Water of Affliction & The Bread of Adversity

The phrase “bread of adversity” comes from the Book of Isaiah in the Bible. Specifically, it is found in Isaiah 30:20. This phrase is often interpreted to mean that God allows his people to experience hardship and suffering as a form of discipline or correction, but ultimately, these experiences lead to a deeper understanding and trust in God.

Isaiah 30:20 (NIV)

“Although the Lord gives you the bread of adversity and the water of affliction, your teachers will be hidden no more; with your own eyes you will see them.”

Context and Interpretation

  • Adversity and Affliction: The “bread of adversity” and “water of affliction” are metaphorical expressions referring to the difficult experiences and sufferings that the people of Israel were enduring. These phrases symbolize the basic sustenance provided during times of hardship, indicating that while the people were going through challenging times, they were not abandoned by God.
  • Divine Discipline: The passage suggests that adversity and affliction can serve as forms of divine discipline. Through these trials, people are often brought back to a closer relationship with God, recognizing their dependence on Him and learning valuable spiritual lessons.
  • Promise of Guidance: Despite the adversity, the verse promises that guidance will be restored. The reference to “your teachers” being “hidden no more” implies that the people will once again receive clear instruction and guidance, likely referring to prophetic guidance or understanding of God’s will.
  • Hope and Restoration: The broader context of Isaiah 30 includes a message of hope and restoration. While the people may face trials, God promises eventual deliverance and a return to prosperity and guidance.

Application

This verse is often used to remind believers that hardships and challenges are a part of life, but they are not without purpose. They can serve as opportunities for growth, correction, and a deeper reliance on God. The phrase encourages believers to maintain faith and trust in God’s plan, even in difficult times, with the assurance that guidance and clarity will eventually be provided.

Glyphosate is a widely used herbicide, most commonly known as the active ingredient in Roundup, a popular weed killer. It is used in agriculture to control weeds and is applied to many crops, including those used to make bread, such as wheat. Concerns about glyphosate in bread or other food products typically center around the potential health risks of glyphosate residues.

Key Points About Glyphosate in Bread

  1. Use in Agriculture: Glyphosate is often used as a pre-harvest desiccant to dry crops, making them easier to harvest. It is applied to crops like wheat, oats, and barley, which can be ingredients in bread and other baked goods.
  2. Residue Concerns: There is ongoing debate and research regarding the presence of glyphosate residues in food products. Some studies and reports have detected trace amounts of glyphosate in bread and other foods made from crops treated with glyphosate.
  3. Health Implications: The safety of glyphosate has been a contentious issue. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), part of the World Health Organization (WHO), classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans” in 2015. However, other organizations, such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), have concluded that glyphosate is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk to humans when used according to label directions.
  4. Regulation and Safety Limits: Regulatory bodies in various countries set maximum residue limits (MRLs) for glyphosate in food products, including bread. These limits are designed to ensure that the levels present in food are safe for consumption. Compliance with these limits is monitored to protect public health.
  5. Consumer Choices: For consumers concerned about glyphosate residues, options include choosing organic bread, as organic farming standards typically prohibit the use of synthetic herbicides like glyphosate. Additionally, some brands may advertise products as being free from glyphosate residues, though such claims are subject to regulatory scrutiny.

Conclusion

The presence of glyphosate in bread and other food products is a topic of public interest and concern, particularly regarding potential health effects. While regulatory agencies generally consider the levels of glyphosate found in food to be safe, some consumers and advocacy groups continue to push for further research and stricter regulation. For those looking to minimize exposure, selecting organic or certified glyphosate-free products is an available option.

Water treatment often involves the addition of various chemicals to ensure safety and cleanliness. Two common additives are fluoride and chlorine. Here’s a brief overview of their uses and potential concerns:

Fluoride

Purpose:
Fluoride is added to public water supplies to prevent tooth decay. This practice, known as water fluoridation, has been endorsed by numerous health organizations, including the World Health Organization (WHO) and the American Dental Association (ADA). Fluoride helps to remineralize tooth enamel, making it more resistant to decay.

