You won’t believe what Kanye West revealed about his faith in his upcoming album

47

Kanye West surprised everybody by openly supporting President Donald Trump and the music industry hates him for it.

Now, he’s about to be mercilessly attacked for his religious views.

That’s because West revealed something shocking about his faith in an upcoming album that will make every celebrity in the industry furious with him.

Kanye West has never tried to conceal who he is.

When he publically demonstrated his support for President Trump, he received tremendous backlash from the music industry, the media, and even his fans.

But he stayed true to himself.

Now, he’s preparing to be attacked for his in faith in Jesus Christ.

Kim Kardashian, Kanye West’s wife, posted a photo of Kanye West’s new album called, “Jesus Is King”.

The rapper is releasing a Gospel album that will drive the Left nuts.

Breitbart reports:

Kanye West’s TV and fashion mogul wife Kim Kardashian West took to social media this week and shared some news about her Grammy-winning husband’s next album, purportedly titled “Jesus Is King.”

Kardashian’s tweet to her 61 million followers was captioned by a prayer hand emoji and included a photo of what looks like a tracklist filled with Christian-themed song titles. Kanye West fans might expect to hear the super-producer pour his heart out on songs like “Sunday,” “Sweet Jesus,” “God Is,” “Baptized,” and “Through the Valley.” The photo also shows a Bible opened to Psalm 57:6.

Kanye West has never been shy about his faith in Jesus Christ and has spent the better part of the last year treating the world and his fans to his quasi-religious “Sunday Service” ceremonies, which feature hours of gospel songs sung by a choir — from the grassy outside stage at the Coachella Music Festival to the inside of an auditorium where members of the California Worship Center gather.

Naturally, many fans were surprised that Kanye West would dare to create a Christian rap album.

But West has never hidden the fact that he is a Christian.

The media likes to ignore West’s faith, but that hasn’t stopped him.

Recently, West held a Sunday service in Ohio to honor the victims of a mass shooting.

What do you think will happen when Kanye West releases the album?

Will the media attempt to destroy him?

Let us know your thoughts in the comments section below.

47 COMMENTS

  1. Chanting the names of God is a universal religious practice.

    Dr. Harvey Cox, a liberal Protestant theologian at the Harvard Divinity School, observes:

    “Almost every religion I know of has formulae, prayers, chants or hymns, in which the repetition of sound, is used for a devotional purpose… But I think that these criticisms of chanting or repetition of prayers as somehow mentally destructive are frankly some of the most uninformed and ignorant of the criticisms I’ve come across.

    “These sorts of criticisms cannot possibly by made by people who know anything about the history of religions, unless they want to come right out and say that they’re against all religion, or all devotional practices, all prayer — which I think many of them are. At least they ought to be honest and not conceal their personal bias under allegedly scientific language.”

    Every genuine religious tradition in the world teaches that God’s names are holy and meant to be glorified. The Bible contains numerous references to glorifying God and His holy name. (Exodus 15:3; Deuteronomy 32:2-3; I Chronicles 16:8-36; Psalms 29:2, 47:1, 86:11, 91:14, 96:1-3, 97:12, 98:4-6, 113:3, 116:1-17, 146:1, 148:1-5, 13)

    The Lord and His name are praised throughout the Psalms. “I will praise the name of God with a song,” says King David. (Psalm 69:30) In other places we read: “All nations whom Thou hast made shall come and worship before Thee, O Lord: and shall glorify Thy name.” (Psalm 86:9)

    “O give thanks unto the Lord; call upon His name; make known His deeds among the people. Sing unto Him, sing psalms unto Him: talk ye of all His wondrous works. Glory ye in His holy name.”

    (Psalm 105:1-4)

    “…Praise Him with the timbrel and the dance; praise Him upon the loud cymbals.”

    (Psalm 150:4-5)

    Israel Baal Shem Tov (1699-1761), the great Jewish mystic, founded Hasidism, a popular pietist movement within Judaism, in which members dance and chant in glorification of God. The Hasidism were especially influenced by verses in Psalms calling for the joyful worship of the Lord through song. (Psalms 100:1,2, 104:33)

    According to The Jewish Almanac: “In the Jewish tradition the name actually partakes of the essence of God. Thus, knowledge of the name is a vehicle to God, a conveyor of divine energy, an interface between the Infinite and the finite… It is curious that a tradition that places such a strong emphasis on the One God possesses such a large number of names for the divine. Each name, however, actually represents a different quality or aspect of God.”

    When teaching his disciples how to pray, Jesus Christ glorified God’s holy name: “Our Father, who art in Heaven, hallowed be Thy name.” (Matthew 6:9) Jesus also approved of his disciples’ singing joyfully in praise of God. (Luke 19:36-40) Of his own name, Jesus said: “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, I am there with them.” (Matthew 18:20)

    The apostle Paul told his gentile followers to speak to one another in psalms and hymns, to sing heartily and make music to the Lord. Ephesians 5:19) He further taught them to instruct and admonish one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. (Colossians 3:16)

    Paul wrote to his gentile congregation in Rome: “For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.” (Romans 10:13) According to the historian Eusebius, there was “one common consent in chanting forth the praises of God,” in the early Christian churches.

    The Gregorian chants, popularized in the sixth century by Pope Gregory and later by works like Handel’s masterpiece the Messiah, with its resounding choruses of “hallelujah” (which means “praised be the name of God” in Hebrew), are still performed and appreciated all over the world.

    In addition to praising the Lord’s name and glories through music, song, and dance, there has also emerged the practice of meditating upon God by chanting upon beads of prayer.

    St. John Chrysostom recommended the “prayerful invocation of the name of God,” which he said should be “uninterrupted.”

    Reverend Norman Moorhouse of the Church of England writes:

    “The rosary is chiefly associated with Roman Catholics, but many members of the Church of England also use it. And there are many Russian orthodox Christians who chant the name of Jesus several hundred or thousand times every day…

    “In the Book of Psalms there are biddings to praise the name of the Lord and to sing…I remember that during the Second World War, I was in Greece for Easter, and it was a wonderful thing to hear all the people chanting and singing ‘Christos anesethe’—Christ is risen.”

    The repetition of the Jesus prayer (“Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me”) became a regular practice among members of the Eastern Church. In The Way of a Pilgrim, a Russian monk describes this form of meditation:

    “The continuous interior prayer of Jesus is a constant, uninterrupted calling upon the divine name of Jesus with the lips, in the spirit, in the heart… One who accustoms himself to this appeal experiences… so deep a consolation and so great a need to offer the prayer always, that he can no longer live without it.”

    “Perhaps you’ve heard about Hesychasm, a technique of mantra meditation that was employed by Christians as far back as the third century after Christ,” says the Reverend Alvin Hart, an Episcopal priest in New York. “The method was the simple chanting of ‘the Jesus prayer,’ which runs like this: ‘Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy upon me.’ I personally have found great comfort in this mantra.”

    According to Reverend Hart, “Although it was recently popularized by the New Age movement…’the Jesus Prayer’ has a long and venerable tradition in the Philokalia, an important book on Christian mysticism. The word Philokalia literally means ‘the love of spiritual beauty,’ and I can say that the book definitely brings its readers to that level of appreciation…

    “The Philokalia also emphasizes the importance of accepting a spiritual master. The Greek words used are starets and geront, but they basically mean the same thing. The result of chanting under a proper master is theosis, or the ‘respiritualization of the personality.’”

    Reverend Hart says, “When we call on God — and we should learn how to do this at every moment, even in the midst of our day-to-day work — we should be conscious of Him, and then our prayer will have deeper effects, deeper meaning. This, I know, is the basic idea of Krishna Consciousness. In the Christian tradition, too, we are told to ALWAYS pray ceaselessly. This is a biblical command. (I Thessalonians 5:17)

    “In a sense, this could also be considered the heart of the Christian process as well. For instance, in the Latin Mass, before the Gospel is read, there is a prayer spoken by the priest: dominus sit in corde meo et in labiis meis, which means, ‘May the Lord be in my heart and on my lips.’ What better way is there to have God on one’s lips than by chanting the holy name? Therefore, the Psalms tell us that from ‘the rising of the sun to its setting’ the Lord’s name is to be praised. And Paul echoes this idea by telling us that ‘whoever calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved.’ (Romans 10:13)”

    Dr. Klaus Klostermaier notes that meditation and prayer are “important in the Christian tradition, at least for certain sects and monastic orders… In the Philokalia and in the path recommended by The Pilgrim, you find the…’Jesus Prayer,’ which may be unknown to most Christians today, but was very powerful in its time.

    “So people are aware of the potency of ‘the name’ and the importance of focusing on it as a mantra… But it must be done with devotion… The idea of logos, or ‘the Word,’ has elaborate theological meaning that is intimately tied to the nature of Jesus and, indeed, to the nature of God.”

    “All the basic principles of bhakti yoga are richly exemplified in Christianity,” writes Dr. Houston Smith in The Religions of Man. Dr. Smith is a Professor of Philosophy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. His 1958 book is used as a standard text in major universities. Dr. Smith explains the fundamental principle of bhakti or devotion:

    “All we have to do in this yoga is to love God dearly — not just say we love Him but love Him in fact, love Him only (loving other things because of Him), and love Him for no ulterior reason (even from the desire for liberation) but for love’s sake alone…

    “…every strengthening of our affections toward God will weaken the world’s grip. The saint may, indeed will, love the world far more than the addict, but he will love it in a very different way, seeing in it the reflected glory of the God he adores.

    “How is this love of God to be developed?” asks Dr. Smith. “Japa is the practice of repeating the names of God. It finds a close Christian parallel in one of the classics of Russian Orthodoxy, The Way of a Pilgrim. This book is the story of an unnamed peasant whose first concern is to fulfill the biblical injunction to ‘Pray without ceasing.’

    “He wanders through Russia and Siberia with a knapsack of dried bread for food and the charity of men for shelter, consulting many authorities only to come away empty-hearted until… he meets a holy man who teaches him ‘a constant, uninterrupted calling upon the divine Name of Jesus with the lips, in the spirit, in the heart… at all times, in all places, even during sleep.’

    “The peasant’s teacher trains him until he can repeat the name of Jesus more than 12,000 times a day without strain. ‘This frequent service of the lips imperceptibly becomes a genuine appeal of the heart.’ The prayer becomes a constant warming presence within him… a ‘bubbling joy.’ ‘Keep the name of the Lord spinning in the midst of all your activities’ is the Hindu statement of the same point.”

    In Islam, the names of God are held sacred and meditated upon. According to tradition, there are ninety-nine names of Allah, found inscribed upon monuments such as the Taj Mahal and on the walls of mosques. These names are chanted on an Islamic rosary, which consists of three sets of thirty-three beads.

    The Sanskrit literatures of ancient India are diverse and cover a vast body of knowledge. The one hundred eight principle Upanishads tend to focus primarily on spiritual wisdom, while the eighteen Puranas contain historical narrations from the distant past, when humans were pious, civilizations were more enlightened and the miraculous was ordinary. The Kali-santarana Upanishad emphasizes chanting:

    “Hare Krishna, Hare Krishna
    Krishna Krishna, Hare Hare
    Hare Rama, Hare Rama
    Rama Rama, Hare Hare”

    to counteract the ill effects of this present age of spiritual darkness, while the Brihan-naradiya Purana emphatically states thrice that there is no alternative for spiritual deliverance in this age other than chanting God’s holy names. Traditionally, the Lord is glorified congregationally, with drums, cymbals and dance, or He may be praised individually, in silent prayer, upon rosary beads.

