Претражи Живе Речи Утехе

"Why is the believing Catholic not subject to neurosis?" A question posed to Karl Jung in 1939 Social media grenade-launcher Matt Walsh recently posted the following on his FaceBook page: It's a fair question. It's certainly hard to make the case that our lives are so much more difficult than, say, those of our Great Depression era grandparents or great-grandparents. Add to this the fact that despite the ubiquity of mental health services in American society, we are in the midst of an ongoing and worsening mental health crisis, particularly among the young. It's almost as if the expansion of mental health services has in some way contributed to the proliferation of mental illness. Thousands of articles like the following have been written over the past half-decade examining the problem and ultimately failing to come up with good answers: Over 50% Of Liberal, White Women Under 30 Have A Mental Health Issue. Are We Worried Yet? Depression rates among US adults reach new high: Gallup Rates of Depression and Anxiety Are Rising in Young People Many will no doubt blame the mental health crisis on a host of pop-politico-cultural bugbears: sexism, student debt, racism, transphobia, the COVID shutdowns, MAGA-terror, etc. But could the core reason for this epidemic of mental illness be that fewer people than ever before in the West are practicing Catholics who make regular and devout use of the sacraments of the Church? Now before you dismiss this possibility out of hand, I'd like to call your attention to a talk by one of the primordial psychoanalysts of the early 20th century, Carl Gustav Jung. Jung was the offspring of a Swiss Lutheran pastor. Several of his uncles were also Protestant pastors, and it was expected that Carl himself would find a career in the ministry. Instead, Jung rejected Christianity and entered the nascent world of psychotherapy as it was developing under Sigmund Freud. During his life, Jung had numerous spiritual experiences, nearly all of which a believing Catholic might consider encounters with the demonic. All this is to say that Carl Jung was no great friend of Catholicism. And yet, in a lecture he gave in London in April of 1939, on the eve of the outbreak of the Second World War, Jung was asked to offer insights on why the believing Catholic was not subject to neurosis, or at least not to the same extent as, say, Protestants or Jews. Jung's answer is fascinating: Of course, by "the Mass", Jung was referring the Traditional Latin Mass as it was known everywhere by Catholics prior to the late 1960s. After a tangent during which Jung elaborates on ancient symbolism as found in Catholic ritual, he returns to confession with this very curious passage: God only knows if what Jung says above regarding the Pope giving him a private blessing is actually true. His account has a pretty thick overlay of hubris, so it is perhaps best to take it with a grain of salt. But the fact remains that this former Lutheran spiritualist psychoanalyst who occasionally had communication with potentially demonic beings was astounded by the psychological resilience of practicing Catholics. I looked up the American study Jung cited and found out that it was part of a 1938 work entitled Explorations in Personality: A Clinical and Experimental Study of Fifty Men of College Age by Henry A. Murray. Murray was another mid-20th century psychological researcher who was no great friend of Catholics. In his conclusion, Murray writes: Were they really "self-deceived"? Or had they adopted a faith that allowed them to see the world as it truly is, understand it, and react to the challenges presented by life in healthy and resilient ways? Given that Murray's later career included abusive experiments on college students, one of whom was apparently so damaged that he went on to achieve infamy as the Unabomber, I'm not particularly concerned about his judgments on self-deception. Sad to relate, those very aspects of Catholicism which formed such mentally strong men and women in the past—the Mass, the rituals, the sacraments and confession in particular—were all watered down and de-emphasized in the aftermath of the 1960s. The result has been that today's Catholics, practicing or otherwise, seem just as susceptible to mental illness as the rest of society. Nevertheless, we can hear echoes of this resilience even today. Anecdotally, some of the most emotionally and psychologically solid people I have ever known may be found among that relatively small remnant of Catholics who steadfastly practice the faith with reverence and devotion. Never have I encountered a group of people who have endured so much personal suffering with such abiding grace. I am continually amazed at how many of these good people are struck with truly gut-wrenching family tragedies. And yet, they are able to endure, heal, and carry on, trusting that Christ will always be with them and that their departed loved ones are even now praying for them before the heavenly throne of God Almighty. It is not controversial to observe that many of the current-day princes of the Catholic Church have wandered far from the traditional teachings and practices of the Church. Perhaps if these men would pause their awkward shamble after adolescent sexualized mysticism, they might realize that the ancient practice of Catholicism which they largely discarded in the 1960s was among the greatest treasures that God has ever gifted to mankind. At the very least, we can posit that the traditional practice of Catholicism is a way to comprehend the triumphs and tragedies of human existence that does not ultimately drive men mad. The same can not be said for the neurotic mess that modern Western secular culture has become. Gloria Romanorum: "Why is the believing Catholic not subject to neurosis?" A question posed to Karl Jung in 1939 GLORIAROMANORUM.BLOGSPOT.COM Social media grenade-launcher Matt Walsh recently posted the following on his FaceBook page: "Many people claim to know for a...

St. Anselm of Canterbury (c1033-1109) – Bishop, Confessor, Doctor of the Church Following the death of his mother, probably at the birth of his sister Richera, Anselm’s father repented his earlier lifestyle but professed his new faith with a severity that the boy found likewise unbearable. Anselm, at age 23, left home with a single attendant crossed the Alps and wandered through Burgundy and France for three years. His countryman Lanfranc of Pavia was then prior of the Benedictine abbey of Bec; attracted by the fame of his fellow countryman, Anselm reached Normandy in 1059. After spending some time in Avranches, he returned the next year. His father having died, he consulted with Lanfranc as to whether to return to his estates and employ their income in providing alms or to renounce them, becoming a hermit or a monk at Bec or Cluny. Professing to fear his own bias, Lanfranc sent him to Maurilius, the Archbishop of Rouen, who convinced him to enter the abbey as a novice at the age of 27. Probably in his first year, he wrote his first work on philosophy, a treatment of Latin paradoxes called the Grammarian. Over the next decade, the Rule of Saint Benedict reshaped his thought. AdvertisementPrivacy Settings Because of the physical closeness and political connections, there was frequent travel and communication between Normandy and England and Anselm was in repeated contact with Church officials in England. He was chosen as reluctant Archbishop of Canterbury, England in 109 – officials had to wait until he was too sick to argue in order to get him to agree. “Anselm Assuming the Pallium in Canterbury Cathedral” from E M Wilmot-Buxton’s 1915 Anselm As bishop he fought King William Rufus’s encroachment on ecclesiastical rights and the independence of the Church, refused to pay bribes to take over as bishop and was exiled for his efforts. He travelled to Rome, Italy and spent part of his exile as an advisor to Pope Blessed Urban II, obtaining the pope’s support for returning to England and conducting Church business without the king’s interference. He resolved theological doubts of the Italo-Greek bishops at Council of Bari in 1098. In 1100 King Henry II invited Anselm to return to England but they disputed over lay investiture and Anselm was exiled again only to return in 1106 when Henry agreed not to interfere with the selection of Church officials. Anselm opposed slavery and obtained English legislation prohibiting the sale of men. He strongly supported celibate clergy and approved the addition of several saints to the liturgical calendar of England. He died on Holy Wednesday, 21 April 1109. His remains were translated to Canterbury Cathedral and laid at the head of Lanfranc at his initial resting place to the south of the Altar of the Holy Trinity (now St Thomas’s Chapel). During the church’s reconstruction after the disastrous fire of the 1170s, his remains were relocated, although it is now uncertain where. Anselm was one of the great philosophers and theologians of the middle ages and a noted theological writer. He was far more at home in the monastery than in political circles but still managed to improve the position of the Church in England. Counsellor to Pope Gregory VII. Chosen a Doctor of the Church in 1720 by Pope Clement XI.

