tft-short-4578168
Ken Ammi’s True Free Thinker:
BooksYouTube or OdyseeTwitterFacebookSearch

Pope vs Satanic Temple – canonization & demonization of St Junipero Serra

A competition, of sorts, is afoot between Pope Francis and the Satanic Temple: see my previous posts on both here and here. There are actually two competitions occurring: 1) Pope Francis canonize and the Satanic Temple want to demonize St. Junipero Serra.

2) Both Pope Francis and the Satanic Temple are vying for who can perform the most un-, non- and anti-biblical action.

Junipero Serra (1713-1784 AD) was a Spanish Franciscan monk who established California’s first Catholic missions. He is controversial due to, for example, that which Tongva tribal council member Mark Acuña referred to as being “a slave society” with specific reference to the San Gabriel Mission.
Historian Sherburne F. Cook wrote that “Despite innumerable lamentations, apologies, and justifications, there can be no serious denial that the mission system, in its economics, was built upon forced labor” (The Indian versus the Spanish Mission).

In turn, Satanic Temple, Lost (fallen) Angeles chapter, will perform a ceremony so as to demonize Serra. Part of their press release read thusly:

…under the leadership of Junípero Serra, tens of thousands of Native American People were brutally enslaved in missions, forced into a life of hard labor for the sole benefit of the Church. Serra, who had a serious penchant for self-flagellation, also led The Spanish Inquisition in his territories, trying residents of the Missions for the crimes of sorcery, witchcraft and devil worship.

Let us pause here to consider that which the Satanic Temple left out and that which the media is not asking of them. We live in such an intellectually undeveloped era that personages are used to jumping directly to their conclusions and they seem to forget to wrap an argument around them. For example, The Satanic Temple condemned Junipero Serra for 1) “brutally enslaved,” 2) “forced into a life of hard labor,” 3) “for the sole benefit of the Church,” 4) “The Spanish Inquisition,” and 5) “trying residents of the Missions for the crimes of sorcery, witchcraft and devil worship.” Yet, upon what premise do they condemn well, anything at all? You see, they jump straight into condemnation, the conclusion, without providing the rest of the argument such as: 1. Something, something. 2. Something, something.

3. Therefore, 1-5 above were wrong, bad, evil, immoral, unethical, and Junipero Serra was a bad man.

pope20francis20satanic20temple20junipero20serra-4333149

The Satanic Temple’s mission is “to encourage benevolence and empathy among all people, reject tyrannical authority, advocate practical common sense and justice, and be directed by the human conscience to undertake noble pursuits guided by the individual will.”
But yet again, why 1) encourage benevolence, 2) empathy3) reject tyrannical authority, 4) advocate practical common sense, 5) justice, 6) directed by the human conscience, 7) undertake noble pursuits, 8) guided by the individual will? The point is not whether this carefully crafted PR based mission statement is true, good, etc. but upon what premise do they seeking to accomplish such things and why? These things are left unstated and they therefore, make the mission statement as meaningless as their condemnations.

Satanists range from Atheists, to pseudo-Atheists to theists. Atheists Satanists view God as a figment of the imagination and claim that Satan is merely a symbolic archetypical figure representing human nature, etc.
Pseudo-Atheist Satanists claim to be Atheists but are not as they feel free to lie without guilt, shame or recourse. For example, Church of Satan founder Anton LaVey is claimed to have been an Atheist Satanist and yet, when his girlfriend the actress Jayne Mansfield’s son was mauled by a lion, Anton gathered up his supposedly Atheist Satanists and conjured Satan for healing, referring to him by the personal (personhood) term brother Satan (see Miranda Barbour: is she a satanist and are her murders satanic crimes?). In fact, according to Anton LaVey murder, human sacrifice, is a-okay for Satanists, see “On the Choice of a Human Sacrifice” – Anton LaVey’s Satanic Bible. Also, Aleister Crowley gave specific instructions on how to choose a victim for child sacrifice specifically in Magick in Theory and Practice chap XII, “ Of The Bloody Sacrifice: And Matters Cognate” wherein he wrote, “For the highest spiritual working one must accordingly choose that victim which contains the greatest and purest force. A male child of perfect innocence and high intelligence is the most satisfactory and suitable victim.” A commentary commonly printed along with the text states “It appears from the Magical Records of Frater Perdurabo” one of Crowley’s magickal names, “that He made this particular sacrifice on an average about 150 times every year between 1912 e.v. and 1928 e.v.” with e.v. referring to the year of the vulgar which is how magickians, by any other name, view non magickians. This has lead Crowley apologists to come to his rescue and claim that he did not say what he means and did not mean what he said. For example, “It is the sacrifice of oneself spiritually. And the intelligence and innocence of that male child are the perfect understanding of the Magician, his one aim, without lust of result. And male he must be, because what he sacrifices is not the material blood, but his creative power” and “When Crowley speaks of sacrificing a male child, his diaries and other writings indicate that he thereby obfuscates the actual practice. Crowley did this by diversion of the act of sexual intercourse and other sexual actions. He considered contraception as human sacrifice. There is no indication in any of his writings that he ever performed infanticide.”

Well, this is all quite quaint and yet, for example, how does contraception factor into the fact that Crowley refers to the choosing a victim who is of “high intelligence”—do fertilized eggs possess the ability for intelligence? No and neither do, apparently, Crowley apologists.

In any case, it is clear that the Satanic Temple’s actions are yet another public stunt which is bringing that which has long been hidden, literally occult, into the open as the Satanic Temple is applauded for their activism in favor of Natives. Ironically, another portion of the press release noted:

The Pope’s canonization of Serra underscores the hypocrisy of his “liberal” PR campaign in America, an attempt to sway public perception of an organization that still condemns same sex marriage, refuses women the right to govern their own bodies and [has] done little to address the horrific crime of child abuse running rampant in its ranks.

Ironic because the Satanic Temple is seeing Pope Francis’ PR campaign and raising him one of their own—but then again, what is hypocrisy to Satanists but an opportunity?

Lastly, why claim that both Pope Francis and the Satanic Temple are vying for who can perform the most un-, non- and anti-biblical action? Because biblically there is no such thing as a special class of most holy people who are “saints.” Rather, all, every, each and every Christian is referred to as a saint. This also does not mean that they are most holy people as in special but that they have been sanctified and are saintly based on Jesus’ act of redemption.
For details, see Catholic vs. Bible on saints, intercession and mediation.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help. Here is my donate/paypal page.

Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Facebook page and/or on my Google+ page. You can also use the “Share / Save” button below this post.


Posted

in

by

Tags: