, if there is any bigotry here it is directed at me.
nabadip - Tue, 27 Apr 2004 23:18:01 +0530
Joy Nitai. I have studied at a Jesuit university, the main one in the world, Pontificia Universitas Gregoriana, in Rome (near Fontana di Trevi) the world's best resource-equipped university in its fields, and I do not mean money, but books, specialists, professors, research-facility, things like that. I can attest to the moral and spiritual dignity and realisation of Jesuit professors, teachers and priests. They have a high degree of spiritual practice, focussing on an inner development.

Naturally, the Jesuit order was founded to counter the reformation, to help the Church which like every organised religion including Iskcon is a power institution, where politics is an important instrument of survival and propagation. The Jesuits played a role. Inquiries into this are in place. But character assassination on the basis of power plays discovered should be avoided.

I lived and studied at the Collegium Germanicum et Hungaricum (near Via Veneto in Rome) which was founded by Ignatius Loyola with the intention to educate German speaking priests and to cultivate servants to the Catholic Church that lead a dignified life, were not as corrupted in their life-style as the ones were against which Martin Luther addressed his Reformation drive. At that Collegium there is a rule still followed that it is not allowed that any of its allumni may enter the order of the Jesuits. Loyola could easily have ordered that everyone must be a Jesuit, and thus his army would have been much stronger. But to the contrary, he wanted a theologically and spiritually well educated clergy in German speaking countries.

Pierre Theillard de Chardin was himself a spiritually inclined person. His teachings were not conform to the Church doctrine, and he was silenced, not allowed to publish further in the fifties I think. Similar things happened to South American Liberation theologians etc. Each one has to be appraised on case to case basis. Many Church critiques emerged both within the Jesuit order, as well as from these above mentioned institutions.
Joy Nitai
Jagat - Wed, 28 Apr 2004 01:03:14 +0530
I haven't got time to research this thoroughly, and that's a call I'll have to make. This is not, after all, a matter that is directly concerned with this forum's primary subject matter.

I am sure that the Baron Manhattan has researched his works well and there is probably useful and true information in them--to a point. The man clearly has an agenda and that should make anyone reading his books tread very careful. On the other hand, the sites that preserve and lionize his work--the "reformation" site, the "Puritan" site, the "Chick Books" site, all seem to be rabidly anti-Catholic in ways that makes them less trustworthy than even he. They don't even try to give any appearance of impartiality. Catholic sites that deal with these people seem far more sober and even a little humorous in their attitude toward them.

Once again, I get the distinct impression that Shivaji is forming strong opinions after reading the research on only one side of the story and not looking into the other. I feel much the way I do when I am faced with a convinced creationist, trotting out his collections of "proofs," seizing on any incoherent semblance of a flaw or wrongdoing. Ity alam.

NOTA BENE: Accusations and counter-accusations of bigotry will not be tolerated on this forum. I will delete any short posts that do not contribute meaningful content.

I am closing this thread. If anyone really thinks that they have something vital to say on the matter, in a way that comes closer to our mandate on the Gaudiya Discussions, feel free to open a new one or PM me.