Safety and Regulation:
Fluoride levels in drinking water are regulated to ensure they are safe for consumption. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sets the maximum contaminant level for fluoride in drinking water, while the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recommends an optimal level to balance the benefits of preventing tooth decay with the risk of dental fluorosis, a condition caused by excessive fluoride intake during tooth development that can cause mild discoloration.

Controversies and Concerns:
Some people oppose water fluoridation, citing concerns about potential health risks, such as skeletal fluorosis (a bone disease caused by excessive fluoride intake) or other health issues. However, at regulated levels, scientific consensus generally supports the safety and efficacy of fluoridation in preventing tooth decay.

Chlorine

Purpose:
Chlorine is used as a disinfectant in water treatment processes. Its primary function is to kill harmful microorganisms, including bacteria and viruses, to make water safe for drinking. Chlorine can also control the growth of biofilm and prevent the spread of waterborne diseases.

Safety and Regulation:
Chlorine levels in drinking water are regulated to minimize the risk of harmful effects. The EPA sets maximum allowable levels for chlorine in drinking water to protect public health. Chlorination has been a critical factor in reducing the incidence of waterborne diseases.

Concerns and Alternatives:
While chlorination is effective, it can lead to the formation of disinfection byproducts (DBPs), such as trihalomethanes (THMs) and haloacetic acids (HAAs), which are formed when chlorine reacts with organic matter in the water. Long-term exposure to high levels of these byproducts may pose health risks, including an increased risk of cancer. As a result, water treatment facilities aim to minimize DBP levels and may use alternative disinfection methods, such as chloramine (a combination of chlorine and ammonia), ozone, or ultraviolet (UV) light.

Conclusion

Both fluoride and chlorine are commonly used in water treatment to promote public health—fluoride for dental health and chlorine for disinfection. While there are concerns about their use, regulatory agencies set safety standards to ensure that the levels present in drinking water are safe for consumption. Public water systems are regularly monitored to comply with these standards, ensuring the safety and quality of the water supply.

What do you think of this post?
  • Awesome (0)
  • Interesting (0)
  • Useful (0)
  • Boring (0)
  • Sucks (0)

Muslim Demographics

In the Roman Catholic Church, priests are generally required to remain celibate, which means they are not permitted to marry. This practice is a long-standing tradition in the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church and is based on the belief that celibacy allows priests to fully dedicate themselves to their spiritual duties and the service of the Church. Here are some key points about the Catholic Church’s stance on priestly celibacy and marriage:

Latin Rite vs. Eastern Rites

  • Latin Rite: In the Roman Catholic Church’s Latin Rite, which includes the majority of Catholics worldwide, celibacy is a mandatory discipline for priests. Once ordained, priests in this tradition are expected to remain celibate and unmarried.
  • Eastern Catholic Churches: In the Eastern Catholic Churches, which are in full communion with the Pope but have different liturgical and administrative traditions, there are different rules regarding celibacy. In these rites, married men can be ordained as priests, but once ordained, they cannot marry. Bishops in these churches, however, are typically chosen from among the celibate clergy.

Historical Context and Theological Basis

  • Early Church: In the early centuries of Christianity, there was no uniform rule regarding clerical celibacy. Some priests and bishops were married, while others chose to remain celibate.
  • Developments: Over time, the Latin Church increasingly emphasized celibacy. The discipline became more firmly established, especially after the First and Second Lateran Councils in the 12th century, which explicitly forbade clerical marriage.
  • Theological Rationale: The theological basis for celibacy includes the belief that it allows priests to devote themselves more fully to the service of God and the Church. It is also seen as a way to imitate the celibate life of Jesus Christ.

Exceptions and Considerations

  • Permanent Deacons: In the Latin Rite, married men may be ordained as permanent deacons. These deacons can perform many ministerial functions but are not permitted to celebrate Mass.
  • Dispensation and Conversion: In some cases, married men who have converted from other Christian denominations where clerical marriage is allowed (such as Anglicanism or Lutheranism) may be granted a dispensation to become Catholic priests while remaining married. This is relatively rare and requires special permission from the Pope.

Ongoing Discussion

  • The discipline of priestly celibacy is a subject of ongoing discussion within the Church. Some advocate for the option of allowing priests to marry, citing a shortage of clergy and the potential benefits of a married priesthood. However, any change in this discipline would require significant theological and ecclesiastical consideration and approval from the Church’s highest authorities.

CONCLUSION

When it comes to European demographic collapse, our priests should lead by example and have a big family.

What do you think of this post?
  • Awesome (0)
  • Interesting (0)
  • Useful (0)
  • Boring (0)
  • Sucks (0)

Catholic Encyclopedia: Illuminati

The name assumed by the members of a secret society founded
by Adam Weishaupt in 1776

Illuminati, the name assumed by the members of a secret society founded by Adam Weishaupt in 1776.

HISTORY.—Weishaupt was born of Westphalian parents at Ingolstadt (Bavaria), on February 6, 1748, and lost his father in 1753. Although educated at a Jesuit school, he fell early under the influence of his free-thinking godfather, the director of the highschool of Ickstatt, to whom he owed his appointment as professor of civil law at the University of Ingolstadt in 1772. He was the first layman to occupy the chair of canon law at this university (1773), but, in consequence of the growing rationalistic influence which he exerted over the students both in his academic capacity and in his personal intercourse with them, he came into ever sharper collision with the loyal adherents of the Church and with those who were influential in government circles. As, furthermore, his obstinate nature led him to quarrel with almost everyone with whom his intercourse was at all prolonged, he felt the need of a powerful secret organization to support him in the conflict with his adversaries and in the execution of his rationalistic schemes along ecclesiastical and political lines. At first (1774) he aimed at an arrangement with the Freemasons. Closer inquiry, however, destroyed his high estimate of this organization, and he resolved to found a new society which, surrounded with the greatest possible secrecy, would enable him most effectually to realize his aims and could at all times be precisely adapted to the needs of the age and local conditions.

His order was to be based entirely on human nature and observation; hence its degrees, ceremonies, and statutes were to be developed only gradually; then, in the light of experience and wider knowledge, and with the cooperation of all the members, they were to be steadily improved. For his prototype he relied mainly on Freemasonry, in accordance with which he modeled the degrees and ceremonial of his order. After the pattern of the Society of Jesus, though distorting to the point of caricature its essential features, he built up the strictly hierarchical organization of his society. “To utilize for good purposes the very means which that order employed for evil ends”, such was, according to Philo (Endl. Erkl., 60 sq.), “his pet design”. For the realization of his plans, he regarded as essential the “despotism of superiors” and the “blind, unconditional obedience of subordinates” (ibid.), along with the utmost secrecy and mysteriousness. At the beginning of 1777 he entered a Masonic Lodge and endeavored, with other members of the order, to render Freemasonry as subservient as possible to his aims. As Weishaupt, however, despite all his activity as an agitator and the theoretic shrewdness he displayed, was at bottom only an unpractical bookworm, without the necessary experience of the world, his order for a long time made no headway. The accession to it, in 1780, of the Masonic agent Freiherr von Knigge (Philo), a man of wide experience and well known everywhere in Masonic circles, gave matters a decisive turn. In company with Weishaupt, who, as a philosopher and jurist, evolved the ideas and main lines of the constitution, Knigge began to elaborate rapidly the necessary degrees and statutes (until 1780 the Minerval degree was the only one in use), and at the same time worked vigorously to extend the order, for which within two years he secured 500 members. When the great international convention of Freemasons was held at Wilhelmsbad (July 16 to August 29, 1782) the “Illuminated Freemasonry”, which Knigge and Weishaupt now proclaimed to be the only “pure” Freemasonry, had already gained such a reputation that almost all the members of the convention clamored for admission into the new institution. Particularly valuable for the order was the accession of Bode (Amelius), who commanded the highest respect in all Masonic circles. Assisted by Bode, Knigge labored diligently to convert the whole Masonic body into “Illuminated Freemasons”. A number of the most prominent representatives of Freemasonry and “enlightenment” became Illuminati, including, in 1783, Duke Ferdinand of Brunswick, the foremost leader of European Freemasonry and the princely representative of the illuminism of his age. Other famous members were Goethe, Herder, and Nicolai. The order was also propagated in SwedenRussiaPolandDenmarkHungary, Austria, and France. But in 1783 dissensions arose between Knigge and Weishaupt, which resulted in the final withdrawal of the former on July 1, 1784. Knigge could no longer endure Weishaupt’s pedantic domineering, which frequently assumed offensive forms. He accused Weishaupt of “Jesuitism”, and suspected him of being “a Jesuit in disguise” (Nachtr., I, 129). “And was I”, he adds, “to labor under his banner for mankind, to lead men under the yoke of so stiff-necked a fellow?—Never!”

