Why do I feel so convinced that Satan's 100 year reign will end in 2017?
It is because of the things that happened in 1917, which could have been the beginning of Satan's reign!
In February 1917, the Russian Revolution began.
(On October 25, there was an insurrection in Petrograd, as a result of which the Bolsheviks took control.)
On 27 May 1917, the Pope promulgated the first formal Code of Canon Law.
A good thing on the face of it but Canon 1543 read,
"If a commodity which is consumed by its first use be lent on the stipulation that it becomes the property of the borrower, who is bound to return to the lender not the thing itself, but its equivalent only, the lender may not receive any payment by reason of the loan itself."
This teaching was a continuation of the Church's unbroken history but a tragic 'however' was added,
"In the giving or lending of such a commodity, however, it is not in itself unlawful to make an arrangement for the recovery of interest at the rate allowed by the civil law, unless that rate is clearly excessive."
What had been unlawful and sinful now became lawful if civil law allowed it.
Remember civil law also allows abortion, birth control, divorce and same-sex marriage.
Without this critical change in Canon Law, Catholics would have been unable to participate in the lending or borrowing of money with interest, and Protestants might have asked themselves about the morality of usury.
What a different place the world would be today if the teaching had not been changed.
In 1917, Europe was enmeshed in an evil war that was ultimately to lead to an even worse war with the rise of National Socialism in Germany.
In 1917, the reigning Pope was seriously concerned about the formation of Catholic priests and bishops, and their emphasis on education at the expense of faith formation. In his encyclical Humani genoris redemptionem, dated June 15, Benedict XV wrote,
"What gives a man's life worth and vigor and makes them promote wonderfully the salvation of souls is Divine Grace. 'God gave the increase. (2Cor3:6)'. But the grace of God is not gained by study and practice: it is won by prayer, therefore he who is little given to prayer or neglects it altogether, vainly spends his time and labor preaching, for in God's sight his sermons profit neither himself nor those that hear him."
The Pope went so far as to request that all those priests who are incapable of preaching be weeded out.
How many priests and bishops since 1917, have seemingly lacked Divine Grace but were not weeded out?
How many priests and bishops have devoted their time to earning an advanced degree?
I don't believe it was coincidental that the Blessed Virgin appeared at Fatima in 1917, to give the Church grave warnings!
Yet still the solemn consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart by the Pope and the bishops in union with him, has not happened
Showing posts with label Usury. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Usury. Show all posts
Sunday, September 4, 2011
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
When Did The Church Change Its Teaching on Usury?
There was a time when lending money at interest was a sin.
There was a time if a Catholic had gone to confession and admitted lending money at interest he would only have received absolution after agreeing not to repeat the sin.
This obviously made it impossible to be a Catholic banker
Why did the Church change its position on Usury?
Has the Church changed its teaching on prostitution?
I don't believe lending money at interest was a Church law like eating meat on Friday.
Usury is repeatedly condemned in the Old Testament.
From the earliest days of the Church it was forbidden for followers of Christ to engage in usury.
Today, usury is defined as charging exorbitant interest rates.
Isn't that just a legal way of redefining sin?
If I had to point to one change made by the Church which has lead, more than any other, to the Great Apostasy, it would be the change on usury.
In my opinion, the Bankers of the world have the control they do over every element of society because of usury.
Most wage earners have become essentially wage slaves because of usury.
Student loan debt has surpassed consumer credit card debt.
I recently heard of a veterinarian student who still had one year to complete her studies, whose student loan debt was $400,000. It is quite possible it will reach $500,000 by graduation.
The worst example of usury seems to me that when a congregation decides to build a new church or school and the bishop decides the diocese will lend the parish the funds. The bishop takes title to the church and then charges the parish interest on the money borrowed.
I find it interesting that Muslims may not charge interest. Muslim banks takes an equity position in an enterprise in which they invest.
It is impossible to worship God and money. Doesn't the Church still teach this?
There was a time if a Catholic had gone to confession and admitted lending money at interest he would only have received absolution after agreeing not to repeat the sin.
This obviously made it impossible to be a Catholic banker
Why did the Church change its position on Usury?
Has the Church changed its teaching on prostitution?
I don't believe lending money at interest was a Church law like eating meat on Friday.
Usury is repeatedly condemned in the Old Testament.
From the earliest days of the Church it was forbidden for followers of Christ to engage in usury.
Today, usury is defined as charging exorbitant interest rates.
Isn't that just a legal way of redefining sin?
If I had to point to one change made by the Church which has lead, more than any other, to the Great Apostasy, it would be the change on usury.
In my opinion, the Bankers of the world have the control they do over every element of society because of usury.
Most wage earners have become essentially wage slaves because of usury.
Student loan debt has surpassed consumer credit card debt.
I recently heard of a veterinarian student who still had one year to complete her studies, whose student loan debt was $400,000. It is quite possible it will reach $500,000 by graduation.
The worst example of usury seems to me that when a congregation decides to build a new church or school and the bishop decides the diocese will lend the parish the funds. The bishop takes title to the church and then charges the parish interest on the money borrowed.
I find it interesting that Muslims may not charge interest. Muslim banks takes an equity position in an enterprise in which they invest.
It is impossible to worship God and money. Doesn't the Church still teach this?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)