Sławomir N. Gworzycki: "THE DECLARATION OF THE SIXTH", HAVE REPEATED THE SECRET CASTLE IN THE TIME OF president CAMPAN. Part II: Bibliology and liturgy.
Let us follow the “a fewer basic spiritual and historical facts” in the wake of "Declaration of 16".
Point 1 of the “Declaration” of the fact that “Christ the Lord celebrated the festival of Hanukkah”, contrary to the assurances of “sixteen” there is no clear Scriptural confirmation. Nevertheless, for apparent reasons, he celebrated how the full community, among which His earthly life passed, various festivals of Biblical Judaism at the time, so there is no reason to spread specified content in this polemic and to evoke it, whether in the context of the "polsko-symical dispute over Khanuka" or in the context of the beginning of another presidential run in Poland (!).
The Signatories of the Declaration of sixteen omit this "basic spiritual and historical fact" that the followers of Christ the Lord were in the mediate of the first century by the Council of Jerusalem irrevocably (!) exempt from the celebration of the rites of Biblical Judaism, to celebrate the rites of earthly life and of the Divine Message of Christ. Thus, both rites belong to the 2 totally unconnected collections, without the smallest common part!
besides this late (!) invented (!) due to the fact that only in the beginning of the 21st century and imposed (!) on us Catholics the worship of this unfortunate household of St.
There were any voices on the net a year ago that, here Jews belonging to another sects of Judaism were not at all advised, first – to bring this Khanuk from the privacy of the house, and second – to introduce it to specified public places as the Sejm. In another words – that these another Jews were ill-seen by the closeness of ceremonial Jews to Catholicism, so searching for even the thinnest "common threads" in the December "sacrifice of light", "Jewish and Christian" (as next). And they were right! Here, by the theological definition, it was functional, it is and will be the rule: “Get out of yourself, and we will get out.”
In point 2 of the Declaration, its signatories usage the concept of the “holiness of light”, which we believe is unknown to Catholics. That is what is said to be the universal syncretic “holy of light” during the longest nights of the year, which Jews celebrate in their own way, and the variant for Catholics is “mostly the feast of the Blessed Gromnic Mother” – so we realize the first conviction of paragraph 2 “Declaration of sixteen”.
No offense, but following the lead that these "sixteen" submits to us, there is no request for today's confused people of any superior (!) pagan-Roman "Sol invictus" (Invincible Sun), just a "holy light" celebrated by devout, yet unbaptized Romans, besides syncretic, with elements of pagan east cults. Here we note that the "sixteen" in many places of the text of its shortly "Declaration" emphasizes that it is they who defend Catholicism against "an insult to Catholicism" (!), and the Homeland-Poland before "a disfigurement" of its "image" (!), and the "public" life before its "destroyation".
Is it not adequate that the rites taken from a abroad country are from a abroad civilization and from a abroad religion, performed for many years in the very heights of how “sixteen” he writes, about the “Christian character” of the Polish State, due to the fact that in the Seym and in the Presidential Palace, and secretly, in secret, from the Polish public opinion (especially those in the Sejm) favour and service to defend the dignity of Catholicism, to make Poland more beautiful (the other of the “disfigurement”) and to organize its public life carefully? Those who hesitated to answer these questions again, we say, no! They do not favour it or service it!
Poland of our times in many respects, including in the symbolic (intimately and religiously discussed here, after all) has been reduced to the level of natural dirt on which they will disagree as they wish, not only in the opinion of the Polish "local population", but even as if this population – today's Polish Nation – was simply absent in Poland! But since Poles themselves co-organise this activity with strangers, and their prominent and media recognized representatives of this activity publically defend...
The “Christmas of Light”—as he wants to call it—is in the eternal calendar of the Holy Apostolic Catholic Church (sic!). We go to Holy Mass with the candles-mongers on the mentioned feast of Our woman of Gromnic (the Lord's Feast in the Temple – 2 February), but besides on the large Saturday, erstwhile it is celebrated, and yes, but not the "liturgy of light", but – we read from the conventional Mass of Rome (not strangely "sixteen") – the sacred rites of "the consecration of the fresh Light and the announcement of the Resurrection", "the consecration of the fresh Fire", "the consecration of the Passover", combined with the singing of the Easter Message, erstwhile the central object is "Lumen Christi", in Polish "Light of Christ", loudly called by the priest. That's it.
But it all happens in another months, not in winter at the turn of the year. Yes, then, i.e. in the four-week Advent all day (!) before dawn, Holy Mass is celebrated. The roratnia, to which these dark inactive December nights come, and whose way is not bare candles, but ingenious work with lanterns, in which these candles are entangled, or with average hounds, but with surviving fire. A lot to talk about, but it's not here.
The "sixteen" mentioned in the "purity of the consecration of the Temple by the Jews" was not and is not in the Catholic calendar, so recalling it in the context of Catholicism is unfounded. That's it! We remind you: 2 separate rites, so no common part.
In view of those "sixteen", including those widely known, we simply do NOT want to believe that the following conviction is included in their "Declarations" (point 2). But it is there!!!:
"The Church always believed that the Jews, practicing their religion, remained witnesses of the fact of Christianity, the fact of the Messianic Promises which Christ fulfilled, and the Acts of the past of Salvation which preceded the birth of the Lord."