Pevačica Tina Tarner umrla je u 83. godini, saopštio je njen portparol. „Tina Tarner, ‘Kraljica rokenrola’ umrla je danas u 83. godini nakon duge bolesti u svom domu u Kusnahtu kod Ciriha, u Švajcarskoj“, navodi se u saopštenju i dodaje: „Njenim odlaskom svet je izgubio muzičku legendu i uzor“. Sahrana će biti privatna, sa bliskim prijateljima i porodicom. „Molimo da poštujete privatnost njene porodice u ovom teškom trenutku“, saopštio je portparol Tine Tarner. https://nova.rs/zabava/sudbine/preminula-tina-tarner/

The Four Marks of the Church Author: Kenneth D. Whitehead We can show how the Church of the apostles resembles in all essentials the Church of today by showing how the early Church already bore the marks, or "notes," of the true Church of Christ which are still professed today in the Nicene Creed. The Nicene Creed declares the Church to be One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic. Thus, the Church of the apostles was definitely one: "There is one body and one spirit," Paul wrote, "just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of us all" (Eph. 4:4-5). Paul linked this primitive unity to the Church's common Eucharistic bread: "Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of one bread" (1 Cor. 10:17). Jesus had promised at the outset that "there would be one flock, one shepherd" (John 10:16). Similarly, the Church of the apostles was holy. When we say that, we mean among other things that it had the all-holy God himself as author. We do not mean that all of its members have ceased to be sinners and have themselves become all-holy. On the contrary, the Church from the beginning, on her human side, has been composed of sinners: "Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners" (1 Tim. 1:15). The Church was founded for no other reason than to continue Christ's redemptive and sanctifying work with them in the world. One of the things implicit in the appellation "holy" as applied to the Church, then, is that the Church from the beginning has been endowed with the sacramental means to help make holy the sinners who are found in her ranks. The Church has been given the sacraments along with the word precisely in order to be able to help make sinners holy. It was in this sense that Paul was able to write, "Christ loved the Church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that he might present the Church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish" (Eph. 5:25-27). The holiness of the Church, of which the creed properly speaks, has always had reference to her divine Founder and to what the Church was founded by him with the power and authority to do, not with the condition of her members. The third great historic mark or note of the one true Church was that this Church was Catholic. "Catholic" means "universal." It refers as much to the fullness of the faith which it possesses as it does to the undeniable extension in both time and space which has characterized it virtually from the beginning. At the very beginning, of course, it was no doubt difficult to see how the "little flock" (Luke 12:32) of which the Church then consisted could by any stretch of the imagination qualify as "universal." Still, just as the embryo contains in germ the whole human being, so the Church already contained the universality that would quickly begin to manifest itself. It is not without significance that the Holy Spirit came down upon the Church at Pentecost at a time when "there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men from every nation under heaven" (Acts 2:5). It was to them that the Holy Spirit temporarily enabled the apostles to speak in the languages of all these various nations--a powerful sign that the Church was destined for all men everywhere, represented at that first Pentecost in Jerusalem by those of many nations who had come there from afar. Many accepted the faith then and there and presumably began forthwith carrying "the Catholic Church" back to the four corners of the earth. The Catholicity of the Church in any case resides as much in the fact that the Church is for everybody at all times as it does in the fact that it was indeed destined to spread everywhere throughout the whole world. Within a few years of the foundation of the Church, Paul was writing that "the word of truth . . . in the whole world . . . is bearing fruit and growing" (Col. 1:5-6). Finally, the Church that issued from the commission of Christ to the apostles was necessarily apostolic. Christ founded the Church upon the apostles and in no other way: "Did I not choose you, the twelve?" he asked them (John 6:70). The apostles of all people understood perfectly well that they did not set themselves up in their own little community, as we sometimes today see "gospel churches" set up in store fronts or in the suburbs. The New Testament teaches, "One does not take the honor upon himself" (Heb. 5:4). Nothing is clearer, then, that the Church started out as "apostolic." The question is whether the apostles had the power and authority to pass on to others what they had received from Christ. We have already seen that they very definitely did have this power and authority; the New Testament evidence is clear about that. The subsequent historical evidence is equally clear that they did pass it on to successors (the bishops). Indeed there are already references in the New Testament itself to the appointment of bishops by the apostles, as well as to the appointment of further bishops by them (Titus 1:5-9). When we ask where, if anywhere, is to be found the same Church which the New Testament tells us Christ founded, we have to reformulate the question to ask: What Church, if any, descends in an unbroken line from the apostles of Jesus Christ (and also, not incidentally, possesses the other essential notes of the true Church of which the creed speaks)? Further, to introduce a point we have not dwelt upon at all up to now, What Church, if any, is headed by a single recognized designated leader, just as the apostles of Jesus plainly functioned, on the evidence of the New Testament, under the headship of Peter? To ask these questions is to answer them: Any entity or body claiming to be the Church of Christ would have to be able to demonstrate its apostolicity by demonstrating an organic link with the original apostles on whom Christ manifestly established his Church. Nothing less than this could qualify as the "apostolic" Church which Jesus founded. As much for our instruction as for the assurance he intended to give to the apostles to whom he was actually speaking, Jesus said, "He who hears you, hears me" (Luke 10:16). Do we take these words seriously today? Do we listen to the teachings of the successors of the apostles of Jesus, the bishops, in union with and under the successor of the apostle Peter, the pope, as if these teachings were the words of Christ himself? If we do, we are properly members of the Church which Jesus Christ founded on the apostles and which has come down to us from them. If we do not, how can we pretend that we take anything seriously that Christ said and taught? He said nothing more solemnly and categorically than these words, in which he declared that the apostles and their successors would speak for him in the serious business of gathering in and sanctifying his people and leading them toward the salvation he offers. Jesus intended that the fullness of his grace should come to his people in a Church that, from the beginning, was what the creed still calls it today: One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic. The Four Marks of the Church | EWTN WWW.EWTN.COM EWTN is a global, Catholic Television, Catholic Radio, and Catholic News Network that provides catholic programming and news coverage from around the world.