    Dr. Guy Beck’s PhD thesis, Sonic Theology: Hinduism and the Soteriological Function of Sacred Sound examines the doctrine that the Word or divine sound can have a “salvific” effect. Examining the Vaishnava (worshippers of Lord Vishnu, or Krishna) practice of chanting God’s names upon beads of prayer, he observes: “…a work from the sixth century AD, entitled the Jayakhya-Samhita, contains… many early references to the practice of japa or silent prayer.

    “It says that there are three considerations in doing japa repetitions — employing the rosary (the akshamala), saying the words aloud (vachika) or repeating them in a low voice (upamshu). There are quite a few details in this text, garnered from early sources, and so a case can be made for a pre-Islamic, and even pre-Christian, use of beads or rosary in the Vaishnava tradition.”

    Because the Roman Catholics did not begin using rosary or japa beads until the era of St. Dominic, or the 12th century, Dr. Beck concludes, “the Vaishnavas were chanting japa from very early on.”

    Father Robert Stephens, a Catholic priest in Australia, considers Krishna “one of the many names of God.” He writes that he is “saddened at the narrowness and arrogance of many Christian fundamentalists;” “those who claim a monopoly on all truth or goodness;” “those who desperately cling only to external forms under the pretense of faith in God,” and “those who have turned their Sacred scriptures into mere weaponry against those who differ from themselves.”

    According to Father Stephens, we who engage in interreligious discussion “have firm support from the Catholic Church, especially the Second Vatican Council, and from such official bodies as the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, and the Dialogue Commission of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of India.”

    Father Stephens observes that “Because spiritual riches belong to all, dialogue and sharing are not an optional extra in a pluralistic society. We cannot live in a fortress of one-eyed people.” Father Gerald O’Collins SJ, similarly, is of the opinion that the Bible does not necessarily provide authoritative answers to new questions which arise in the life of the Church, and that the Bible is not that kind of “norm for every problem and every situation.”

    Father Bede Griffiths says of Bhagavad-gita, “For a Christian, this is a wonderful confirmation of God’s love contained in the Gospel.” Meister Eckhart wrote: “When we say God is ‘eternal,’ we mean God is eternally young.” This is Krishna Consciousness. God is an eternal youth.

    Matthew Fox’s statement that “God and God’s Son are ultimately attractive and alluring because of their beauty” is also consistent with Vaishnavaism. The name “Krishna” means “the all attractive one.”

    Dr. Harvey Cox, a liberal Protestant theologian at the Harvard Divinity School, favorably compares Krishna Consciousness with Christianity:

    “You can see the obvious similarities. Here you have the idea of a personal God who becomes incarnate… revealing what God is about and eliciting a form of participation in the life of God.

    “I think a Christian will have some natural sensitivity to Krishna devotion… devotion of the heart, that is, pietistic Christianity… We noted several surprising similarities between what you might call Appalachian folk religion and Krishna Consciousness. Both religions put a big emphasis on joy, the spiritual joy of praising God…

    “…both traditions emphasize puritanical values and practice certain forms of asceticism such as no drinking, no smoking, no non-marital sex and no gambling… Both seem to put more emphasis on a future life or another world.”

    According to Dr. Cox, “You have to remember that if you had been there at the early Methodist frontier revivals here in America… you would have seen some very ecstatic behavior… jumping up and down and singing. This sort of ecstatic religious behavior is, of course, associated with religious devotion from time immemorial in virtually every culture. We happen to be living in a culture which is very restricted, unimaginative, and narrow in this regard.”

    The Sikh religion is a blend of Hinduism and Islam. The Sikhs emphasize the name of God, calling Him “Nama,” or “the Name.” Guru Nanak, the founder of the Sikh religion, prayed, “In the ambrosial hours of the morn I meditate on the grace of the true Name,” and says that he was instructed by God in a vision to “Go and repeat My Name, and cause others to do likewise.”

    Rosaries are used in Buddhism. Members of Japan’s largest Buddhist order, the Pure Land sect, practice repetition of the name of the compassionate Buddha (“namu amida butsu”). Founder, Shinran Shonin says, “The virtue of the Holy Name, the gift of him that is enlightened, is spread throughout the world.” Followers believe that through the name of Buddha a worshiper is liberated from repeated birth and death and joins the Buddha in the “Pure Land.”

    Religions all over the world teach that God’s names are holy and meant to be glorified. A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada’s humble requests to the confused and alienated American youth of the late 1960s are especially relevant today:

    “…don’t commit suicide. Take to chanting this Hare Krishna mantra, and all real knowledge will be revealed… We are not charging anything… No. It is open for everyone. Please take it… That is our request. We are begging you — don’t spoil your life. Please take this mantra and chant it wherever you like… chant, and you’ll feel ecstasy.”

    “…and you can develop (love of God) so simply. You just hallow the name of the Lord. Jesus says, ‘hallowed be Thy name, my Father.’ And we are also hallowing the name of the Lord. We don’t even demand you say ‘Krishna.’ You can say ‘Jehovah.’ You can say ‘Yahweh.’ You can chant the names of God…”

    –Srimad Bhagavatam lecture, 1972

    “If one has become a lover of God, naturally he will be detached from material enjoyment. Love of God and love of the material world cannot go together. Lord Jesus Christ never advised going for economic development, for industrial development. He sacrificed everything for God. That is one test — ‘Here is a lover of God.’ Lord Jesus Christ was punished. He was ordered, ‘Stop this preaching.’ But he did not. So that is love of God. He sacrificed everything.

    “The idea is that Lord Jesus Christ and his followers must both be, at least to some extent, at that point. That is the test. So we say that you follow any religious path. Which one doesn’t matter. We want to see whether you are a lover of God. That is our propaganda…

    “But Jesus Christ never said that he is God. He said ‘son of God.’ We have no objection to chanting the holy name of Jesus Christ. We are preaching, ‘Chant the holy name of God.’ If you haven’t got any name of God, then you can chant our conception of the name of God, Krishna. But we don’t say only Krishna…

    “And it is such a simple thing. They don’t have to go to a church or temple. It doesn’t matter if they are in hell or heaven. In any condition they can chant the holy name of God… There is no charge, there is no fee, there is no loss. If there is some gain, why not try for it?…

    “So what more do you want? Therefore let us cooperate. Don’t think that it is against Christianity or that it is sectarian. Let us cooperate fully. Jointly let us preach all over the world, ‘Chant the holy names of God.’ Let us join together. That should be the real purpose of devotees of God. My students are preaching love of God. Why should others be envious of them? We don’t say that you must chant Hare Krishna. If you have a name of God, chant it.”

    —Room conversation, London, August 14, 1971

    As to Jesus’ words: “When you pray do not repeat and repeat as the pagans do,” some Bible translations appear to be attacking chanting or praying in “vain repetition.”

    Was Jesus attacking the *method* of prayer (chanting/repeating) as being pagan, or rather the *mentality* behind the prayer?

    Matthew 6:7 suggests Jesus was attacking chanting/repeating, or praying “in vain repetition” as a pagan practice.

    However, Jesus goes on to say in Matthew 6:31-32 (in the very same chapter!): “Do not, then, be anxious, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What are we to wear?’ For on all these things pagans center their interest, while your heavenly Father knows that you need them all.”

    Jesus told his followers there is no need to pray to God for material blessings or even necessities. (Matthew 6:8, 31-33; Luke 12:29-30)

    The *pagans* concern themselves with these things.

    When Jesus taught his disciples how to pray, he began by teaching them to hallow God’s name, and to pray to do God’s will on earth as it is in heaven — to be a servant of God. (Matthew 6:9-13)

    This is the Hare Krishna mantra, which can roughly be translated as, “O Lord, please engage me in Your service.”

    Repetition helps keep the mind focused on God, rather than on worldly distractions.

    “Haribol” (“praise Hari!”) is the Sanskrit equivalent to “Hallelujah” (which means “praised be the name of God” in Hebrew).

    George Harrison explained his putting the chanting of Hare Krishna in his 1970 hit song, “My Sweet Lord”:

    “Well, first of all, ‘Hallelujah’ is a glorious expression the Christians have, but Hare Krishna has a mystical side to it. It’s more than just glorifying God; it’s asking to become His servant…

    “Although Christ in my mind is an absolute yogi, I think many Christian teachers today are misrepresenting Christ. They’re supposed to be representing Jesus, but they’re not doing it very well. They’re letting him down very badly, and that’s a big turn off.”

    The late Reverend Janet Regina Hyland (1933 – 2007), raised Catholic, but went on to become an evangelical minister, a vegan, and author of God’s Covenant with Animals (it’s available through People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, or PETA), wrote me on July 21, 2007:

    “I also received your paper on Krishna Consciousness and Christianity (Points of Similarity). Being familiar with Christian monasticism, I always saw many similarities between the two. When Catholics say the rosary beads, they are repeating the same prayers, over and over…

    “When I was at the Assembly of God Seminary, we would attend revival meetings at local and rural churches… ecstatic behavior pretty much defined the services.”

  2. Good for him!!! A Christian lives their faith in all things and at all times. They serve Jesus in everything they do. They will never be separated from Him. Libs/dems/atheists/communists cannot stand that but that is their problem. When Jesus returns He will send satan and all of them to eternal torture and we will never have to deal with them again.

  3. “To some, talk about topics such as whether or not life emerged from matter may appear far removed from day-to-day affairs, and thus irrelevant to their own lives. Whether the discussions involve highly reasonable ideas based on solid evidence or vague, unsubstantiated hypotheses rooted in flimsy data and nurtured by scientific prejudice, they seem like subject matter for scholars in ivory towers.

    “But because the answers to fundamental questions about the origin of life determine how we view ourselves and our place in the universe, they profoundly affect our sense of identity, our decisions, our feelings, our relationships, our behavior — in fact, they affect all aspects of our life, including the goals of our whole secular society.”

    (Origins magazine, Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, 1984, p. 30)

    The twin doctrines of karma and reincarnation as taught in the the Eastern religions (Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism) provide a valid theistic foundation for animal rights ethics, but are not yet accepted in the secular arena.

    Research by credible scientists into mind-body dualism and past-life studies suggest it is a real possibility.

    There is more to the human mind than information processing. It is consciousness itself that is the foundation of all experience, but no one can describe it by numerical expression in the same way as chemical reactions, the force of gravity, and other physical phenomena.

    Yet just because it cannot be measured by quantitative means in no way denies its existence — consciousness can clearly be known by experience: cogito ergo sum.

    This suggests a serious limitation of the mechanistic approach, namely, that it can only describe behavior connected with consciousness but not consciousness itself.

    Let us consider a machine that when exposed to a red light would say, “I see a red light.” Such a machine could be built by connecting a photocell with a red filter to an amplifier. When triggered, the amplifier would turn on a tape recorder that plays back the message, “I see a red light.”

    Although the machine declares that it “sees” a red light, no one in his right mind would conclude that it is actually “seeing” anything.

    Similarly, a tape recorder receives sound impulses but does not hear, and an automobile moves but does not itself experience motion.

    While machines perform certain activities that could duplicate those of a sentient being, all the actions of the machine are reducible to a mechanistic explanation.

