Bản Chất của Quyền Lực: Tội Phạm và Bịp Bợm Dối Trá Như Nhau:
Vatican: Cách đây không lâu (đầu năm 2012) khi cái gọi là VatiLeaks nổ ra cho biết những trò chơi quyền lực hăm dọa, tống tiền, và tham nhũng trong hệ thống “ngân hàng Vatican” trong “Tòa Thánh Công Giáo La Mã” với những “tội đồng tính”.
Cái gọi là “Tòa Thánh Đại Diện Chúa Giời” cũng đầy những trò đe dọa bật mí đề dành quyền lực lãnh đạo. Và cũng chơi trò dùng quyền lực “bảo mật” để bảo vệ che đậy tội ác!
Vừa qua, khi vừa lên “ngôi” Giáo Hoàng Francis đã thông báo thay đổi “lề lối cũ của hệ thống tài chính ngân hàng “của Giáo Hội”.
Người đuợc giáo hoàng chọn để thay thế làm đại diện thẩm quyền của toà thánh trong hệ thống ngân hàng Vatican được biết chính thức duói chức vụ “giám mục viện giáo vụ” (!!!) (institute for the Works of Religion (IOR), là “Đức ông” Battista Ricca, một nhân vật vừa bị “phanh phui” qua Vatileaks là có quan hệ đồng tính gần như công khai với một “Sĩ quan quân đội Thụy Sĩ” khi “công vụ khâm sứ” ở Uruquay! Ngoài ra còn một lần bị hành hung trong vụ dính líu đến “đĩ đực” tại một hội quán của giới đồng tính ỡ thủ đô Urruguay, Montevideo.
Dĩ nhiên, cũng như “Toá Bạch Ốc” Obama và các “nhà lãnh đạo”, Vatican chối bỏ “nguồn tin” này!!!
Chúng ta còn nhớ vị “lãnh đạo” Clinton và “điếu xì gà” Monica Lewinski đã bác bỏ “tin đồn” để rồi sau đó khi có đầy đủ bằng chứng không thể chối cãi!!
Quyền lực và niềm tin mù quáng thì như nhau! Niềm tin vào Nhà nuớc tận thiện che chỏ đùm bọc bảo vệ dân lành, nhưng sẵn sàng ra lệnh cho công an cảnh sát quân đội an ninh tàn sát áp đảo quấn chúng, nó chẳng khác gì “đấng tự hữu, bao dung lòng lành vô cùng” nhưng sẵn sàng trừng phạt nặng nề xua đuổi người vô tội chỉ vì “đồng tính” cũng do chính “chúa” sáng tạo ra!!!
Ôi nhân loại đã đạt những thành tựu khoa học như du hành khỏi quả địa cầu; đã có thể tạo sinh, chọn và đổi giống v.v thế nhưng nhũng việc phi lý vớ vẩn như “nhà nuớc, thuợng đế” hiển nhiên đơn giản như thế lại nhìn không ra!!!
Cho đến khi nào nhân loại này mới có khả năng nhìn ra đuợc những điều nghịch lý bịp bợm HIỂN NHIÊN trước mắt như thế này!!!
Pope’s pick for Vatican bank embroiled in gay sex scandal
Pope Francis will fly out of Rome on Monday, leaving behind the latest controversy to engulf the Holy See – a slew of gay sex claims, denied by the pope’s spokesman, against the man Francis chose to be his representative at the Vatican “bank”.
On 15 June, the pope appointed Monsignor Battista Ricca, an Italian cleric and former Vatican diplomat, to be “prelate” of the bank, formally known as the Institute for the Works of Religion (IOR). As such, Ricca is entitled to attend meetings of both the bodies that oversee the scandal-ridden IOR’s operations – its board and a five-strong commission of cardinals. The prelate can also demand to see any document he cares to inspect.
According to the latest edition of the weekly news magazine L’Espresso, Ricca has a past punctuated with scandal. Its report, which the pope’s spokesman branded as “not trustworthy”, claimed Ricca lived more or less openly with a Swiss army officer while at the Holy See’s nunciature (embassy) in Uruguay. It said he arrived with his lover and, while running the post between nuncios, provided him with both accommodation and a job.