by Roberto de Mattei On Thursday 9 June 2022, at the Brompton Oratory in London, Prof de Mattei presented the following talk for the launch of Calx Mariae Publishing, at which his book The Church in the tempests: the first millennium of the history of the Church was among those presented, notably along with The Christian sense of history by Dom Prosper Guéranger. Picking up in the same century where he left off in his book, Prof de Mattei highlighted Dom Guéranger’s principles for Christian historians and continued to apply them to the phenomenon of Eastern Christianity in the second millennium — unravelling a history which is of greater importance than ever as we enter the third. Ladies and gentlemen, dear friends, One of the volumes published by Calx Mariae is my book The Church in the Tempests: The First Millennium of the History of the Church. In these pages I try to offer a summary of Church history, from its origins to the First Crusade, taking my inspiration from the teaching of Dom Prosper Guéranger, who — in his book, The Christian Sense of History — writes that the Catholic historian is someone who “judges facts, men, and institutions from the point of view of the Church; he is not free to judge otherwise, and that is his strength”. I am glad that Calx Mariae has also translated and published the important essay by Dom Guéranger, which confirms for us the importance of history in the battle of ideas. Today, we are witnessing an attempt to erase historical memory, an attempt to rewrite history in an anti-Catholic and anti-Western sense. And the history of the Church helps us to fight these errors. I will give just one example. Leo XIII, in the encyclical, Quarto Abeunte Saeculo, issued 130 years ago on 16 July 1892 for the fourth centenary of the discovery of America, extolled the enterprise of Christopher Columbus, calling it “in itself the highest and grandest which any age has ever seen accomplished by man”. But in America, Columbus Day, on 12 October, which celebrates the Italian navigator’s arrival in the Americas, is being equated with the celebration of a genocide. In recent years, many American states have chosen to turn Columbus Day into Indigenous Peoples’ Day. The message is unmistakable: the supreme evil is the West, its culture, its Christian tradition. While the West is denying itself, its roots, its tradition, Putin’s Russia is proclaiming an identity opposed to that of the West, it too erasing and rewriting its own history. I am not going to speak on the merits of the war underway, but I take Vladimir Putin’s vision of history very seriously and would like to draw your attention to an important speech that the president of the Russian Federation gave on 12 July 2021 at the Valdai Club, the best known Russian think tank.1 In this speech, entitled On the historical unity of Russians and Ukrainians, Putin sets out to rewrite the history of Russia over the past thousand years, in order to justify the invasion of Ukraine. The basic thesis of the president of the Russian Federation is this: Ukraine has no right to exist, because it is a piece of Russia, part of the Russian state for more than a thousand years. Russians and Ukrainians are one people, bound together by one language, one culture and one faith, that of the Orthodox Church, said to date back to the baptism of Prince Vladimir in the year 988. Putin continues his historical analysis by stating that, after the devastating Mongol invasion of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, two Russias were formed: Lithuanian Rus’, which absorbed Poland, and the principality of Moscow, which became the Tsarist Empire. The Grand Dukes of Lithuania converted to the Catholic faith, while the princes of Moscow kept the Orthodox faith. The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, through Catholicism and Latinisation, allegedly tried to break Russian linguistic and religious unity. This unity was restored thanks to the tsarist conquests and subsequent Soviet domination. According to Putin, after the fall of the Soviet regime, the Ukrainian state rebelled against Russia, asserting its independence and opening up to the West. In order to stop this process, which threatens Russia’s territorial, linguistic and religious integrity, Ukraine must be Russified. For Putin, the work of Russification is not only political and territorial; it is linguistic and cultural, because it affirms the primacy of Russian language and culture over other national languages and cultures; and above all, it is religious, because it consists in the imposition of Orthodoxy as the only religion of the state. This ideological project is in reality based on a profound falsification of Russian history. The first historical falsehood of Putin’s reconstruction lies in attributing a Slavic origin to the kingdom of Kiev, while it was instead the creation of an elite group of Scandinavian warriors, the Normans or Vikings, whom the Byzantines called Varangians. They were the same Normans who, at the dawn of the Middle Ages, conquered the British Isles and Sicily, and reached Greenland and the coasts of America. The city of Kiev, on the right bank of the Dnieper River, was conquered in the ninth century by the Norman Rurikid dynasty, which takes its name from its founding father, Rurik. The term “Rus’” itself does not belong to the Slavic language, but comes from Balto-Finnic.2 The second historical falsehood is that of disregarding the fact that the State of Kiev, which between the tenth and twelfth centuries extended from the Baltic to the Black Sea, up to the Carpathians, remained part of Western Christian civilisation until the Mongol invasion. Kiev experienced the apogee of its splendour during the first half of the eleventh century, under the reign of Prince Yaroslav “the Wise” (978–1054), who was the monarch most interrelated by marriage to the ruling families in Europe.3 Yaroslav’s sister, Maria, was married to King Casimir of Poland; while, among his daughters, Elisiv was married to King Harald III of Norway, Anastasia to King Andrew I of Hungary, and Anne to King Henry I of France, with whom she had four children, the eldest of whom was France’s king Philip I — a Greek name which thus came into use by the French royal family. The historian, Christian Raffensperger, has written a book on genealogy and dynastic marriage in Kievan Rus’, which shows how extensive the interweaving of kinship between East and West was, within a selfsame Christendom.4 Yaroslav’s last son, Vsevolod I, who reigned from 1073 to 1093, spoke five languages and married a Greek princess. His daughter, Adelaide (1067–1109), was empress of the Holy Roman Empire, because in 1089, in Cologne, she married Henry IV (1050–1106), who later became emperor and the great enemy of St Gregory VII, by whom he was humiliated in Canossa. Adelaide accused her husband of abuse and took refuge with Matilda, Grand Countess of Canossa. Then, in 1095, with uncommon courage, she publicly accused the emperor before Urban II at the Council of Piacenza, where the pope announced the First Crusade. Adelaide at last returned to Kiev, where she died in a convent. The third historical falsehood is that of attributing to the State of Kiev, or of Rus’, a religious determination deemed Orthodox, meaning by this term the Greek-schismatic religion that was defined in 1054, after the schism with the Church of Rome. Prince Vladimir received Catholic baptism in 988. The baptism took place in Kherson and was followed soon after by his marriage to Princess Anna, sister of Emperor Basil II. Towards the end of May 989, Vladimir and Anna left Kherson accompanied by many bishops and priests and went to Kiev, where the collective baptism of the people took place in the waters of the Dnieper. This baptism is considered to be the historical origin of Russia. Kievan Rus’ was born Catholic, because the schism in 1054 that brought about the religious fracture between East and West came more than half a century after Vladimir’s baptism. But even after the schism, Kiev struck its own balance between Constantinople and Rome. What in fact happened after the act of rupture of Constantinople patriarch Cerularius? As the historian Bernard Leib observes, one must distinguish between the metropolitans and the faithful of Kiev. The metropolitans remained tied to Constantinople in administrative terms, but the princes and the population never showed any sentiment of hostility towards Rome.5 In Kievan Rus’, two rites coexisted peacefully, the Eastern rite and the Latin rite. Please note: two rites, not two churches. Kievan Rus’ had understood that its mission was to act as a bridge between East and West, to continue to maintain, in addition to the rites, the unity of the universal Church.6 The princes of Kiev recognised the Roman Pontiff as the supreme spiritual authority of the Respublica Christiana, into which they were fully integrated. Thus, in 1075 Prince Iziaslav I (1024–1078), whose Christian name was Demetrius, sent his son Yaropolk to pay homage to St Gregory VII, and the pope responded by sending “most benevolent wishes of every heavenly blessing” to “Demetrius, king of the Russians, and to his consort the queen”.7 The annus horribilis of the Rus’ was 1236, when the Mongol cavalry crossed the Caucasus, led by Batu, a grandson of Genghis Khan. All the Russian principalities were conquered. Kiev was stormed and razed to the ground in 1240.8 The Mongol domination lasted for over 250 years, until the beginning of the sixteenth century. It is to the time of the Mongol domination that the tradition of servility and moral corruption which would characterise Russian history dates back. Alexander Nevsky (1221–1263), the Russian national hero, progenitor of the Muscovy princes, agreed to be a vassal of the Mongols in order to keep the throne, and his grandson Ivan I (1288–1340) became the tax collector of the Great Khan. They belonged to the Rurikid dynasty, but politically were the descendants not of the princes of Kiev but of the Tartar Khans, from whom they learned how to govern the new state: the Grand Duchy of Moscow which was born in opposition to that of Kiev. After the liberation from the Mongols, Catholics and schismatic Orthodox competed for religious primacy in Kiev. In 1439, the