    But in the case of a sentient being, endowed with conscious awareness, the physical description is inadequate to describe one’s personal experience.

    Conscious awareness is different from mechanical stimulus-response. (A car doesn’t experience pain during collision when its airbags are deployed.)

    Even Darwin’s champion, Thomas Huxley, pointed out the irreducible nature of consciousness.

    He stated:

    “I understand the main tenet of materialism to be that there is nothing in the universe but matter and force: and that all the phenomena of nature are explicable by deduction from the properties assignable to these two primitive factors…

    “It seems to me pretty plain that there is a third thing in the universe, to wit, consciousness, which… I cannot see to be mater or force, or any conceivable modification of either.”

    Nobel Laureate physicist Eugene Wigner similarly said:

    “There are two kinds of reality or existence: the existence of my consciousness and the reality or existence of everything else. The latter reality is not absolute but only relative.”

    Wigner observed that external, measurable phenomena are known to him only by virtue of his own consciousness, and thus his consciousness is, if anything, more real than these phenomena.

    After extensive research in this area, Alan Gevins of EEG Systems Laboratory in San Francisco concluded individual consciousness might be nonphysical:

    “I’m not as firm as some of my colleagues in the belief that the mind can be reduced to a flow of electrons.”

    Although a percentage of the research on near death experiences (NDEs) is unreliable, other work has been presented by individuals with impeccable credentials.

    For example, Dr. Michael Sabom, a cardiologist and professor at Emory University Medical School was openly skeptical of NDEs but changed his mind after investigating them.

    Based on his extensive research and his thorough analysis of various alternative explanations, Sabom arrived at the following question:

    “Could the mind which splits apart from the physical brain be, in essence, the soul, which continues to exist after final bodily death, according to some religious doctrines? As I see it, this is the ultimate question that has been raised by reports of the NDE.”

    “As the embodied soul continuously passes, in this body, from boyhood to youth to old age,
    the soul similarly passes into another body at death. A sober person is not bewildered by such
    a change.”

    “That which pervades the entire body you should know to be indestructible. No one is able to
    destroy that imperishable soul.”

    “For the soul there is never birth nor death. Nor, having once been, does he ever cease to be.
    He is unborn, eternal, ever-existing, undying, and primeval. He is not slain when the body is slain.”

    “As a person puts on new garments, giving up old ones, the soul similarly accepts new material
    bodies, giving up the old and useless ones.”

    –Bhagavad-gita, chapter two, verses 13, 17, 20, and 22

    And of course, Lord Krishna Himself says to His disciple Arjuna, in Bhagavad-gita 3.26:

    “One who restrains the senses of action but whose mind dwells on sense objects certainly deludes himself and is called a pretender.”

    Belief in reincarnation IS compatible with Western spirituality!

    There are many passages throughout the Old Testament which speak of death with finality, and make no mention of an afterlife. “Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return,” said the Lord to Adam and Eve in Genesis 3:17. Humans lost a physical immortality, and there is no mention of existence beyond the body.

    Psalm 49:12 says man is like the animals that perish. Psalm 103:15 says mans’ days are like the grass or a flower of the field. Psalm 115:17 says, “The dead do not praise the Lord, nor any who go down into silence.” According to Psalm 143:3, those long dead “dwell in darkness.” The Book of Ecclesiastes (3:19-20) says men are like beasts; “as one dieth, so dieth the other,” that man “hath no pre-eminence above a beast”; “all go into one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again.” Job (6:18) teaches that there is no existence after death; men “go to nothing, and perish,” and “he that goeth down to the grave shall come up no more.” (7:9)

    Reincarnationist thought, nonetheless, has found its way into Judaism. The Pythagoreans, Neoplatonists, Hindus, Buddhists and Jains have all forbidden animal slaughter at various times in human history because of a belief in transmigration of souls and, consequently, the equality of all living beings. The doctrine of reincarnation is taught in the Kabbala, or mystical Judaic tradition, and was used to advocate ethical vegetarianism in Sedeh Hermed — a huge, talmudic encyclopedia authored by Rabbi Hayyim Hezekiah Medini (1837-1904).

    In Wheels of a Soul, Rabbi Phillip S. Berg, a renowned contemporary Kabbalist, explains: “…the concept of reincarnation is by no means exclusive to Judaism. The idea was prevalent among Indians on the American continent; and in the Orient, the teaching of reincarnation is widespread and influential. It is the basis of most of the philosophical systems of India, where hundreds of millions accept the truth of reincarnation the way we accept the truth of gravity–as a great natural and inevitable law that only a fool would question.”

    According to Rabbi Jacob Shimmel: “We are reborn until we reach perfection in following the Torah… In Hebrew, reincarnation is called gilgul, and there is a whole section of the Kabbala entitled Sefer HaGilgulim. This deals with details in regard to reincarnation.

    One remarkable figure from this mystical school of Jewish thought is Rabbi Isaac Luria (1534-72). Born in Jerusalem, he became a brilliant student, noted for his intelligence, logic and reasoning abilities. By the age of 15, Luria had surpassed all the sages in Egypt in his understanding of talmudic law.

    With a thirst for higher knowledge, he studied the Zohar and the Kabbala. For seven years, he lived as an ascetic on the banks of the Nile River; fasting often, seeing his wife only on the Sabbath, and merely for brief conversation, if necessary. During this time, he experienced many strange voices and ecstatic visions.

    At times, the prophet Elijah appeared to teach him the secrets of the Torah. Luria later went to Safed (in Palestine) and became the spiritual master of the community of mystics there. He taught that the good souls in heaven could be brought down to inhabit human bodies.

    Luria saw spirits everywhere. He heard them whispering in the rushing water of rivers, in the movement of trees, in the wind and in the songs of birds. He could see the soul of a man leave the body at the time of death. Intimate conversations were often held with the souls of past figures in the Bible, the talmudic sages and numerous respected rabbis.

    Luria’s disciples said he could perform exorcisms and miracles and speak the language of animals. They wrote: “Luria could read faces, look into the souls of men, recognize that souls migrated from body to body. He could tell you what commandment a man had fulfilled and what sins he had committed since youth.”

    Is reincarnationist thought compatible with Christianity? The first books of the Bible speak of man as a physical being, formed from the dust and then infused with a divine “breath of life.” New Testament writings, however, describe the individual as a spiritual being, clothed in an earthly body of flesh.

    The New Testament distinguishes between the carnal and the spiritual. “It is the Spirit that giveth the body life,” taught Jesus, “the flesh profit nothing.” (John 6:63)

    Paul taught Jesus had both an earthly and a spiritual nature (Romans 1:3), and referred to his own spiritual self. (Romans 1:9)

    The spirit is a prisoner to sin and the flesh in a body doomed to death. (Romans 7:18-24)

    Christians are to behave in a spiritually, rather than in a fleshly way. (Romans 8:4; 13:14; I Peter 2:11)

    The desires of the Spirit and those of the flesh are opposed to one another. (Galatians 5:13,16-17)

    Christians have “crucified the flesh with its passions and desires;” they “live by the Spirit” and are “directed by the Spirit.” (Galatians 5:19-26)

    To be carnally minded is to die. One must transcend one’s lower, bodily nature. (Rom. 8:5-14) Saving the spirit of an individual differs from the destruction of the person’s flesh. (I Corinthians 5:5)

    God’s kingdom is not carnal, but spiritual:

    “…flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, neither does the perishable inherit the imperishable… For this perishable must put on imperishability and this mortal must put on immortality. (I Corinthians 15:50,53)

    The body is like a lump of clay. (Romans 9:21; II Corinthians 4:7) The body decays, but the self is renewed in spiritual life. (II Corinthians 4:16-17)

    The body is a temporary tent in which the spirit resides; the spirits of the faithful will soon be clothed in everlasting, heavenly bodies. (II Corinthians 5:1-3)

    The spirit resides inside a body of flesh. (II Corinthians 10:3) To identify with the body is to be absent from the Lord. (II Corinthians 5:8-10)

    Paul wrote of being “caught up as far as the third heaven… whether in the body or out of the body I do not know…” (II Corinthians 12:2-3)

    Being with Christ differs from remaining “in the body;” one’s self is separate from the physical body. (Philippians 1:21-24)

    Christians are to set their sights on heavenly, not earthly things, and to put to death their earthly nature. (Colossians 3:1-5)

    The flesh decays, but the word of God is eternal. (I Peter 2:23-25) To love this world is to alienate oneself from God’s love, because the passions of this world are temporary. (I John 2:15-17) This world belongs to the devil (II Corinthians 4:4); this present world is evil (Galatians 1:4).

    God rewards each individual according to his deeds. (Romans 2:6)

    One reaps what one sows. (II Corinthians 9:6; Galatians 6:7)

    Some souls remain entangled in decaying flesh, while others turn to the Spirit. “The one who sows for his own flesh will harvest ruin from his flesh; while the one who sows for the Spirit will harvest eternal life from the Spirit.” (Galatians 6:8)

    A kernel of spirit is placed in a body:

    “…God gives it a body as He plans, and to each seed its particular body. All flesh is not the same; but one kind is human, another is animal, another is fowl, and another fish.” (I Corinthians 15:38-39)

    The New Testament also distinguishes between earthly bodies and heavenly bodies:

    “There are heavenly bodies and also earthly bodies; but the radiance of the heavenly is one kind and that of the earthly is another kind.” (I Corinthians 15:40)

    Resurrection in the New Testament is not the Old Testament doctrine of the reassembling of dust into living bodies, but rather, the clothing of the spirit with a new body; the placing of a kernel of spirit into a new body, from where its existence continues.

    The New Testament emphasizes the distinction between the soul and the body, the clothing of the soul with a new body, and the eternal nature of the soul and its relationship to God versus the temporary nature of the flesh and the material world.

    These concepts can all be found in the doctrine of reincarnation.

    During the second century, Justin Martyr, in his Dialogue with Trypho, taught that the soul inhabits more than one body in its earthly sojourn.

    He even suggested that those who lead carnal lives and thus deprive themselves of the capacity to serve God may be reborn as beasts.

    The earliest Christians who taught the pre-existence of the soul came to be known as the “pre-existiani.” Clement of Alexandria wrote with interest about what he called metensomatosis.

    “…we have existed from the beginning,” wrote Clement in his Stromata, “for in the beginning was the Logos… Not for the first time does (the Logos) show pity on us in our wanderings; he pitied us from the beginning.”

    Origen (185-254), was one of the fathers of the early Christian church, and its most accomplished biblical scholar. His influence upon the early church was second only to that of Augustine.

    Origen taught that God creates spirits, and all spirits are created equal. All are endowed with free will. Some fall into sin, becoming demons, or imprisoned in bodies. This process of growth or retardation is continuous.

    A human being, at the time of death, may become an angel or a demon. Origen gave a highly allegorical interpretation of Genesis and the Fall from paradise.

    Origen held that the various orders of living creatures in the world corresponded to the varying degrees of perfection and imperfection.

    All of God’s children are created free and equal, but received their present condition “as rewards or punishments for the manner in which they used their free will.”

    Therefore, “as befits the degree of (the soul’s) fall into evil, it is clothed with the body of this or that irrational animal.”

    Writing in the third century, he explained: ”

    By some inclination toward evil, certain souls… come into bodies, first of men; then through their association with the irrational passions, after the allotted span of human life, they are changed into beasts, from which they sink to the level of…plants.