Moreover, in 1783 the anarchistic tendencies of the order provoked public denunciations which led, in 1784, to interference on the part of the Bavarian Government. As the activity of the Illuminati still continued, four successive enactments were issued against them (June 22, 1784; March 2, and August 16, 1785; and August 16, 1787), in the last of which recruiting for the order was forbidden under penalty of death. These measures put an end to the corporate existence of the order in Bavaria, and, as a result of the publication, in 1786, of its degrees and of other documents concerning it—for the most part of a rather compromising nature—its further extension outside Bavaria became impossible. The spread of the spirit of the Illuminati, which coincided substantially with the general teachings of the “enlightenment”, especially that of France, was rather accelerated than retarded by the persecution in Bavaria. In two letters addressed to the Bishop of Freising (June 18 and November 12, 1785) Pius VI had also condemned the order. As early as February 16, 1785, Weishaupt had fled from Ingolstadt, and in 1787 he settled at Gotha. His numerous apologetic writings failed to exonerate either the order or himself. Being now the head of a numerous family, his views on religious and political matters grew more sober. After 1787 he renounced all active connection with secret societies, and again drew near to the Church, displaying remarkable zeal in the building of the Catholic church at Gotha. He died on November 18, 1830,” reconciled with the Catholic Church, which, as a youthful professor, he had doomed to death and destruction “—as the chronicle of the Catholic parish in Gotha relates.

OBJECTS AND ORGANIZATION.—As exhibiting the objects and methods of the order, those documents are authoritative which are given in the first and second sections of works in the bibliography. The subsequent modifications of the system, announced by Weishaupt in his writings after 1785, are irrelevant, since the order had spread far and wide before these modifications were published. The above-named documents reveal as the real object of the Illuminati the elaboration and propagation of a new popular religion and, in the domain of politics, the gradual establishment of a universal democratic republic. In this society of the future everything, according to Weishaupt, was to be regulated by reason. By “enlightenment” men were to be liberated from their silly prejudices, to become “mature” or “moral”, and thus to outgrow the religious and political tutelage of Church and State, of “priest and prince”. Morals was the science which makes man “mature”, and renders him conscious of his dignity, his destiny, and his power. The principal means for effecting the “redemption” of the world was found in unification, and this was to be brought about by “secret schools of wisdom”. These “schools”, he declares, “were always the archives of nature and of the rights of man; through their agency, man will recover from his fall; princes and nations, without violence to force them, will vanish from the earth; the human race will become one family, and the world the habitation of rational beings. Moral science alone will effect these reforms `imperceptibly’; every father will become, like Abraham and the patriarchs, the priest and absolute lord of his household, and reason will be man’s only code of law” (“Nachtr.”, pp. 80 sq.; repeated verbatim in Knigge, “Die neuesten Arbeiten”, p. 38). This redemption of mankind by the restoration of the original “freedom and equality” through “illumination” and universal charity, fraternity, and tolerance, is likewise the true esoteric doctrine of Christ and his Apostles. Those in whom the “illuminating” grace of Christ is operative (cf. Heb., vi, 4) are the “Illuminati”. The object of pure (i.e. illuminated) Freemasonry is none other than the propagation of the “enlightenment” whereby the seed of a new world will be so widely scattered that no efforts at extirpation, however violent, will avail to prevent the harvest (“Nachtr.”, pp. 44, 118; “Die neuesten Arb.”, pp. 11, 70). Weishaupt later declared (Nachtrag zu meaner Rechtfertigung, 77 sqq., 112 sqq.) that Masonry was the school from which “these ideas” emanated.