seventeenth ecumenical council of the Church was convened by Pope Eugene IV in Florence. Isidore (1385–1463), metropolitan of Kiev and all Rus’, signed with his own name the decree by which the Greek Church was solemnly reunited with the Latin Church, recognising the Roman primacy, after the schism of 1054.9 The union with the Greeks was not destined to last long. The Byzantine bishops who returned to Constantinople were challenged and reconsidered the agreement and, in 1453, the Turks conquered the capital of the Eastern Empire. On 18 December 1439, Eugene IV rewarded the work of Archbishop Isidore with the purple and sent him as his legate to Russia to implement the union. Isidore met with no difficulty in Kiev and its nine bishoprics, but in Moscow, where he arrived on 19 March 1441, his mission failed. In fact, Isidore delivered a letter from Eugene IV to the prince of Moscow, Basil (Vasily) II (1415–1462), in which the pope urged him to support the spread of Catholicism in Russian lands. Basil categorically refused and had Isidore arrested, but he managed to escape and make his way Rome, where he died on 27 April 1463. He is now at rest in the Vatican basilica. Moscow, which at the time of the birth of the State of Kiev was just a small Finnish village, had received Christianity from Ukraine, and its church reported to the metropolitan see of Kiev. But when, in 1453, Constantinople fell under the dominion of the Turks, Moscow proclaimed itself heir to Constantinople’s political and religious role, developing a visceral theological and political hatred against Rome and Latinity. The sixteenth century was that of the first great Revolution: the Protestant Revolution that followed the era of humanism and the Renaissance. But during the same years in which Luther turned his back on Rome, a second great apostasy took place: that of Muscovite Russia. It was in the years of Martin Luther’s revolt, between 1520 and 1530, that expression was given to the concept of Moscow as the “Third Rome”. The letter of the monk Philotheus of the Pskov monastery (c. 1520) addressed to the Grand Duke of Muscovy, Basil III (Vasily III Ivanovich) is considered as a manifesto of this ideology. According to Philotheus, the true faith that for centuries was held by Constantinople did not collapse along with the fall of the city. “Holy Byzantium did not vanish but was transferred to Moscow” as to “the third Rome, and there will be no fourth”. The historian Felix Koneczny (1862–1949) states that Philotheus finally defined “the basic canon of Moscow culture: the conviction about their own superiority over the rest of the world, founded on a state religion and temporal despotism, controlling the Orthodox Church”.10 Orthodox Christianity, with Ivan IV — “Ivan the Terrible” — (1530–1584), became a sort of national religion. Ivan IV reunified the Russian lands under Moscow and was the first to take the title of Tsar of all Rus’, which in 1561, was approved by decree of the patriarch of Constantinople. Russia presented itself as the sanctuary of the true faith, and the Kremlin was the fortress that contained the foundational myth of the Third Rome. The legacy of Genghis Khan merged with that of the Byzantine Empire. The Moscow Patriarchate was created in 1589. Six years later came the response from Rome and Kiev. On 23 December 1595, in the Hall of Constantine in the Apostolic Palace, Archbishop Michael Rohoza (1540–1599), Metropolitan of Kiev, Galychyna and all Ruthenia, after having presented to the Supreme Pontiff the declaration of all the bishops, made in their name and in his own name a solemn profession of the Catholic faith. The union was solemnly proclaimed in Brest on the Bug River on 16 October 1596. Pope Clement VIII, with the apostolic constitution Magnus Dominus et laudabilis nimis,11 announced this to the whole Church, and with the apostolic letter Benedictus sit Pater, addressed the bishops of the Metropolia, communicating to them that the union had taken place.12 Between the sixteenth and nineteenth centuries, Ukraine lost its territorial and state identity and was repeatedly taken apart and put back together between Russia, Austria and Poland, but it did not entirely lose the Catholic identity that it had recovered in the Union of Brest. Brest is the answer to the Third Rome of Muscovy, and it is once again a historical falsehood on Putin’s part to link this religious event to the Latinisation process promoted by Austria and Poland because, in the Union of Brest, the Eastern rites were maintained, and not the Latin ones of the Church called Ruthenian. The popes of the twentieth century always confirmed that the ancient Greek rites can be preserved, as had already been permitted by the Council of Florence and the apostolic letter Benedictus sit Pater of 1596.13 When John Paul II spoke of a Europe that could breathe with two lungs, that of the West and that of the East, he was not referring to the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, but to the method of evangelisation of Saints Cyril and Methodius, who, worked according to the ideal of uniting the new believers in Christ; adapting the liturgical texts to the Slavic language and the Greco-Roman law to the customs of the new peoples.14 The Eastern rites should not be confused with the Orthodox religion, falsifying history. Above all, there is a line, not of continuity but of discontinuity, between the state of Kiev in the year 1000 and the principality of Moscow in the sixteenth century. Unlike the state of Kiev, which was integrated into Western Christian civilisation, Muscovite Russia began its existence as an extra-European state, meaning that it was outside the domain of the “Christian Republic”.15 The Moscow Patriarchate, subordinate to the state, was always characterised by a radical theological hatred of the Rome of Peter. Equally visceral was the Kremlin’s hatred of the Lithuanian-Polish state, which after 1569, became the largest and most powerful country in eastern Europe, within which were found a good nine contemporary nations: Poland, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Russia and Transnistria. This was also the vision of Peter the Great (1672–1725), who moved the capital from Moscow to St Petersburg (1703), strengthened the centralised and autocratic state and created the Holy Synod, the supreme ecclesiastical council placed at the head of the Russian church and controlled by imperial authority. In the title of “Autocrat of all Rus’” that he adopted in 1721, there was the convergence of Mongolian absolutism, Byzantine Caesaropapism and the Muscovite ideology of the Third Rome. The autocratic character of the Russian state, its Asiatic connotation and its isolation from Europe has never wavered during the entire period from Peter the Great to the Bolshevik Revolution, or up to our own day. The destruction of historical memory represented a constitutive element of the totalitarianism of the twentieth century and is a characteristic of the new totalitarianism of the twenty-first century. Although totalitarianism can erase and manipulate memory, it must nonetheless resort to it if it wants to survive. Stalin, to consolidate his regime, invoked the memory of Alexander Nevsky, the victor over the Teutonic knights in the thirteenth century, and not that of Marx; he invoked the memory of Ivan the Terrible, the destroyer of the Tartars in the sixteenth century, and not that of Engels. To justify the invasion of Ukraine, Putin invokes the founder of Kievan Rus’, St Vladimir, seeking to combine his memory with that of Stalin, the patriot who, in the Second World War, restored the territorial unity and moral greatness of Russia. At the conclusion of these considerations of mine, some may object that I have given a negative image of Putin’s historical reconstruction and question whether a positive value be ascribed to the West, which today sets itself against Russia? Are Putin’s patriotic and religious values not better than those of the depraved West in which we live? My answer is this: in all my books, my articles, my talks, I have always denounced the cultural and moral degradation of the West, which, for centuries, has been going through a historical process of self-dissolution. I define this historical process as Revolution, with a capital letter, following the analysis that Professor Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira made in his work Revolution and Counter-Revolution. But Joseph de Maistre had already said that the Revolution must not be resisted with a Revolution in the opposite direction, but with the opposite of Revolution; or if one prefers, an error has to be counteracted with the truth and not with an error in the opposite direction. So if it is true that Putin’s Russia cannot be counteracted with Biden’s West, the contrary is equally true, namely that the ideology of Soros and Bill Gates cannot be counteracted with that of Aleksander Dugin and Russkiy Mir. This is precisely the temptation I am trying to combat within the Catholic and conservative world. I am not afraid of Moscow’s tanks and missiles, but of the ideology that lies behind them. For me, more dangerous than Russia’s political and military expansion is the Kremlin’s ideological propaganda, which consists of presenting the religious and patriotic values of Russia as better than those of the corrupt West and even those of the Catholic Church, which remains its true enemy. An error is not fought with another error, but with the truth, full and intact. This truth is, for me, the way of thinking and living transmitted by the Catholic Church over the centuries. This is why, in my book, The Church in the Tempests, I sought to follow Dom Guéranger’s teaching, to which I wanted to bear witness in today’s brief contribution as well: “the Catholic historian is someone who judges facts, men, and institutions from the point of view of the Church; he is not free to judge otherwise, and that is his strength.” Roberto de Mattei Presentation of The Church in the tempests: the first millennium of the history of the Church - Voice of the Family VOICEOFTHEFAMILY.COM by Roberto de Mattei On Thursday 9 June 2022, at the Brompton Oratory in London, Prof de Mattei presented the following talk for the launch of Calx Mariae