The weekly magazine said Ricca was once beaten up in a gay bar in Montevideo and that, when the lift at the nunciature broke down in the night, firefighters called to deal with the emergency found him inside with a local rent boy known to police. It said that, after he was transferred to Trinidad and Tobago, that his alleged lover left trunks behind in Uruguay containing his effects. When they were opened later, they were found to contain a pistol, large numbers of prophylactics and sizeable quantities of pornography, the magazine said. Ricca has not made any comment on the allegations.
Catholic teaching regards homosexuality as “objectively disordered” and homosexual acts as “contrary to natural law”. It condemns discrimination against gay men and women on the grounds of their sexual orientation, but says they are “called to chastity”.
L’Espresso responded to the papal spokesman’s partial denial with a statement in which it stood by its Vatican expert’s report. It called on the Holy See to “check the trustworthiness of what L’Espresso published simply by consulting the exhaustive documentation on the case in its possession”.
That points to the key questions in the affair: whether Pope Francis knew of the claims against Ricca before he handed him one of the most sensitive jobs in the Vatican. And if not, why not? After he was recalled to Rome, Ricca served in the Vatican’s secretariat of state before being given charge of first one, and eventually three, of the guest houses that the Holy See uses to accommodate church dignitaries on visits to Rome.
It was at one of these that the future pope met the Italian cleric. Their friendship was cemented after the pope’s election when Francis decided not to occupy the lavish papal apartments in the Apostolic Palace, but to remain at the guest house, run by Ricca, in which he stayed during the election.
It would have been standard procedure for him to call in Ricca’s personal file before making the appointment and – whatever the truth or otherwise of the claims against him – it is inconceivable that he would have gone ahead had he known about them. It is hard to imagine a more dangerous official for the pope than one charged with shaking up the IOR, yet acutely vulnerable to blackmail.
What remains unclear is whether Vatican allies wiped Ricca’s file clean of allegations after his return to Rome, or whether enemies of the pope’s reform programme stripped them out before handing the dossier to Francis in an attempt to discredit both him and the programme. The IOR is already caught up in a separate scandal over an alleged plot to use it for the return to Italy of €2m (£1.7m) of evaded taxes.
Ex-Priest Seeks $450,000 From Wis. Archdiocese…child sexual abuse victims with child sexual abuse in 2002 but represented sexual abuse victims on when a scandal in Boston on clergy …
Today in History…championship, won the British Open. Five years ago: Pope Benedict XVI wrapped up a six-day World Youth Day Festival in Sydney Carlos Santana is…
L. A.’s Catholic Archiocese Reaches $10 Million Settlement With Sex Abuse Victims…victims of sexual abuse perpetrated by and that a new pope could make no hopeful the new pope might “actually and outrage.” Sex – abuse…
Pope Francis Gives Slight Hope to Priest Abuse Victims…a victim of sex abuse . Survivors like the church. Pope Francis must Isely said. ” Pope Francis must tolerance of sexual abuse of children…
Pope Francis’ View on Contraception Could Impact AIDS Work…Argentina, now Pope Francis , might impact contraceptives. While the new pope is reportedly orthodox indicates that the new pope supports the…
Vatican Begins Papal Conclave With Mass, First Vote Today…the retired Pope Emeritus Benedict Sunday. RELATED: Sex Abuse Is Catholic Church’s indicating a new pope has been picked of an American pope…
Pope says Vatileaks probe will stay secret, adding intrigue to final days
A potentially explosive report into embarrassing leaks from the Vatican will be seen by only two people — Pope Benedict XVI and the man who succeeds him.
Italian newspapers have already angered the Vatican by suggesting that the report found evidence of corruption, blackmail and a gay sex ring, and that it triggered Benedict’s decision earlier this month to give up the papacy.
The Vatican said in a statement Monday that Benedict, who commissioned the report on leaks from three cardinals, is the only person who knows its contents and will make them available only to the next pope. The pontiff also praised the cardinals for showing “the generosity, honesty and dedication of those who work in the Holy See,” considering “the limitations and imperfections of the human component of each institution.”
Over the weekend, the Vatican took the unusual step of lashing out at the Italian press — accusing it of “unverifiable or completely false news stories” designed to influence the conclave that will pick the next pope.
Father Thomas Reese, author of “Inside the Vatican: The Politics and Organization of the Catholic Church,” said that Benedict’s decision to keep the report secret was not a surprise.
“The Vatican doesn’t like to do its laundry in public,” he said.
In any event, he added, the new pope could always decide to make the report public. Benedict’s decision simply gives him cover in case he wants to keep it private, Reese said.
The pope ordered the report on what has become known as the Vatileaks scandal last year after documents became public that deeply embarrassed the church, including some of Benedict’s own correspondence and letters alleging corruption.
Benedict pardoned the ex-butler, Paolo Gabriele, just before Christmas.
The pope, 85, announced earlier this month that he would abdicate, the first leader of the Catholic Church to do so since the Middle Ages. His last day is Thursday. A conclave to pick successor begins next month.
The decision to keep the leaks report secret adds a layer of intrigue to what has already been a tumultuous papal transition.
Just Monday, the most senior cleric in Britain, Cardinal Keith O’Brien, resigned after The Observer newspaper reported that three priests and a former priest had accused him of inappropriate behavior going back 30 years.
Also Monday, the pope changed Vatican law to allow his successor to be picked sooner — as soon as all the voting cardinals are in place in Rome. Under previous law, the conclave could not have begun before March 15.
Why Popes banned the Bible
Comment on this Article
To cover-up the false nature of the Christian texts, an extraordinary decision is found in the records of the First Council of Constantinople of 381-3, convened by Roman Emperor Theodosius (d. 395). What was decided at that assembly presents an historical fact outlining an extraordinary episode in New Testament history that is little-known today, and involved Pope Damasus, who was in attendance. He was a man so stained with impiety and so notorious with women that he was called the Tickler of Matron’s Ears.¹ When he found that the Roman people would not walk before him in processions, he had them beaten, and many were killed. He was charged with adultery in a Civil Court, and only the intervention of his friend, the Emperor, averted the scandal of a trial. He returned to the Church, and in a candid personal confession frankly admitted that the Gospel manuscripts of his day were so ‘full of errors and dubious passages’² that copies coming from scriptoriums were different and conflicting. To prevent the fabricated writings being seen by the wrong eyes, Pope Damasus came up with a solution that was brilliant in its simplicity … he banned the Bible.
Origin of ‘heresy’
When the basic New Testament canon started to develop towards the end of the Fourth Century (generally) the laity was strictly ‘forbidden to read the word of God, or to exercise their judgment in order to understand it’.³ Damasus recorded that ‘bad use of difficult passages by the simple and poor gives rise to hear-say’ and the general populace was denied access to the compilations. The word ‘hear-say’ developed into ‘heresy’ and people who opposed Church opinions were subsequently called ‘heretics’.4 It was with a resolution of that council that the ban was officially established but some members of the priesthood had trouble understanding the new terminology. The unreliability of their explanations of heretics and heresies is illustrated in the case of St. Epiphanius, Bishop of Salamis (d. 403) who mistook the Pythagorean Sacred Tetrad (the number 4), for a heretic leader.
After he suppressed the Bible, Damasus created an array of formidable penances and additional anathemas ‘designed to keep the curious at bay’5, the chief tendency of the priesthood was to keep the Bible away from people and substitute Church authority as the rule of life and belief.
Owning a Bible was a criminal offence
In 860, Pope Nicholas I, sitting high on a throne built specially for the occasion in the town square, pronounced against all people who expressed interest in reading the Bible, and reaffirmed its banned public use (Papal Decree). In 1073, Pope Gregory supported and confirmed the ban, and in 1198, Pope Innocent III declared that anybody caught reading the Bible would be stoned to death by ‘soldiers of the Church military’ (Diderot’s Encyclopedia, 1759). In 1229, the Council of Toulouse, ‘to be spoken of with detestation’, passed another Decree ‘that strictly prohibits laics from having in their possession either the Old or New Testaments; or from translating them into the vulgar tongue’. By the 14th Century, possession of a Bible by the laity was a criminal offence and punishable by whipping, confiscation of real and personal property, and burning at the stake.
With the fabricated Christian texts safely hidden from public scrutiny by a series of Decrees, popes endorsed the public suppression of the Bible for twelve hundred and thirty years, right up until after the Reformation and the printing of the King James Bible in 1611.