    “From this condition they rise again through the same stages and are restored to their heavenly place.”
    (De Principiis, Book III, Chapter 5)

    According to Origen, God sent forth Christ to bring about the redemption of all souls; a salvation so universal, even the demons will be saved. “The purified spirit will be brought home; it will no longer rebel; it will acquiesce in its lot.”

    Origen based his theology upon passages from Scripture. The prophet Elijah lived in the 9th century BC. Elijah never died, but was lifted up into heaven. (II Kings 2:11) In the closing lines of the Old Testament, Malachi recorded the prophecy: “Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord.” (Malachi 3:1, 4:5) Elijah would precede the Messiah.

    When the disciples asked Jesus about the prophecy that Elijah must precede the Messiah, Jesus replied, “Elijah will come indeed and will restore all things. But I tell you that Elijah has already come and they did not recognize him, but have done to him as they pleased.” The disciples then realized he was talking about John the Baptist. (Matthew 17:9-13)

    Jesus even told the multitudes, “It is he (John) of whom it is written, ‘Behold I send My messenger ahead of you, who will prepare the road before you’…If you will accept it, this is Elijah who was to come.” (Matthew 11:10,14; Luke 7:27)

    Many in Jesus’ day believed him to be the reincarnation of an Old Testament prophet. In Matthew 16:13-14, when Jesus asked his disciples, “Who do men say that I am?” they replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others, Elijah; others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets.”

    Similarly, in Luke 9:18-19, when Jesus asked, “Who do the crowds say that I am?” his disciples respond, “John the Baptist; but some say Elijah, and others that one of the old prophets has risen again.”

    Mark 16:14-16 records King Herod saying of Jesus, “John the Baptist is risen from the dead, and therefore these miracles are being done by him.” Others said, “He is Elijah,” while still others believed, “He is a prophet like one of the prophets of old.”

    Tertullian, one of the earliest of the Latin Fathers of the Christian Church, vehemently attacked any and all reincarnationist interpretations of Scripture. His attacks indicate the widespread influence of reincarnationist thought upon Christianity at the time.

    Tertullian took the position that the above passages do not presuppose reincarnation. Since Elijah was lifted into heaven (II Kings 2:11), he never died. His appearance as John the Baptist was not reincarnation, but a return visit. However the Gospel of Luke (1:5-25,57-80) indicates that Elijah did not return to earth as a mature man, but was miraculously reconceived and reborn as John the Baptist.

    Origen remarked that the fact that the Jews specifically asked John the Baptist if he was Elijah (John 1:21) indicated “that they believed in metensomatosis, as a doctrine inherited from their ancestors and therefore in no way in conflict with the secret teachings of their masters.”

    In the Fourth Gospel, Jesus and his disciples encounter a man who had been blind from his birth. The disciples asked, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents? Why was he born blind?”

    Since reincarnation was a widespread belief during the time of Jesus, (as were beliefs in apocalypses, judgement day, heaven, hell and resurrection), one cannot help but wonder if the disciples had reincarnation in mind. For if the man had been born blind, he could not have committed the sin in his present life.

    Jesus did not reject the notion of pre-existence as a solution to the problem of evil. He merely replied that this man was afflicted so that “the works of God should be displayed in him,” and that it was their duty to practice the works of a merciful God. (John 9:4)

    On another occasion, Simon (Peter) said to Jesus, “Look, we have given up everything and have followed you…”

    Jesus replied: “I assure you, there is no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mothers or father or children or fields on account of me and the gospel, but will receive a hundred times over now in this age homes and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and fields, along with persecutions; and in the world to come, eternal life.” (Matthew 19:27,29; Mark 10:28-31; Luke 18:28-30)

    It’s hard to imagine these rewards — including hundreds of relatives, parents and children — being fulfilled in one brief lifetime.

    “So where to now St. Peter?
    “If it’s true I’m in your hands?

    “I may not be a Christian
    “But I’ve done all one man can

    “I understand I’m on the road
    “Where all that was is gone

    “So where to now St. Peter?
    “Show me which road I’m on

    “Which road I’m on…”

    –Elton John, “Where to Now, St. Peter?” (1970)

    In the 3rd century, Chalcidius taught, “Souls who have failed to unite themselves with God, are compelled by the law of destiny to begin a new kind of life, entirely different from their former, until they repent of their sins.”

    Arnobius (A.D. 290) said, “We die many times, and often do we rise from the dead.” (Adversus Gentes)

    St. Gregory of Nyssa (257-332) taught, “It is absolutely necessary that the soul should be healed and purified, and if this does not take place during its life on earth it must be accomplished in future lives.” (Great Catechism)

    St. Jerome (340-420), wrote in Epistola ad Demetriadem, that “The doctrine of transmigration has been secretly taught from ancient times to small numbers of people, as a traditional truth which was not to be divulged.”

    In his Confessions, St. Augustine (354-430) prayed, “Say, Lord to me… say, did my infancy succeed another age of mine that died before it? Was it that which I spent within my mother’s womb?… and what before that life again, O God my joy, was I anywhere or in any body?”

    Synesius, Bishop of Ptolemais (370-430), wrote in his Treatise On Dreams:

    “Philosophy speaks of souls being prepared by a course of transmigrations… When first it comes down to earth, it (the soul) embarks on this animal spirit as on a boat, and through it is brought into contact with matter…

    “The soul which did not quickly return to the heavenly region from which it was sent down to earth had to go through many lives of ‘wandering.'”

    Although belief in reincarnation was widespread in early Christianity, orthodoxy prevailed. The doctrine of reincarnation never really caught on, in part, because of the apocalyptic mood of the early church. The Second Coming of Christ and the resurrection of the dead were thought to be imminent.

    During the fourth century, Origen became an easy target for ecclesiastical authorities seeking victory in power struggles with other theological factions within the Christian church.

    Under circumstances that to this day remain shrouded in mystery, the Byzantine emperor Justinian in AD 553 banned the teachings of pre-existence from what had by then become the Roman Catholic Church. During that era, numerous Church writings were destroyed.

    The doctrine of reincarnation was forced underground, but persistently appeared in sects such as the Cathari, the Paulicians, and the Bogomils.

    The Cathari (who were also vegetarian) taught that the reason we are on earth in the first place is we are fallen souls forced to be repeatedly incarcerated in bodies, and must seek salvation from transmigrating from one body to another. The Cathari saw Christ as the means of divine redemption from the wheel of death and rebirth.

    The Cathari were a medieval heretical Christian sect believing in metaphysical dualism — a distinction between the spirit Vs the flesh… to the point of reincarnation. Albi, France, became the center of Cathari influence. Thus the sect came to be known as the Albigensians. Their sect consisted of two levels of service: the ordinary believers or “hearers” and members of the pious category, the “venerate.”

    Members of the venerate abstained from nearly all animal foods, and the hearers were strongly encouraged to adopt this abstemious diet.

    A passage from a Catharist book written in the middle of the 13th century says:

    “…you will make this commitment to God: that you will never knowingly or of your own will, eat cheese, milk, the flesh of birds, or creeping things, or of animals, as prohibited by the Church of God.”

    It appears that many Albigensians were resolute in their opposition to killing animals for food, as their vegetarianism was used by ecclesiastical authorities within the Roman Catholic Church to detect heresy. Many heretics chose death and even torture to apostasy. A group of heretics were hanged at Goslar in 1052 for their refusal to kill a chicken.

    Dr. Geddes MacGregor, Professor of Philosophy and Religion, and author of over twenty books, believes reincarnation is compatible with the Christian faith.

    According to Dr. MacGregor: “Reincarnation is, of course, a kind of resurrection. Great importance was attached by Christian theologians, however, to the notion of the resurrection of the ‘same body’ that we now have, though in a glorified form.

    “The so-called Athanasian Creed affirms that all men shall rise again with their bodies…and a council held at the Lateran… asserted that all shall rise again with their own bodies…

    “…such very Latin teaching about a carnis resurrectio does not seem to fit Paul’s teaching in the New Testament, which is that the body is to be of a new order… not otherwise recognizable as the same body as the one on earth.

    “The curious notion of the revivification of the material particles of the body does not arise in St. Paul.”

    Dr. MacGregor explains that conflicting theological and scriptural accounts of the afterlife have caused many, including regular churchgoers, not to concern themselves with such affairs.

    Many Christian theologians have discouraged “idle speculation” on the afterlife. Luther recognized the theological difficulties, while Calvin, in a commentary on I Corinthians 13:12, questioned his own doctrine of the eternality of the soul.

    According to Calvin, Paul intentionally gave no details on the subject, since details “could not help our piety.”

    Dr. MacGregor suggests, however, that just as we have ceased to take literally Archbishop Ussher’s biblical concept of a 6,000 year old universe, so also might reincarnation be consistent with a more enlightened world view.

    During the Renaissance, a new flowering of public interest in reincarnation emerged. One of the prominent figures in this revival was Italy’s leading philosopher and poet Giordano Bruno.

    Bruno had entered the Dominican Order at the age of fifteen. As a scholar, Bruno upheld the Copernican world view, that the Sun — and not the earth — is the center of our cosmos, teaching that there are an infinity of worlds and that many are inhabited.

    Galileo had announced other worlds and Giordano Bruno spoke of other life forms. Bruno believed there are no privileged reference frames for viewing the universe; the universe looks essentially the same from wherever one happens to view it. Bruno taught that at death the soul passes out of one body and enters into another.

    Because of his teachings, Bruno was ultimately brought before the Inquisition. In his profession of faith before the Inquisition, Bruno acknowledged that, speaking as a Catholic, he must say that the soul at death goes directly to heaven, hell or purgatory.

    However, Bruno insisted that as a philosopher who had given much thought to the question, he found it reasonable that since the soul is different from the body, yet is never found apart from the body, it passes from one body to another, as Pythagoras had taught 2,000 years before.

    In his final answers to the charges brought against him, Bruno defiantly responded that the soul “is not the body” and that “it may be in one body or in another, and pass from body to body.”

    Giordano Bruno was eventually burned at the stake in Rome on February 17, 1600. His teachings influenced 17th century philosophers such as Leibniz and Spinoza.

    “Has it occurred to you that transmigration is at once an explanation and a justification of the evil of the world?” wrote W. Somerset Maugham in The Razor’s Edge.

    “If the evils we suffer are the result of sins committed in our past lives, we can bear them with resignation and hope that if in this one we strive toward virtue our future lives will be less afflicted.”

    Sir William Jones, a Christian missionary who helped introduce East Indian philosophy to Europe in the 18th century, wrote:

    “I am no Hindu, but I hold the doctrine of the Hindus concerning a future state (reincarnation) to be incomparably more rational, more pious, and more likely to deter men from vice than the horrid opinions inculcated by Christians on punishment without end.”

    In his monumental book, The Story of Christian Origins, secular historian Dr. Martin A. Larson notes that according to Hindu, Buddhist, and Pythagorean doctrine, “hell itself was actually a kind of purgatory, since it was a place in which perhaps a majority of all people underwent repeated refinement and punishment,” before being reborn as a plant, animal, or human being.

    Examining the concept of eternal damnation, Dr. Geddes MacGregor concludes:

    “It is no wonder that purgatory seemed by comparison, despite its anguish, a demonstration of God’s mercy. Purgatory is indeed a far more intelligible concept, in the light of what the Bible says about the nature of God. Even the crassest forms of purgatory suggest moral and spiritual evolution.