The Holy Synod of the Church of Greece Condemns AB Elpidophoros ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΗ ΜΕΤΑΦΡΑΣΗ ΑΚΟΛΟΥΘΕΙ By Nick Stamatakis As was largely expected and as Helleniscope reported, the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece, in its special meeting today in Athens, condemned AB Elpidophoros for the baptism of the two children of the gay couple and sent two letters of condemnation, one to Elpidophoros personally and one to the Holy Synod of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. The latter is scheduled to convene this Thursday, July 21st, and is expected to make serious decisions on the Charter of GOARCH. But since the actions of the Archbishop have truly placed him under scrutiny, with the overwhelming majority of the faithful demanding his resignation, it is generally expected that AB Elpidophoros will be forced to end his tenure in America one way or the other. The Holy Synod of Athens declared that they remain “firm in what was determined by the Lord, the Holy Apostles and the Holy Fathers” regarding the issue of homosexuality… During the Synod of the Church of Greece, Metropolitan of Aigialias Amvrosios scathingly denounced Elpidophoros: a) for betraying our immaculate Faith, b) for violating the Holy Canons, and c) for scandalizing the conscience of the faithful children of the Church Please link here to see Met. Amvrosios full letter. The Holy Synod of the Church of Greece fell short of harsher actions they could have taken, but they definitely passed the baton to the Patriarchate, which will have to make serious decisions; it is clear that the days of Elpidophoros in America are over. Patriarch Bartholomew is credited with one more mistake in his 30-yr tragic tenure, and he will have to make up for it with a break from his usual path. First, he will have to let GOARCH in the way of autonomy (in the model of the Autocephalous Church of Crete), and second, he will have to pick a true “Man of God” as a leader for this Church – instead of the circle of homosexuals he has appointed elsewhere and above all Emmanuel (formerly of France and now of Chalcedon). Helleniscope has proposed (as we did before the election of Elpidophoros in 2019) Metropolitan of Mesogaias Nikolaos (please see our recent posts). Let me clarify here that it is not simply homosexuality that we oppose as condemned by our faith, but (as it unfortunately happened in the recent baptism by Elpidophoros in Greece) we protest the flashy declarations and “pride” in this marginal human “identity”. All are accepted to save their souls into our Church – no exceptions! But the Church is about Christ, not marginal aberrations of nature and even more marginal identities… This “flashy” approach to homosexual behavior of Patriarchate hierarchs was notoriously exposed in the scandal of Paris when Emmanuel and Maximos (then – 2019 – Metropolitan and his assistant) invited Bulgarian male escorts into the building of Metropolis, and there is a written report of the French Police on the issue. Then, Pat. Bartholomew, instead of sending them to Mt.Athos to repent, promoted them!! He has to take a different path now!! He has to take a position on homosexuality. In earlier years, we could find videos online where the Patriarch condemned homosexuality, following our Faith. Not anymore!! The Patriarch has to make the right choices now bringing to America the best Orthodoxy has to offer!! July 18, 2022, [email protected] www.helleniscope.com DISCLAIMER: The views and statements expressed in this article constitute constitutionally protected opinions of this author. AT THE END OF THIS POST YOU CAN SEE THE LAST PARAGRAPH OF THE ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE HOLY SYNOD OF THE CHURCH OF GREECE IN ENGLISH AND IN GREEK ========== Η Ιερά Σύνοδος της Εκκλησίας της Ελλάδος καταδικάζει τον Αρχ. Ελπιδοφόρο Όπως ήταν σε μεγάλο βαθμό αναμενόμενο και όπως μετέδωσε το Helleniscope, η Ιερά Σύνοδος της Εκκλησίας της Ελλάδος, στην ειδική συνεδρίασή της σήμερα στην Αθήνα, καταδίκασε τον Αρχ.. Ελπιδοφόρος για τη βάφτιση των δύο παιδιών του ομοφυλόφιλου ζευγαριού και έστειλε δύο επιστολές διαμαρτυρίας, μία προς αυτόν και μία και προς την Ιερά Σύνοδο του Πατριαρχείου Κωνσταντινουπόλεως. Η τελευταία έχει προγραμματιστεί να συνεδριάσει αυτήν την Πέμπτη 21 Ιουλίου και αναμένεται να λάβει σοβαρές αποφάσεις για τον Καταστατικό Χάρτη της Αρχιεπισκοπής. Επειδή όμως οι ενέργειες του Αρχιεπισκόπου τον έθεσαν πραγματικά υπό έλεγχο, με τη συντριπτική πλειοψηφία των πιστών να ζητά την παραίτησή του, αναμένεται ευρέως ότι ο Αρχ. Ελπιδοφόρος θα