These objects of the order were to be revealed to members only after their promotion to the “priestly” degree (Nachtr., I, 68). The preliminary degrees were to serve for the selection, preparation, and concealment of the true “Illuminati”; the others were to open the way for the free religion and social organization of the future, in which all distinction of nations, creeds, etc., would disappear. The government of the order was administered by the superiors of the Minerval “churches”, “provincials”, “nationals”, and “areopagites” (who constituted the supreme council), under the direction of Weishaupt as general of the order. Members were acquainted only with their immediate superiors, and only a few trusted members knew that Weishaupt was the founder and supreme head of the order. All the members were obliged to give themselves a training in accordance with the aims of the society, and to make themselves useful, while the order, on its part, pledged itself to further their interests by the most effectual means. They were especially recommended to systematically observe persons and events, to acquire knowledge, and to pursue scientific research in so far as it might serve the purposes of the order. Concerning all persons with whom they had intercourse they were to gather information, and on all matters which could possibly affect either themselves or the order they were to hand in sealed reports; these were opened by superiors unknown to the writers, and were, in substance, referred to the general. The purpose of this and other regulations was to enable the order to attain its object by securing for it a controlling influence in all directions, and especially by pressing culture and enlightenment into its service. All illuministic and official organs, the press, schools, seminaries, cathedral chapters (hence, too, all appointments to sees, pulpits, and chairs) were to be brought as far as possible under the influence of the organization, and princes themselves were to be surrounded by a legion of enlightened men, in order not only to disarm their opposition, but also to compel their energetic cooperation. A complete transformation would thus be effected; public opinion would be controlled; “priests and princes” would find their hands tied; the marplots who ventured to interfere would repent their temerity; and the order would become an object of dread to all its enemies.

Concerning the influence actually exerted by the Illuminati, the statements of ex-Freemasons—L. A. Hossman, J. A. Starck, J. Robinson, the Abbe Barruel, etc.—must be accepted with reserve, when they ascribe to the order a leading role in the outbreak and progress of the French Revolution of 1789. Their presentation of facts is often erroneous, their inferences are untenable, and their theses not only lack proof, but, in view of our present knowledge of the French Revolution (cf., e.g., Aulard, “Hist. poi. de la Rev. Franc.”, 3rd ed., 1905; Lavisse-Rambaud, “Hist. generale”, VIII, 1896), they are extremely improbable. On the other hand, once it had discarded, after 1786, the peculiarities of Weishaupt, “Illuminationism” was simply the carrying out of the principles of “enlightenment”; in other words, it was Freemasonry and practical Liberalism adapted to the requirements of the age; as such it exerted an important influence on the intellectual and social development of the nineteenth century. (See MasonrySecret Societies.)

HERM. GRUBER

The name assumed by the members of a secret society founded by Adam Weishaupt in 1776

What do you think of this post?
  • Awesome (0)
  • Interesting (0)
  • Useful (0)
  • Boring (0)
  • Sucks (0)