    “Surely, too, even countless rebirths as a beggar lying in misery and filth on the streets of Calcutta would be infinitely more reconcilable to the Christian concept of God than is the traditional doctrine of everlasting torture in hell.

    “The appeal of reincarnationism to anyone nurtured on hell-fire sermons and tracts is by no means difficult to understand.”

    Archbishop Passavalli (1820-1897), a learned Roman Catholic archbishop accepted the teaching of reincarnation from two disciples of the Polish seer Towianski.

    Archbishop Passavalli admitted that reincarnation is not condemned by the Church, and that it is not in conflict with any Catholic dogma.

    Another Catholic priest who came to believe in reincarnation was Edward Dunski, whose Letters were published in 1915.

    Many other priests in Poland and Italy have believed in reincarnation, influenced by the great mystic Andrzej Towianski (1799-1878).

    In her autobiography, A Servant of the Queen, Maude Gonne wrote that when a priest asked her why she was not a Catholic, and she replied, “Because I believe in reincarnation,” she was told:

    “The soul comes from God and returns to God when purified, when all things will become clear; and who can tell the stages of its purification? It may be possible that some souls work out their purification on this earth.”

    The Reverend Alvin Hart, an Episcopal priest in New York, says, “In the Second Letter of Peter, the word exitus (‘exit’ or ‘a way out’) is used for ‘dying.’ The expression implies that something does exist which at death goes away, or ‘exits’ the body.

    “Reincarnation would explain a great many things–such as just where the soul goes after death. After all, it is unlikely that a merciful God would send a sinner to ‘hell’ after just one birth into this… world… It takes time…

    “Reincarnation was also accepted by many philosophers in the early church. To my way of thinking it is a logical explanation of what happens at the time of death. Reincarnation is an acceptable answer.”

    The doctrine of reincarnation first fell into disfavor in the early church beginning with Augustine, who wrote: “Let these Platonists stop threatening us with reincarnation as punishment for our souls. Reincarnation is ridiculous. There is no such thing as a return to this life for the punishment of souls…”

    As a result of this thinking, Western theology has been unable to resolve the ‘problem of evil.’ Why does a merciful and omnipotent God allow suffering and injustice? Why, for example, are some people born handicapped, or into poverty, while others are born into wealth and privilege?

    The reincarnationist explanation is karma: we reap what we sow. We are suffering and enjoying according to the deeds we committed in innumerable previous lifetimes, and our deeds in this present lifetime dictate our future — in 8,400,000 different species of life.

    Rabbi Harold S. Kushner caused a theological controversy back in the early 1980s, with his book, When Bad Things Happen to Good People. Kushner’s solution to the ‘problem of evil’ is that God is not omnipotent! There are limits to His power. God is just as outraged as we are at the injustices in the world, but there’s nothing He can do to stop them.

    Asking millions of synagogue-and-church-and-mosque going Americans to take up an Eastern religion, worship a long-haired, flute-playing, blue God, and believe in karma and reincarnation may sound crazy and radical, but we now find mainstream Americans doing something even more radical: they are becoming worshipers of God-the-not-Almighty.

    Brother Ron Pickarski, a vegan chef and Franciscan monk, said in an interview in historian Rynn Berry’s 1998 book, Food for the Gods: Vegetarianism & the World’s Religions, he believes Christianity will one day embrace reincarnation and vegetarianism.

    As for scientific proof of reincarnation: research by credible scientists into mind-body dualism suggests it is a real possibility. These include the research on near-death experiences by Dr. Michael Sabom, a cardiologist and professor at Emory University, and the past life memory research of Dr. Ian Stevenson, Carlson professor of psychiatry at the University of Virginia.

    • vasu, you have no concept at all of who God is or what the Bible teaches. You are missing the most important lesson…YOU must be born again through the saving blood of Christ. Either you accept the wonderful love and sacrifice of Jesus or you spend an eternity of torture with satan. And Jesus very clearly said that it is appointed man ONCE to die and then the judgement. Jesus trumps all scientists who are merely human. Scientists have no more knowledge of the truth than you do, which is none at all. And God very clearly gave us animals for food. It is in that Bible you have rejected. NO, Christianity CANNOT embrace reincarnation. It goes against what Jesus said. You are a fool who has rejected the truth. sad

  4. OMG,When did vasu and his STAFF start writting That mini Library,I Just checked,That post surpassed All the words written in Every steven king book Combined!! Has Anyone Ever read one of his posts start to Finish!!??? Three of my fingers Fell off Scrolling thro That!! Semper Fi

    • Art, At least King’s book are interesting and have endings! But not Vasu!! And to answer your question, yes, I’ve read one his posting once. That was good enough…Just the leftists propaganda…..

        • Karen K; Well, I just wanted to see if he had any saving grace in his REALLY LONG POSTINGS. Other than I do share a love for animals. That’s it! His is a Hindu and he has no clue about one GOD or Jesus. But he keeps quoting all the radical Leftists and their opinions. Totally worthless propaganda. .

    • Art, you have a great sense of humor and in it tell the truth. At first, I read the first couple of long novellas and novels that vasu pens without any semblance of knowing what he is writing or the dribble it truly is and not addressing the issue of the articles.

      I have experienced several miracles that saved my life and the lives of my fellow group while in Iraq, The present surviving members meet regularly and we all thank God in Christ Jesus for our lives.

      • Allen Morgan: Thank you for your service. I was in Nam during the 60’s and I heard many an atheist call out to GOD at their final moment. The GOD they denied their whole life’s.
        These are very dark times we are now living in, Allen. So much hate. Division and lies spoken by the Democrats. We are once again at war. But for now, with words and evil actions..
        GOD bless you and yours and please keep our great country in your prayers as well..

    • No, we don’t read Vasu’s diatribes. If he wants to comment on everything under the sun, he should be writing a book which maybe would sell or NOT! As to Kanye, he s a smart cookie and the Hollywood trash will come after him but he is strong like our President!! God Bless you!!

  5. Good for Mr. West for standing up for his beliefs and not caring what the radical, godless Leftists say! And may GOD bless us from the constant harassment we have to endure at the hands of Vasu. But you know what? EVERYTIME he posts his” novels”, it only reinforces what HIS cultists party really represent. So let him rabble. We know the REAL true, and we stand with GOD and Jesus!!!!

  6. I think Jesus said something along the lines of: If you will not be ashamed of my name, I will not be ashamed of you. All who proclaim Christ is Lord and accept him as savior are at least on the pilgrimage to salvation in Him.

  7. Jesus is KING. He is my all and all. He is the TRUTH ONLY TRUTH and the libs can not and will not accept the TRUTH. They are on the devils side. You are either for Jesus and the BIBLE or against them! Not picking and choosing what you believe about Jesus and the WORD OF GOD!!! It is Not that we are for Trump as much as it is the policies that the demonic libs would bring with them!!!!

  8. Mr West. God Bless you. So refreshing that some famous people put Jesus Above all in life. Thanks for being a true believer and Christian not ashamed to share the truth to all. Thanks also for standing up, supporting and Voting for President Trump.

  9. God Bless you Kanye.
    Until today I thought of you and Kim as Nut jobs.
    Today I respect Kanye and feel his heart and soul and stand beside him and anything he does even though I seriously doubt his sanity at times. Does not matter. I stand beside him from today forward.

  10. the Democrats, atheists and satanists don’t like to hear ANYONE SINGING ABOUT GOD. WELL THAT’S TOO BAD. GOD BLESS YOU KANYE. GO TO HELL ALL YOU ANTI -CHRISTIANS.

    • Karen, all who reject Jesus and follow satan will join him in Hell. satan has the dems/libs/atheists/communists and muslims on his side. They all have the chance to change sides and accept Jesus as their Savior. But they have chosen satan as their master. very sad.

  11. That just means Kanye is a smart child of God for listening and being true to his convictions unlike most of his peers!!!

    God bless Kanye West!!! Finally something good from LA…and yes I live here. Good for him!

  12. Vegetarianism is at the heart of Christianity. Jesus insisted upon the moral standards given by God in the beginning (Matthew 5:31-32, 19:3-9; Mark 10:2-12; Luke 16:18), and this did not go unnoticed by early church fathers such as St. Basil and St. Jerome.

    One of the greatest theologians in the early Christian church, Tertullian, or Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus, was born in Carthage about AD 155-160. Cyprian, the Bishop of Carthage, called him the “Master.”

    Tertullian was one of four early church fathers who wrote extensively on the subject of vegetarianism. According to Tertullian, flesh-eating is not conducive to the highest life, it violates moral law, and it debases man in intellect and emotion.

    Responding to the apparent permissiveness of Paul, Tertullian argued: “and even if he handed over to you the keys of the slaughterhouse… in permitting you to eat all things… at least he has not made the kingdom of Heaven to consist in butchery: for, says he, eating and drinking is not the Kingdom of God.”

    Tertullian similarly scorned those who would use the gospel to justify gratifying the cravings of the flesh:

    “How unworthily, too, do you press the example of Christ as having come ‘eating and drinking’ into the service of your lusts: He who pronounced not the full but the hungry and thirsty ‘blessed,’ who professed His work to be the completion of His Father’s will, was wont to abstain — instructing them to labor for that ‘meat’ which lasts to eternal life, and enjoining in their common prayers petition not for gross food but for bread only.”

    Tertullian made his case for moderate eating by referring to the history of the Israelites (Numbers 11:4-34): “And if there be ‘One’ who prefers the works of justice, not however, without sacrifice—that is to say, a spirit exercised by abstinence — it is surely that God to whom neither a gluttonous people nor priest was acceptable — monuments of whose concupiscence remain to this day, where lies buried a people greedy and clamorous for flesh-meats, gorging quails even to the point of inducing jaundice.

    “It was divinely proclaimed,” insisted Tertullian, “’Wine and strong liquor shall you not drink, you and your sons after you.’ Now this prohibition of drink is essentially connected with the vegetable diet. Thus, where abstinence from wine is required by the Deity, or is vowed by man, there, too, may be understood suppression of gross feeding, for as is the eating, so is the drinking.

    “It is not consistent with truth that a man should sacrifice half of his stomach only to God—that he should be sober in drinking, but intemperate in eating. Your belly is your God, your liver is your temple, your paunch is your altar, the cook is your priest, and the fat steam is your Holy Spirit; the seasonings and the sauces are your chrisms, and your belchings are your prophesizing…”

    Tertullian sarcastically compared gluttons to Esau, who sold his birthright in exchange for a meal. “I ever recognize Esau, the hunter, as a man of taste and as his were, so are your whole skill and interest given to hunting and trapping… It is in the cooking pots that your love is inflamed—it is in the kitchen that your faith grows fervid — it is in the flesh dishes that all your hopes lie hid… Consistently do you men of the flesh reject the things of the Spirit. But if your prophets are complacent towards such persons, they are not my prophets…Let us openly and boldly vindicate our teaching.

    “We are sure that they who are in the flesh cannot please God…a grossly-feeding Christian is akin to lions and wolves rather than God. Our Lord Jesus called Himself Truth and not habit.”

    In general, Tertullian railed against gluttony, and taught that spiritual life consists of simple living. He explained, “if man could not follow even a simple taboo against eating one fruit, how could he be expected to restrain himself from more demanding restrictions? Instead, after the Flood, man was given the regulation against blood; further details were length to his own strength of will.”