After all... they are not Jews, but they are Christians who “become witnesses of the fact of Christianity.” And only Christians! Nobody else! Do we not have any clarity as to whether the "sixteen" writes about the Old Testament Israel or about the Judaism of our modern rabbinic? For they were, indeed, "before Christians." Not enough:
The Greek word “martires” means as much as witnesses. But in the Christian languages of the European nations these "martires" are identified with martyrs. Oh, yeah. This word means people who are martyred of the Holy religion of Christ. Do the “sixteen” among them undoubtedly many polyglots, along with the prominent experts of the Holy Catholic Theology among them, do not know about these facts? Did they not know that among these martyr witnesses by definition there is no rabbinic Judaism and possibly no rabbinic Judaism?
Let the "sixteen" effort to convince us of their claims – delight – citing the classical texts of Revelation and Tradition in this thematic area. Which of the Holy Fathers and Doctors of the Church wrote about the Jews as they wanted to?
Furthermore, in the context of the insistence of the Khanukov ceremony held in the Polish Sejm all year, non-Christian, including the 1 of December 2024, so “first after fire extinguishers”, the summoning of Catholics and Poles “respect” to these practices, “witnesses for the fact of Christianity”, “the truthfulness of the Messianic promises”, their “fulfillment” by our Lord Jesus Christ, and in general “acts of the past of salvation” is... Everyone knows what he is, and we here calling the thing bluntly and by name we will no longer “come out in front of the ranks.”
We ask these "sixteen," why do they mix Biblical Judaism before the Lord Jesus' day with rabbinic Talmudic Judaism, whose followers reject Jesus?
Let the signatories of the Declaration of the Sixteenth say in its point 3. Who, in their opinion, "insulted Catholicism"; and let them not usage an impersonal statement, referring to the content for the general unknown or not remembered, for originating just a year ago and then only available (and until) on the Internet. He's insulting! Ah, insults! Rape! But who? When? IN WHAT CONTEXT? So: Does he truly insult you? And that's Catholicism. In a dispute about the rule – and with specified here we have a real surprise to deal with – the rejection of something for 1 side of the dispute is simply a disgrace and an insult, and for the another side a honour. Isn't it?
individual data of the author/authors of these alleged "insults" Private P.T. The reader in the text “Declaration 16” does not recognize, although this is not just a matter, but an allegation from the heaviest ones.
It is impossible for the signatories to the Declaration of the Sixteenth not to know this – they indirectly give us a message in their text that they evidently know – that even within Christendom any another texts of the Holy Scriptures were interposed differently and others did not know otherwise; which was the reason for calling 21. The Councils of the Universal and many Synods and another congregations called to item the contents of the Holy Doctrine.
Let's just talk about interpretative Christian-Jewish differences! And here we have, in paragraph 3 of the Declaration of Sixteen, this subtle example of specified discrepancies. To put it briefly – due to the fact that this article does not claim the ambition of a theological paper – that "someone-not-know-who", or this 1 (or possibly it was a female or a child?; in the Declaration it is not explained to us), which allegedly committed "the insults of Catholicism", was called many months ago simply... The judaistic explanation of events known from the books of Machabeans, just in the context of the celebrations of the Khanuki and another inactive judaistic holidays, celebrated besides on the basis of records from another Sacred Books of the Old Testament. That's it!
The Catholic explanation of THIS TEXT (and there are besides translational differences!) is different, but as far as we remember it, it is not "the-some-not-know-who" who quoted it. And in general, as the Declaration rightly states, “The books of the Machabeans... in the judaic and Protestant canon are not there” and Catholics are (!). So for Catholics, they are, to say, holier; if we realize these theological complexity well.
In Warsaw, a celebrated Grochowska conflict took place in mention to those historical events, a beautiful quote about the highest soldier sacrifice made in defence of the Homeland, coming from the Machabean Books, was made in mention to those historical events. Yeah, yeah. And we know that. And we know that.
Returning to the questionable basis on which the signatories of the Declaration of Sixteen build a point of it, among another things, 3 announcement that they are accusing "no-give-one" that he has committed, in their opinion, "just insults to Catholicism." How? This is through “calling the presence of the Machabean Books in the Catholic and Orthodox canon of Scripture (...) 'celebrating genocide'” (sic!) and by acknowledging for our tradition the "remember of idolaters" (sic!).
Do P.T. Readers realize any of this? Did anyone want to, now, not know why, and on the basis of what power of attorney, throw these Holy Maccabee Books out of the Catholic Old Testament? Because, as the “sixteen” resembles, any of the “their” Old Testament have long since removed them. due to the fact that these books are expected to be... in memory of the idolaters? Mercy! These matters have long been settled by the first General Councils. What else do you want to know?
We've been stopping here besides long. There are most likely any specialized publications, long ago written, in which in 1 column is the text of a given book of the Old Testament, in the second column its Judaism-rabic interpretation, in the 3rd column of its Catholic interpretation. That's it.
C.D.N.
We besides recommend: Young Soros declares to fight the Trump administration