αναγκαστεί να τερματίσει τη θητεία του στην Αμερική με τον ένα ή τον άλλο τρόπο. Η Ιερά Σύνοδος των Αθηνών δήλωσε ότι παραμένουν «σταθεροί σε ό,τι ορίστηκε από τον Κύριο, τους Αγίους Αποστόλους και τους Αγίους Πατέρες» για το θέμα της ομοφυλοφιλίας… Κατά τη διάρκεια της Συνόδου της Εκκλησίας της Ελλάδος, ο Μητροπολίτης Αιγιαλείας Αμβρόσιος κατήγγειλε δριμύτατα τον Ελπιδοφόρο: α) για την προδοσία της αμόλυντης πίστης μας, β) για παράβαση των Ιερών Κανόνων, και γ) για σκανδαλισμό της συνείδησης των πιστών τέκνων της Εκκλησίας Παρακαλώ συνδεθείτε εδώ για να δείτε την επιστολή του Mητ. Αμβρόσιου Η Ιερά Σύνοδος της Εκκλησίας της Ελλάδος δεν προχώρησε σε πιο σκληρές ενέργειες που θα μπορούσε να είχαν κάνει, αλλά σίγουρα πέρασαν τη σκυτάλη στο Πατριαρχείο, το οποίο θα πρέπει να λάβει σοβαρές αποφάσεις. Είναι ξεκάθαρο ότι οι μέρες του Ελπιδοφόρου στην Αμερική έχουν τελειώσει. Ο Πατριάρχης Βαρθολομαίος πιστώνεται ένα ακόμη λάθος στην 30χρονη τραγική θητεία του και θα πρέπει να το επανορθώσει με αλλαγή πορείας. Πρώτον, θα πρέπει να οδηγήσει της Αρχιεπισκοπή Αμερικής στον δρόμο της αυτονομίας (κατά το πρότυπο της Αυτοκέφαλης Εκκλησίας της Κρήτης) και δεύτερον, θα πρέπει να επιλέξει έναν αληθινό «Άνθρωπο του Θεού» ως ηγέτη αυτής της Εκκλησίας – αντί για τον κύκλο ομοφυλόφιλων που έχει διορίσει αλλού και πάνω από τον Εμμανουήλ (πρώην Γαλλίας και τώρα Χαλκηδόνας). Το Helleniscope πρότεινε (όπως κάναμε πριν την εκλογή Ελπιδοφόρου το 2019) τον Μητροπολίτη Μεσογαίας Νικόλαο (δείτε τις πρόσφατες αναρτήσεις μας). Να διευκρινίσω εδώ ότι δεν αντιτιθέμεθα απλώς στην ομοφυλοφιλία ως καταδικασμένη από την πίστη μας, αλλά (όπως δυστυχώς συνέβη στην πρόσφατη βάπτιση του Ελπιδοφόρου στην Ελλάδα) διαμαρτυρόμαστε για τις κραυγαλέες διακηρύξεις και την «υπερηφάνεια» για αυτή την περιθωριακή ανθρώπινη «ταυτότητα». Όλοι γίνονται δεκτοί να σώσουν τις ψυχές τους στην Εκκλησία μας – χωρίς εξαιρέσεις! Αλλά η Εκκλησία είναι για τον Χριστό, όχι για περιθωριακές εκτροπές της φύσης και ακόμη πιο περιθωριακές ταυτότητες… Αυτή η «φανταχτερή» προσέγγιση της ομοφυλοφιλικής συμπεριφοράς των ιεραρχών του Πατριαρχείου αποκαλύφθηκε περιβόητα στο σκάνδαλο του Παρισιού όταν Εμμανουήλ και Μάξιμος (τότε – 2019 – Μητροπολίτης και βοηθός του) προσκάλεσε Βούλγαρους άνδρες συνοδούς στο κτίριο της Μητρόπολης Παρισίων και υπάρχει γραπτή αναφορά της Γαλλικής Αστυνομίας για το θέμα. Στη συνέχεια ο Πατ. Βαρθολομαίος αντί να τους στείλει στο Άγιο Όρος να μετανοήσουν τους προβίβασε!! Πρέπει να πάρει άλλο δρόμο τώρα!! Πρέπει να πάρει θέση για την ομοφυλοφιλία. Τα παλαιότερα χρόνια, βρίσκαμε στο διαδίκτυο βίντεο όπου ο Πατριάρχης καταδίκαζε την ομοφυλοφιλία, ακολουθώντας την πίστη μας. Οχι πια!! Τότε ο Πατριάρχης πρέπει να κάνει τις σωστές επιλογές φέρνοντας στην Αμερική ότι καλύτερο έχει να προσφέρει η Ορθοδοξία!! July 18, 2022, [email protected] www.helleniscope.com DISCLAIMER: The views and statements expressed in this article constitute constitutionally protected opinions of this author. ============ BELOW YOU CAN SEE THE LAST PARAGRAPH OF THE ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE HOLY SYNOD OF THE CHURCH OF GREECE IN ENGLISH AND IN GREEK “…To send a letter of protest to the His Eminence Archbishop of America Mr. Elpidophoros for what the His Eminence Metropolitan of Glyfada, Hellinikon, Voula, Vouliagmeni and Vari Mr. Antonios reported in writing (S.S. Report of Glyfada to the 1st Synod), in relation to the holding of the Holy Sacrament of the Baptism of two infants in Vouliagmeni, as well as a relevant letter to the Ecumenical Patriarchate, under whose canonical jurisdiction the Archbishop of America falls. At the same time, the Holy Synod discussed at length the issues related to the pastoral treatment of such issues, remaining firm in what was determined by the Lord, the Holy Apostles and the Holy Fathers. ======== Να αποστείλει επιστολή διαμαρτυρίας προς τον Σεβασμιώτατο Αρχιεπίσκοπο Αμερικής κ. Ελπιδοφόρο για όσα εγγράφως ανέφερε ο Σεβασμιώτατος Μητροπολίτης Γλυφάδας, Ελληνικού, Βούλας, Βουλιαγμένης και Βάρης κ. Αντώνιος (Σ.Σ. Αναφορά του Γλυφάδας στην Ι. Σύνοδο),σε σχέση με την τέλεση Ιερού Μυστηρίου του Βαπτίσματος δύο βρεφών στην Βουλιαγμένη, καθώς και σχετική επιστολή προς το Οικουμενικό Πατριαρχείο, στην κανονική δικαιοδοσία του οποίου υπάγεται ο Αρχιεπίσκοπος Αμερικής. Ταυτόχρονα, η Ιερά Σύνοδος συζήτησε εκτενώς τα ζητήματα που αφορούν στην ποιμαντική αντιμετώπιση τέτοιων ζητημάτων, παραμένουσα σταθερή στα υπό του Κυρίου, των Αγίων Αποστόλων και των Αγίων Πατέρων ορισθέντα. https://www.helleniscope.com/2022/07/18/the-holy-synod-of-the-church-of-greece-condemns-ab-elpidophoros/