    According to Tertullian, the entire creation prays to God:

    “Cattle and wild beasts pray, and bend their knees, and in coming forth from their stalls and lairs look up to heaven. Moreover the birds taking flight lift themselves up to heaven and instead of hands, spread out the cross of their wings, while saying something which may be supposed to be a prayer.”

    Clement of Alexandria (AD 150-220), or Titus Flavius Clemens, founded the Alexandrian school of Christian Theology and succeeded Pantaenus in AD 190. In his writings, he referred to vegetarian philosophers Pythagoras, Plato, and even Socrates as divinely inspired. But the true teachings, he insisted, are to be found in the Hebrew prophets and in the person of Jesus Christ.

    Clement taught that a life of virtue is one of simplicity, and that the apostle Matthew was a vegetarian. According to Clement, eating flesh and drinking wine “is rather characteristic to a beast and the fumes rising from them, being dense, darken the soul… Destroy not the work of God for the sake of food. Whether ye eat or drink, do all to the glory of God, aiming after true frugality. For it is lawful for me to partake of all things, yet all things are not expedient…neither is the regimen of a Christian formed by indulgence… man is not by nature a gravy eater, but a bread eater.

    “Those who use the most frugal fare are the strongest, the healthiest and the noblest…We must guard against those sorts of food which persuade us to eat when we are not hungry,” warned Clement, “bewitching the appetite…is there not within a temperate simplicity, a wholesome variety of eatables — vegetables, roots, olives, herbs, fruits…?

    “But those who bend around inflammatory tables, nourishing their own diseases, are ruled by a most licentious disease which I shall venture to call the demon of the belly: the worst and most vile of demons. It is far better to be happy than to have a devil dwelling in us, for happiness is found only in the practice of virtue. Accordingly the apostle Matthew lived upon seeds, fruits, grains and nuts and vegetables, without the use of flesh.”

    Clement acknowledged the moral and spiritual advantages of the vegetarian way of life:

    “If any righteous man does not burden his soul by the eating of flesh, he has the advantage of a rational motive… The very ancient altar of Delos was celebrated for its purity, to which alone, as being undefiled by slaughter and death, they say that Pythagoras would permit approach.

    “And they will not believe us when we say that the righteous soul is the truly sacred altar? But I believe that sacrifices were invented by men to be a pretext for eating flesh.”

    St. Basil (AD 320-79) taught, “The steam of meat darkens the light of the spirit. One can hardly have virtue if one enjoys meat meals and feasts… In the earthly paradise, there was no wine, no one sacrificed animals, and no one ate meat. Wine was only invented after the Deluge…

    “With simple living, well being increases in the household, animals are in safety, there is no shedding of blood, nor putting animals to death. The knife of the cook is needless, for the table is spread only with the fruits that nature gives, and with them they are content.”

    St. Basil prayed for universal brotherhood, and an end to human brutality against animals:

    “The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness
    Thereof. Oh, God, enlarge within us the
    Sense of fellowship with all living
    Things, our brothers the animals to
    Whom Thou gavest the earth as
    Their home in common with us

    “We remember with shame that
    In the past we have exercised the
    High dominion of man and ruthless
    Cruelty so that the voice of the earth
    Which should have gone up to Thee in
    Song, has been a groan of travail.

    “May we realize that they live not
    For us alone but for themselves and
    For Thee and that they love the sweetness
    Of life.”

    According to St. Gregory Nazianzen (AD 330-89):

    “The great Son is the glory of the Father
    and shone out from Him like light…
    He assumed a body
    to bring help to suffering creatures…

    “He was sacrifice and celebrant
    sacrificial priest and God Himself.
    He offered blood to God to cleanse
    the entire world.”

    “Holy people are most loving and gentle in their dealings with their fellows, and even with the lower animals: for this reason it was said that ‘A righteous man is merciful to the life of his beast,’” explained St. John Chrysostom (AD 347-407). “Surely we ought to show kindness and gentleness to animals for many reasons and chiefly because they are of the same origin as ourselves.”

    Writing about the Christian saints and ascetics, Chrysostom observed: “No streams of blood are among them; no butchering and cutting of flesh… With their repast of fruits and vegetables even angels from heaven, as they behold it, are delighted and pleased.”

    Chrysostom considered flesh-eating a cruel and unnatural habit for Christians: “We imitate the ways of wolves, the ways of leopards, or rather we are worse than these. For nature has assigned that they should be thus fed, but us God hath honored with speech and a sense of equity, yet we are worse than the wild beasts.”

    In a homily on Matthew 22:1-4, Chrysostom taught: “We the Christian leaders practice abstinence from the flesh of animals to subdue our bodies… the unnatural eating of flesh-meat is of demonical origin… the eating of flesh is polluting.” He added that “flesh-meats and wine serve as materials for sensuality, and are a source of danger, sorrow, and disease.”

    In a homily on II Corinthians 9, Chrysostom distinguished between nourishment and gluttony:

    “No one debars thee from these, nor forbids thee thy daily food. I say ‘food,’ not ‘feasting’; ‘raiment’ not ‘ornament,’… For consider, who should we say more truly feasted — he whose diet is herbs, and who is in sound health and suffered no uneasiness, or he who has the table of a Sybarite and is full of a thousand disorders?

    “Certainly the former. Therefore, let us seek nothing more than these, if we would at once live luxuriously and healthfully. And let him who can be satisfied with pulse, and can keep in good health, seek for nothing more. But let him who is weaker, and needs to be dieted with other vegetable fruits, not be debarred from them.”

    In a homily on the Epistle to Timothy, Chrysostom described the ill effects of becoming a slave to one’s bodily appetites:

    “A man who lives in selfish luxury is dead while he lives, for he lives only to his stomach. In other senses he lives not. He sees not what he ought to see; he hears not what he ought to hear; he speaks not what he ought to speak. Nor does he perform the actions of living.

    “But as he who is stretched upon a bed with his eyes closed and his eyelids fast, perceives nothing that is passing; so is it with this man, or rather not so, but worse. For the one is equally insensible to things good and evil, while the other is sensible to things evil only, but as insensible as the former to things good.

    “Thus he is dead. For nothing relating to the life to come moves or affects him. For intemperance, taking him into her own bosom as into some dark and dismal cavern full of all uncleanliness, causes him to dwell altogether in darkness, like the dead. For, when all his time is spent between feasting and drunkenness, is he not dead, and buried in darkness?

    “Who can describe the storm that comes of luxury, that assails the soul and body? For, as a sky continually clouded admits not the sunbeams to shine through, so the fumes of luxury… envelop his brain…and casting over it a thick mist, suffers not reason to exert itself.

    “If it were possible to bring the soul into view and to behold it with our bodily eyes—it would seem depressed, mournful, miserable, and wasted with leanness; for the more the body grows sleek and gross, the more lean and weakly is the soul. The more one is pampered, the more the other is hampered.”

    And St. John Chrysostom recommended the “prayerful invocation of the name of God,” which he said should be “uninterrupted.” (I Thessalonians 5:17)

    The orthodox, 4th century Christian Hieronymus connected vegetarianism with both the original diet given by God and the teachings of Jesus:

    “The eating of animal meat was unknown up to the big Flood, but since the Flood they have pushed the strings and stinking juices of animal meat into our mouths, just as they threw quails in front of the grumbling sensual people in the desert. Jesus Christ, who appeared when the time had been fulfilled, has again joined the end with the beginning, so that it is no longer allowed for us to eat animal meat.”

    St. Jerome (AD 340-420) wrote to a monk in Milan who had abandoned vegetarianism:

    “As to the argument that in God’s second blessing (Genesis 9:3) permission was given to eat flesh—a permission not given in the first blessing (Genesis 1:29)—let him know that just as permission to put away a wife (divorce) was, according to the words of the Saviour, not given from the beginning, but was granted to the human race by Moses because of the hardness of our hearts (Matthew 19:1-12), so also in like manner the eating of flesh was unknown until the Flood, but after the Flood, just as quails were given to the people when they murmured in the desert, so have sinews and the offensiveness been given to our teeth.

    “The Apostle, writing to the Ephesians, teaches us that God had purposed that in the fullness of time he would restore all things, and would draw to their beginning, even to Christ Jesus, all things that are in heaven or that are on earth. Whence also, the Saviour Himself in the Apocalypse of John says, ‘I am the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end.’ From the beginning of human nature, we neither fed upon flesh nor did we put away our wives, nor were our foreskins taken away from us for a sign. We kept on this course until we arrived at the Flood.

    “But after the Flood, together with the giving of the Law, which no man could fulfill, the eating of flesh was brought in, and the putting away of wives was conceded to hardness of heart… But now that Christ has come in the end of time, and has turned back Omega to Alpha… neither is it permitted to us to put away our wives, nor are we circumcised, nor do we eat flesh.”

    St. Jerome was responsible for the Vulgate, or Latin version of the Bible, still in use today. He felt a vegetarian diet was best for those devoted to the pursuit of wisdom. He once wrote that he was not a follower of Pythagoras or Empodocles “who do not eat any living creature,” but concluded, “And so I too say to you: if you wish to be perfect, it is good not to drink wine and eat flesh.”

    From history, too, we learn that the earliest Christians were vegetarians as well as pacifists. For example, Clemens Prudentius, the first Christian hymn writer, in one of his hymns exhorts his fellow Christians not to pollute their hands and hearts by the slaughter of innocent cows and sheep, and points to the variety of nourishing and pleasant foods obtainable without blood-shedding.

    It’s possible historically that Christianity, like Buddhism, began as a pacifist and vegetarian religion, but was corrupted over the centuries, beginning, perhaps, with the apostle Paul. Secular scholar Keith Akers writes in his as of yet unpublished manuscript, Broken Thread, The Fate of the Jewish Followers of Jesus in Early Christianity:

    “The ‘orthodox’ response to vegetarianism has been somewhat contradictory… The objection to meat consumption has been taken as evidence of heresy when Christians have been faced with outsiders; however, vegetarianism met with a kinder reception among the monastic communities… Vegetarianism does attain a certain status even in orthodox circles.

    “Indeed, a list of known vegetarians among the church leaders reads very much like a Who’s Who in the early church. Peter is described as a vegetarian in the Recognitions and Homilies. Hegesippus, quoted by Eusebius, said that James (the brother of Jesus) was a vegetarian and was raised as a vegetarian. Clement of Alexandria thought that Matthew was a vegetarian…

    “According to Eusebius, the apostles — all the apostles, and not just James — abstained from both meat and wine, thus making them vegetarians and teetotalers, just like James. Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Basil, Gregory of Nanziance, John Chrysostom, and Tertullian were all probably vegetarians, based on their writings… they themselves are evidently vegetarian and can be counted on to say a few kind words about vegetarianism. On the other hand, there are practically no references to any Christians eating fish or meat before the council of Nicaea.

    “The rule of Benedict forbade eating any four-legged animals, unless one was sick. Columbanus allowed vegetables, lentil porridge, flour, and bread only, at all times, even for the sick. A fifth-century Irish rule forbids meat, fish, cheese, and butter at all times, though the sick, elderly, travel-weary, or even monks on holidays may eat cheese or butter, but no one may ever eat meat.