But the crusaders disobeyed the pope and listened to the Greek prince. 1204: the Crusader Sack of Constantinople - OnePeterFive ONEPETERFIVE.COM An examination of the primary sources of a historical calamity between east and west.

How the FDA Manipulates the Media The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has been arm-twisting journalists into relinquishing their reportorial independence, our investigation reveals. Other institutions are following suit How the FDA Manipulates the Media WWW.SCIENTIFICAMERICAN.COM The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has been arm-twisting journalists into relinquishing their reportorial independence, our investigation reveals. Other institutions are following suit

At an untold number of Christian churches and institutions, the silence on sexual abuse is deafening. Statistically, evangelical pastors rarely mention the issue from the pulpit. According to research from the evangelical publishing company LifeWay, 64 percent of pastors said they talk about sexual violence once a year, or even less than that. Pastors drastically underestimate the number of victims in their congregations; a majority of them guessed in the survey that 10 percent or less might be victims. But in 2016, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that 1 in 4 women (women make up approximately 55 percent of evangelicals) and 1 in 9 men have been sexually abused. There is no evidence suggesting those numbers are lower inside the church. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2018/05/31/feature/the-epidemic-of-denial-about-sexual-abuse-in-the-evangelical-church/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.f06aaee9a787

This unique film documents two decades of the rescue, recovery and rebuilding at the World Trade Center site in New York City. It is the longest running time-lapse project in the company’s history, including never-before-seen EarthCam footage spanning 20 years. EarthCam has been on site since 2001 when EarthCam CEO & Founder, Brian Cury, installed a webcam just days after the attacks to webcast the rescue mission to the families of the missing. As rescue became recovery and eventually rebuilding, EarthCam set to work to develop new robotic DSLR camera technology necessary to document this revered 16 acre site in the highest resolution possible. Every few minutes for 20 years, panoramic images captured the transformation of downtown Manhattan from over 100 viewing angles, totaling 13.3 million individual photos. “We appreciate EarthCam’s unprecedented contribution of 20 years of historic images, which have meticulously recorded the rebuilding that transformed this sacred space,” said 9/11 Memorial President and CEO Alice M. Greenwald, “This creative time-lapse both honors the legacy of those who were killed and embodies hope for the future, as we see these remarkable new structures that surround the Memorial as evidence of lower Manhattan’s resilience and renewal.” All two decades of content, in addition to the original EarthCam camera have been donated to the National September 11 Memorial & Museum. “This is an emotional milestone for EarthCam, as the history of the company has been so intertwined with this site.” said Brian Cury, CEO and Founder of EarthCam, “We’re grateful to so many partners, friends, and to the extraordinary dedicated team at EarthCam whose innovation drove this process for 20 years to deliver this historic record for the world.” Produced & Directed by Brian Cury Archival Producers: Lana Moskalyova & Juan Navas Webcam Technology: Bill Sharp, Colin Sheehan, Dylan Stark, Michael Winfield Editors: Travis Cooper & Brian Cury Special Thanks: Riese Restaurants, Millenium Hilton New York Downtown, Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church and National Shrine, Empire State Realty Trust, Hyatt Regency Jersey City On The Hudson, The Statue of Liberty - Ellis Island Foundation, Inc., National Park Service, Kaitlyn Leubling, Daniel Ortiz, Madison Housel, Joseph Alon, Kyle Storm, Taylor Smith, Joseph Nizza, Amanda Valentin, Charles Dilkes, Elisabeth Van Rensalier, Lisa Kelly, Jason Brossa, Todd Maloof

This inaugural video of The Academy of St Juliana focuses on the history of Orthodoxy in the British Isles and the role of the liturgical arts in the renewal of the spiritual and cultural life of the community and the nation. This video features interviews with: Archimandrite Philip of the Monastery of St Antony and St Cuthbert Fr Stephen Maxfield of The Greek Orthodox Church of the Holy Fathers of Nicaea, Shrewsbury Aidan Hart, renowned iconographer, artist and writer. The Academy of St Juliana is intended to be a centre for culture and education in the heart of Shrewsbury, UK. If you would like to participate and support the project and to follow the work to create a hub of culture in the heart of the UK contact: [email protected] "We are are not the first (Orthodox) people here, not the first Orthodox Christians here at all... we have an enormous number of previous witnesses of the resurrection (of Christ)" - Archimandrite Philip

<iframe width="640" height="360" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border: none;" src="https://www.bitchute.com/embed/dohtOkDixFsD/"></iframe> The Mechanics behind the Electronic Vote Steal Operation WWW.BITCHUTE.COM L Todd Wood interviews cyber security expert Russell Ramsland of Allied Security Operations Group. Ramsland explains how easy it is to defraud the election through the software Dominion.

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/09/15/politics/israel-uae-abraham-accords-documents/index.html READ_ Full text of the Abraham Accords and agreements between Israel and the United Arab Emirates_Bahrain - CNNPolitics.html

VELIKA GOSPOJINA.