    “The Carthusians were especially strict about vegetarianism. The origin of their order is related by the story of St. Bruno and his companions, who on the Sunday before Lent are sitting before some meat and are debating whether they should eat meat at all.

    “During the debate, numerous examples of vegetarians among their monastic predecessors are mentioned–the Desert Fathers, Paul (the Hermit), Antony, Hilarion, Macharius, and Arsenius, are all cited as vegetarian examples. After much discussion, they fall asleep — and remain asleep for 45 days, waking up when Archbishop Hugh shows up on Wednesday of Holy Week! When they wake up, the meat miraculously turns to ashes, and they fall on their knees and determine never to eat meat again.

    “It is true that the church rejected the requirement for vegetarianism, following the dicta of Paul. However, it is interesting under these circumstances that there are so many vegetarians. In fact, outside of the references to Jesus eating fish in the New Testament, there are hardly any references to any early Christians eating meat.

    “Thus vegetarianism was practiced by the apostles, by James the brother of Jesus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Basil, Gregory of Nanziance, John Chrysostom, Tertullian, Bonaventure, Arnobius, Cassian, Jerome, the Desert Fathers, Paul (the Hermit), Antony, Hilarion, Machrius, Columbanus, and Aresenius — but not by Jesus himself!

    “It is as if everyone in the early church understood the message except the messenger. This is extremely implausible. The much more likely explanation is that the original tradition was vegetarian, but that under the pressure of expediency and the popularity of Paul’s writings in the second century, the tradition was first dropped as a requirement and finally dropped even as a desideratum.”

    In her 2004 book, Vegetarian Christian Saints: Mystics, Ascetics & Monks, Jewish scholar Dr. Holly Roberts (she has a Master’s degree in Christian theology) documents the lives and teachings of over 150 canonized vegetarian saints.

    In the (updated) 1986 edition of A Vegetarian Sourcebook, Keith Akers similarly observes:

    “But many others, both orthodox and heterodox, testified to the vegetarian origins of Christianity. Both Athanasius and his opponent Arius were strict vegetarians. Many early church fathers were vegetarian, including Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Heironymus, Boniface, and John Chrysostom.

    “Many of the monasteries both in ancient times and at the present day practiced vegetarianism… The requirement to be vegetarian has been diluted considerably since the earliest days, but the practice of vegetarianism was continued by many saints, monks, and laymen. Vegetarianism is at the heart of Christianity.”

    According to Father Ambrose Agius:

    “Many of the saints understood God’s creatures, and together they shared the pattern of obedience to law and praise of God that still leaves us wondering. The quickest way to understand is surely to bring our own lives as closely as possible into line with the intention of the Giver of all life, animate and inanimate.”

    The Reverend Alvin Hart, an Episcopal priest in New York, says:

    “Many Georgian saints were distinguished by their love for animals. St. John Zedazneli made friends with bears near his hermitage; St. Shio befriended a wolf; St. David of Garesja protected deer and birds from hunters, proclaiming, ‘He whom I believe in and worship looks after and feds all these creatures, to whom He has given birth.’ Early Celtic saints, too, favored compassion for animals. Saints Wales, Cornwall and Brittany of Ireland in the 5th and 6th centuries AD went to great pains for their animal friends, healing them and praying for them as well.”

    St. Benedict, who founded the Benedictine Order in AD 529, permitted meat only in times of sickness, and made vegetarian foods the staple for his monks, teaching, “Nothing is more contrary to the Christian spirit than gluttony.” The Rule of St. Benedict itself is a composite of ascetic teachings from previous traditions, such as St. Anthony’s monasticism in Egypt, which called for abstinence from meat and wine.

    According to E. Eyre-Smith, in an article from The Ark, “Montalembert’s Monks of the West records in Vita Columbani, the Chronicler Jonas, writing within 25 years of the death of St. Columba, relates that this saint spent long periods in solitary contemplation and communion with the wild creatures of the forest, and insisted on his monks living, like himself, on the fruits of the earth, herbs and pulses. This indicates that in making rules for his followers in regard to non-meat eating, he was moved by his love and regard for the rest of God’s creation.”

    (The Ark is a bulletin published by the Catholic Study Circle for Animal Welfare.)

    Aegidius (c. 700) was a vegetarian who lived on herbs, water and the milk of a deer God sent to him. Boniface (672-754) wrote to Pope Zacharias that he had begun a monastery which followed the rules of strict abstinence, whose monks do not eat meat nor enjoy wine or other intoxicating drinks. St. Andrew lived on herbs, olives, oil and bread. He lived to be 105.

    St. Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109) “was moved to feelings of compassion for animals, and he wept for them when he saw them caught in the hunter’s net.” St. Richard of Wyche, a vegetarian, was moved by the sight of animals taken to slaughter. “Poor innocent little creatures,” he observed. “If you were reasoning beings and could speak, you would curse us. For we are the cause of your death, and what have you done to deserve it?”

    It is said that St. Francis of Assisi (1182-1226) bought two lambs from a butcher and gave them the coat on his back to keep them warm; and that he bought two fish from a fishwoman and threw them back into the water. He even paid to ransom lambs that were being taken to their death, recalling the gentle Lamb who willingly went to slaughter (Isaiah 53:7; John 1:29) to pay the ransom of sinners.

    “Be conscious, O man, of the wondrous state in which the Lord God has placed you,” instructed Francis in his Admonitions (4), “for He created and formed you to the image of His beloved Son —and (yet) all the creatures under heaven, each according to its nature, serve know, and obey their Creator better than you.” St. Francis felt a deep kinship with all creatures. He called them “brother,” and “sister,” knowing they came from the same Source as himself.

    Francis revealed his fraternal love for the animal world during Christmas time 1223: “If I ever have the opportunity to talk with the emperor,” he explained, “I’ll beg him, for the love of God and me, to enact a special law: no one is to capture or kill our sisters the larks or do them any harm. Furthermore, all mayors and lords of castles and towns are required to scatter wheat and other grain on the roads outside the walls so that our sisters the larks and other birds might have something to eat on so festive a day.

    “And on Christmas Eve, out of reverence for the Son of God, whom on that night the Virgin Mary placed in a manger between the ox and the ass, anyone having an ox or an ass is to feed it a generous portion of choice fodder. And, on Christmas Day, the rich are to give the poor the finest food in abundance.”

    Francis removed worms from a busy road and placed them on the roadside so they would not be crushed under human traffic. Once when he was sick and almost blind, mice ran over his table as he took his meals and over him while he slept. He regarded their disturbance as a “diabolical temptation,” which he met with patience and restraint, indicating his compassion towards other living creatures.

    St. Francis was once given a wild pheasant to eat, but he chose instead to keep it as a companion. On another occasion, he was given a fish, and on yet another, a waterfowl to eat, but he was moved by the natural beauty of these creatures and chose to set them free.

    “Dearly beloved!” said Francis beginning a sermon after a severe illness, “I have to confess to God and you that… I have eaten cakes made with lard.”

    The Catholic Encyclopedia comments on this incident as follows: “St. Francis’ gift of sympathy seems to have been wider even than St. Paul’s, for we find to evidence in the great Apostle of a love for nature or for animals…

    “Francis’ love of creatures was not simply the offspring of a soft sentimental disposition. It arose from that deep and abiding sense of the presence of God. To him all are from one Father and all are real kin…hence, his deep sense of personal responsibility towards fellow creatures: the loving friend of all God’s creatures.”

    Francis taught: “All things of creation are children of the Father and thus brothers of man… God wants us to help animals, if they need help. Every creature in distress has the same right to be protected.”

    According to Francis, a lack of mercy towards animals leads to a lack of mercy towards men: “If you have men who will exclude any of God’s creatures from the shelter of compassion and pity, you will have men who will deal likewise with their fellow men.”

    One Franciscan monk, St. Anthony of Padua (1195-1231), who preached throughout France and Italy, is said to have attracted a group of fish that came to hear him preach. St. James of Venice, who lived during the 13th century, bought and released the birds sold in Italy as toys for children. It is said he “pitied the little birds of the Lord… his tender charity recoiled from all cruelty, even to the most diminutive of animals.”

    St. Bonaventure was a scholar and theologian who joined the Franciscan Order in 1243. He wrote The Soul’s Journey into God and The Life of St. Francis, the latter documenting St. Francis’ miracles with animals and love for all creation. Bonaventure taught that all creatures come from God and return to Him, and that the light of God shines through His different creatures in different ways:

    “…For every creature is by its nature a kind of effigy and likeness of the eternal Wisdom. Therefore, open your eyes, alert the ears of your spirit, open your lips and apply your heart so that in all creatures you may see, hear, praise, love and worship, glorify and honor your God.”

    St. Bridget (1303?-1373) of Sweden, founder of the Brigittine Order, wrote in her Revelations:

    “Let a man fear, above all, Me his God, and so much the gentler will he become towards My creatures and animals, on whom, on account of Me, their Creator, he ought to have compassion.”

    She raised pigs, and a wild boar is even said to have left its home in the forest to become her pet.

    “The reason why God’s servants love His creatures so deeply is that they realize how deeply Christ loves them,” explained St. Catherine of Siena (1347-1380). “And this is the very character of love to love what is loved by those we love.”

    “Here I saw a great unity between Christ and us…” wrote Julian of Norwich (1360-?), “for when he was in pain we were in pain, and all creatures able to suffer pain suffered with him.”

    Christian mystic, Thomas A’ Kempis (1380-1471) wrote in his devotional classic, The Imitation of Christ, that the soul desiring communion with God must be open to seeing, respecting and learning from all of God’s creatures, including the nonhumans:

    “…and if thy heart be straight with God,” he wrote, “then every creature shall be to thee a mirror of life and a book of holy doctrine, for there is no creature so little or vile, but that showeth and representeth the goodness of God.”

    St. Filippo Neri spent his entire life protecting and rescuing other living creatures. Born in Florence in 1515, he went to Rome as a young man, and tried to live as an ascetic. He sold his books, giving away the money to the poor. He worked without pay in the city hospital, tending to the sick and the poor. He gave whatever he possessed to others.

    St. Filippo loved the animals and could not bear to see them suffer. He took the mice caught in traps away from people’s homes and set them free in the fields and stables. A vegetarian, he could not endure walking past a butcher shop. “Ah,” he exclaimed. “If everyone were like me, no one would kill animals!”

    St. Martin de Porres was born in 1579 in Lima, Peru, as the child of a Spaniard and Ana Velasquez, a black washerwoman. He joined the Dominican Order at the age of 24, and later established orphanages, hospitals and other charitable institutions. On one occasion, he told his superior, “charity knows no rules!” St. Martin’s compassion extended to the lower animals, including even rats and mice. St. Martin healed and cared for stray dogs, cats, a mule, and even a vulture. He sometimes allowed the mosquitos to bite him, so that they might be fed, saying, “They, too, are God’s creatures.”

    The Trappist monks of the Catholic Church practiced vegetarianism from the founding of their Order until the Second Vatican Council in the late 1960s. According to the Trappist rules, as formulated by Armand Jean de Rance (1626-1700), “in the dining hall nothing is layed out except: pulse, roots, cabbages, or milk, but never any fish… I hope I will move you more and more rigorously, when you discover that the use of simple and rough food has its origin with the holy apostles (James, Peter, Matthew).

    “We can assure you that we have written nothing about this subject which was not believed, observed, proved good through antiquity, proved by historians and tradition, preserved and kept up to us by the holy monks.”