Xiaomi officially announced its newest Android skin — MIUI 12 — earlier this year in April. As with all previous MIUI releases, the latest software update from the Chinese OEM included a bunch of new static and live wallpapers. Shortly after the official announcement, XDA Recognized Contributor linuxct managed to port the new Super Earth and Mars live wallpapers to other devices and later added two more options — Hale crater and Evergreen garden — to the list. Xiaomi recently released another set of live wallpapers with its 10th-anniversary special Mi 10 Ultra and you can now download it for your device. The new MIUI 12 Super Saturn live wallpapers include two options — Faraway Rings (Horizontal) and Faraway Rings (Vertical) — both of which can now be installed on any Android device running Android 8.0 or newer. As you can see in the embedded tweets, the Faraway Rings (Horizontal) wallpaper gives you a close look at Saturn’s rings in a horizontal orientation, while the Faraway Rings (Vertical) wallpaper aligns the rings in a vertical orientation. Both the wallpapers show a zoomed out version of the ringed planet on the lockscreen and unlocking the device zooms into the rings, with floating asteroids that move when you switch pages. If you’re interested in trying out MIUI 12’s new Super Saturn live wallpapers on your device, you can download the respective APKs from the download link below. Once you have the APK installed on your device, you can pick the new live wallpapers from the stock wallpaper picker on your device. In case the wallpapers don’t show up in the stock wallpaper picker, you can download the Google Wallpaper app from the Play Store to apply the live wallpapers. Download MIUI 12 Super Saturn Wallpaper port MIUI 12 Super Wallpaper — XDA Forum Thread

Archimandrite Alypius (Svetlichny) on the history and symbolism of liturgical utensils. What Vessels and Diskoses Were Used for the Eucharist After the Edict of Constantine the Great? When Emperor Constantine the Great issued his edict that granted Christians equal rights with the pagans, Christian congregations were finally able to worship openly and to build their churches. New liturgical life started, and it required new liturgical items. Provincial prefects and the emperor himself made generous endowments to the churches, including vessels for the Eucharist. We find it mentioned in the biography of Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker. Eucharist Cup, late 5th century The chalices often had the conical shape of the emperor’s cups. Diskoses resembled plain plates. It was understandable because they would order the usual cups and plates, which rich people used at their feasts. Diskos. 6th century When the believers multiplied, a new custom to drink the Blood of Christ from a Eucharist jug was introduced in some provincial churches. Liturgical scholars suppose that the jugs were used by poor congregations as a substitute for cups. The wine that Christians brought to a church in jugs was used during the Eucharist as the full offering. The jugs were later made either of semi-precious gemstones with Christian symbols on them, or of precious metals, and less often from gilded copper. This tradition gained popularity in monasteries because a deacon would carry the Holy Gifts to hermits after a liturgy. A jug was really practical for that, while the sacred Bread was simply wrapped in a piece of clean cloth. It must be noted that traditionally, almost until the tenth century, the faithful would drink the Blood of Christ straight from the Chalice or from the aforementioned jug, while they received the most pure Body into their hands, later into pieces of cloth on their hands, and they would consume it on their own with awe, but first touching their eyes and foreheads with it. The tradition of giving the communion to the faithful on a spoon started spreading in the Eastern Churches since the 7thcentury. However, they would give only the Blood of Christ on a spoon (this tradition has survived up to now in the Coptic Church). They started dipping the Bread into the cup with the Blood and then distribute the particles of the Body soaked in Blood on a spoon. Roman Catholics would criticize this method in their arguments with the Orthodox. Thus, Cardinal Humbert wrote in his treatise Against the Greek Misconceptions, “Jesus didn’t put bread in a cup and didn’t tell the apostles, ‘Take ye and eat it with a spoon, for this is my Body’… The Lord didn’t offer soaked bread to any of his disciples aside from Judas the traitor to point at the one who was going to betray him.” Thus, the Latin Christians started to pay attention to the historicity of the Last Supper. When and Why Did The Tradition of Giving Communion on a Spoon Arise? Apparently, the tradition of giving communion on a spoon wasn’t related to new concepts of personal hygiene. On the contrary, it reflected a development of a more reverent attitude to the Eucharist and was more convenient when there were too many parishioners willing to take communion. They didn’t need to take the communion in two steps any longer: they received both elements at once. Additionally, in contrast with the Latin tradition, which emphasized the suffering and death of Christ, and therefore used unleavened bread for communion as a symbol of sorrow and death, the Eastern Church shaped her attitude to the liturgical elements through theology. The Churches of the East regarded the Liturgy as the re-enactment of the Resurrection, and therefore the liturgical bread was ‘live’ – it was leavened bread of joy. Naturally, this theology stipulated that the Body had to be mixed with Blood visibly for the faithful to symbolize the restoration of life, i.e., Resurrection. That was why the Body was dipped into the Chalice and then taken out of the Chalice with a spoon. The communion spoon wasn’t actually called ‘a spoon’ (κοχλιάριον); rather, it was called ‘tongs’ (λαβίδα), hinting at the burning coal given to Isaiah by an Angel with tongs (Is. 6:7). Interestingly enough, the first spoons for communion resembled real spoons and were quite big. Until the 18th century, though the spoons became smaller, they remained deep enough to distribute sufficiently large portions of the Wine and the Bread to the parishioners. A Communion Spoon. 17th century There was an alternative method of consuming the Gifts in the middle of the 12th century, when the communion spoons were a new thing: drinking from the Chalice using a special silver straw. This custom saw a widespread adoption in Africa and Spain. However, it didn’t stick, and the silver straws became rare as early as the 14th century. I heard that such communion straws appeared much earlier, possibly even as early as the 6th century, in particular in the Western Church. Hardly anyone knows that a wine strainer was considered a liturgical utensil in the 4th century, too. It was made of silver or other valuable stuff and used to pour wine into the Chalice. Treasure found in the Zion Monastery: chalices, censers, a tabernacle, and a wine strainer in the front row Christians used to bring their own wine and their own baked bread for the Liturgy. The wine wasn’t always high-quality and clean enough. That is why they needed a strainer to filter out possible admixtures. Jugs were used for the Eucharist along with the Chalice until the 14th century; a mural painting in Stavronikita Monastery on Mount Athos depicting the Eucharist allows us to see that monks at Mt. Athos might use a jug for communion up until the 16th century. Therefore, the communion spoon wasn’t universally widespread. Use of a jug implies that the Bread and the Wine were consumed separately. https://blog.obitel-minsk.com/2019/03/when-and-why-did-the-tradition-of-giving-communion-on-a-spoon-arise.html?fbclid=IwAR2DuaWuimMP57VWs0KAUuuo88XubuXKYoVQwlfzGeoibRDr0eU1tCmLGeI

How China Just “Reset” the Global Monetary System With Gold International oil trade is the crux of the issue. For decades, the world’s largest oil importers have paid for oil using the petrodollar, which supports the dollar’s value and fuels U.S. government deficit spending (primarily because the petrodollar is backed by Treasuries). But now, China is looking to upset the current petrodollar system by introducing gold-backed “petroyuan” oil futures contracts. And since China is the largest importer of oil globally, this massive shift away from the petrodollar could be bad news for the U.S. But it could be great news for gold owners. Here’s why…