    Roman Catholic Cardinal John Henry Newman (1801-90), wrote in 1870 that “cruelty to animals is as if a man did not love God.” On another occasion, he asked:

    “Now what is it that moves our very heart and sickens us so much at cruelty shown to poor brutes? I suppose this: first, that they have done us no harm; next, that they have no power whatever of resistance; it is the cowardice and tyranny of which they are the victims which make their sufferings so especially touching… there is something so very dreadful, so satanic, in tormenting those who have never harmed us and who cannot defend themselves; who are utterly in our power.”

    Cardinal Newman compared injustices against animals to the sacrifice, agony and death of Christ upon the cross:

    “Think of your feelings at cruelty practiced upon brute animals and you will gain the sort of feeling which the history of Christ’s cross and passion ought to excite within you. And let me add, this is in all cases one good use to which you may turn any… wanton and unfeeling acts shown towards the…animals; let them remind you, as a picture of Christ’s sufferings. He who is higher than the angels, deigned to humble Himself even to the state of the brute creation…”

    Another cardinal, Henry Edward Manning (1808-92), spoke out against cruelty to animals, especially experimentation upon animals. In a letter dated July 13, 1891, he wrote: “We owe ourselves the duty not to be brutal or cruel; and we owe to God the duty of treating all His creatures according to His own perfections of love and mercy.”

    Bishop Westcott wrote, “Animals are in our power in a peculiar sense; they are committed by God to our sovereignty and we owe them a considerate regard for their rights. No animal life can be treated as a THING. Willful disrespect of the sanctities of physical life in one sphere bears its fruit in other and higher spheres.”

    Cardinal Francis Bourne (1861-1934) told children in Westminster Cathedral in April 1931: “There is even in kindness to animals a special merit in remembering that this kindness is obligatory upon us because God made the animals, and is therefore their creator, and, in a measure, His Fatherhood extends to them.”

    Cardinal Arthur Hinsley (1865-1943), the former archbishop of Westminster, wrote that “the spirit of St. Francis is the Catholic spirit.” According to Cardinal Hinsley, “Cruelty to animals is the degrading attitude of paganism.”

    Reverend Jean Gautier, a doctor in canon law, a director of the Grand Seminary in Paris (St. Sulpice), and a noted French authority on Roman Catholic philosophy, wrote in his book A Priest and his Dog: “For cruelty to defenseless beings we shall one day have to answer before Him who trieth the heart and the reins. Not with impunity is the weakness of animals abused.”

    In his 1957 book, The Status of Animals in the Christian Religion, author C.W. Hume wrote that the catechism children use for their first Communion and for their confirmation in France contains the answer, “it is not permissible for me to cause suffering to animals without good reason, to hurt them unnecessarily is an act of cruelty.” British Jesuit Father John Bligh observed, “A man is not likely to be much of a Christian if he is not kind to animals.”

    A Roman Catholic priest, Msgr. LeRoy McWilliams of North Arlington, New Jersey, testified in October 1962 in favor of legislation to reduce the sufferings of laboratory animals. He told congressional representatives:

    “The first book of the Bible tell us that God created the animals and the birds, so they have the same Father as we do. God’s Fatherhood extends to our ‘lesser brethren.’ All animals belong to God; He alone is their absolute owner. In our relations with them, we must emulate the divine attributes, the highest of which is mercy. God, their Father and Creator, loves them tenderly. He lends them to us and adjures us to use them as He Himself would do.””

    Msgr. McWilliams also issued a letter to all seventeen thousand Catholic pastors in the United States, calling upon them to understand “what Christianity imposes on humans as their clear obligation to animals.”

    Reverend Basil Wrighton, the chairman of the Catholic Study Circle for Animal Welfare in London, wrote in a 1965 article entitled, “The Golden Age Must Return: A Catholic’s Views on Vegetarianism,” that a vegetarian diet is not only consistent with, but actually required by the tenets of Christianity. He concluded that the killing of animals for food not only violates religious tenets, but brutalizes humans to the point where violence and warfare against other humans becomes inevitable.

    In 1969, Reverend Kevin Daley, as chairman of the CSCAW in London, wrote that “the work of animal welfare” is an “essential part of the work of a Christian.”

    A strong condemnation of cruelty towards animals appeared in the March 10, 1966 issue ofL’Osserevatore della Domenica, the official Vatican weekly newspaper. Written by the respected theologian, Msgr. Ferdinando Lambruschini, it read in part:

    “Man’s conduct with regard to animals should be regulated by right reason, which prohibits the infliction of purposeless pain and suffering on them. To ill treat them, and make them suffer without reason, is an act of deplorable cruelty to be condemned from a Christian point of view. To make them suffer for one’s own pleasure is an exhibition of sadism which every moralist must denounce.”

    In his 1970 book God’s Animals Reverend Don Ambrose Agius wrote: “It is a moral obligation for every Christian to fight cruelty to animals because the consequences of cruelty are destructive to the Christian order… The Bible… tells us that cruelty to animals is wicked and that it is opposed to God’s will and intention…The duty of all Christians (is) to emulate God’s attributes, especially that of mercy, in regard to animals. To be kind to animals is to emulate the loving kindness of God.”

    In his foreword to Reverend Agius’ book, Cardinal John Heenan wrote: “Animals… have very positive rights because they are God’s creatures. If we have to speak with absolute accuracy, we must say that God has the right to have all His creatures treated with respect… Only the perverted are guilty of deliberate cruelty to animals or, indeed, to children.”

    Vladimir Lossky wrote about “Cosmic Awareness” and the teachings of St. Maximus in a 1973 religious text: The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church. According to Lossky, the limitations of the creation are part of its intrinsic nature:

    “they are problems to be resolved, obstacles to be surmounted on the way towards union with God. Man is not a being isolated from the rest of creation; by his very nature, he is bound up with the whole of the universe, and St. Paul bears witness that the whole creation await the future glory which will be revealed in the sons of God (Rom. viii, 18-22). This cosmic awareness has never been absent from Eastern spirituality, and is given expression in theology as well as in liturgical poetry, in iconography and, perhaps above all, in the ascetical writings of the masters of the spiritual life of the Eastern Church…

    “In his way to union with God, man in no way leaves creatures aside, but gathers together in his love the whole cosmos disordered by sin, that it may at last be transfigured by grace.”

    In an editorial that appeared on Christmas Day, 1988, Washington Post columnist Colman McCarthy, a prominent Catholic vegan, observed:

    “A long raised but rarely answered question is this: If it was God’s plan for Christ to be born among animals, why have most Christian theologians denied the value and rights of animals? Why no theology of the peaceable kingdom?… Animals in the stable at Bethlehem were a vision of the peaceable kingdom. Among theology’s mysteries, this ought to be the easiest to fathom.”

    Mother Teresa, honored for her work amongst the poor with the 1979 Nobel Peace Prize, wrote in 1992 to Marlene Ryan, a former member of the National Alliance for Animals. Her letter reads:

    “I am praying for you that God’s blessing may be with you in all that you are doing to create concern for the animals which are often subjected to much cruelty. They, too, are created by the same loving Hand of God which created us. As we humans are gifted with intelligence which the animals lack, it is our duty to protect them and to promote their well being.

    “We also owe it to them as they serve us with such wonderful docility and loyalty. A person who shows cruelty to these creatures cannot be kind to other humans also. Let us do all we can to become instruments of peace—where we are—the true peace that comes from loving and caring and respecting each person as a child of God—my brother—my sister.”

    In an article entitled “The Primacy of Nonviolence as a Virtue,” appearing in Embracing Earth: Catholic Approaches to Ecology (1994), Brother Wayne Teasdale wrote: “One key answer to a culture’s preoccupation with violence is to teach, insist on, and *live* the value of nonviolence. It can be done successfully, and it has been done for more than 2,500 years by Jains and Buddhists.

    “Neither Jainism nor Buddhism has ever supported war or personal violence; this nonviolence extends to all sentient beings. Christianity can learn something valuable from these traditions. This teaching on nonviolence has been incarnated in the lives of Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Fourteenth Dalai Lama with significant results…”

    According to Teasdale: “…it is necessary to elevate nonviolence to a noble place in our civilization of loving-compassion because nonviolence as ahimsa in the Hindu tradition, a tradition that seems to possess the most advanced understanding of nonviolence, IS love! Love is the goal and ultimate nature of nonviolence as an inner disposition and commitment of the heart. It is the fulfillment of love and compassion in the social sphere, that is, in the normal course of relations among people in the matrix of society.”

    Any Christians looking for the spiritual dimension to vegetarianism and animal rights, should read Every Creature a Word of God by Annika Spalde and Pelle Strindlund. (Vegetarian Advocates Press, Cleveland, OH, 2008)

    “This book is beautifully written and carefully argued. It would be the perfect book for a Bible study or church study group,” writes Stephen Webb, professor of Religion and Philosophy at Wabash College, and author of Good Eating and On God and Dogs: A Christian Theology of Compassion for Animals.

    The authors, Annika Spalde and Pelle Strindlund, are married antinuclear and animal activists involved in the Lutheran Church in Sweden. They write:

    “This is a book about being Christian in a world shared with other beings. We do not live here alone. We have brothers and sisters. ‘The animals,’ wrote the American monk Thomas Merton (1915-68), ‘are the children of God.’ What does a spirituality that affirms God’s love for all creatures look like? That is the central question of this book.

    “The animal rights movement is a recent development, but Christian concern for animals is not. We see it in the stories of medieval monks who helped hares and deer escape from hunters, and of desert hermits who offered water to thirsty donkeys. In these pages you will discover the rich history of animal-friendly living and theology within the Christian tradition…

    “This book is a result of years of reflection on our relationship to other species… over coffee in church halls, fellow worshippers have challenged us: Haven’t we been given animals for our use? Didn’t Jesus eat meat? Such questions have forced us to ask if and how compassion for animals can be an embodiment of the Christian faith. The book is also an answer to the question we have received from many of our friends in the peace movement: How can you focus on animals when so many humans are suffering?”

    Annika Spalde is an ordained deacon of the Church of Sweden (Lutheran) and a founding member of the Swedish Christian Vegetarian Movement. Her work for nonviolence and justice has included participation in the Trident Ploughshares campaign to abolish the British nuclear arsenal; organizing against the Swedish arms industry; serving as an Edumenical Accompanier in Israel/Palestine; working as an assistant nurse in Paraguay; and living with homeless at a Catholic Worker house in Duluth Minnesota. Pelle Strindlund holds an MA in Religious Studies and is a founding member of The Rescue Service, a Swedish animal rights organization.

    And in School of Compassion, Deborah M. Jones engages with the Catholic Church’s contemporary attitude towards animals. This is the fullest sustained study of the subject in that faith tradition. It begins by exploring the history of the Church’s ideas about animals. These were drawn largely from significant readings of Old and New Testament passages and inherited elements of classical philosophies.

    Themes emerge, such as the renewal of creation in the apocryphal legends, in the Desert Fathers, and in Celtic monasticism. The spirituality of St Francis of Assisi, the legal status of animals, and liturgies of the Eastern Catholic Churches also shed light on the Church’s thinking.

    The British Catholic tradition – which is relatively favorable to animals – is considered in some detail. The second part of the book provides a forensic examination of the four paragraphs in the Catechism of the Catholic Church which relate particularly to animals. Finally, major contemporary issues are raised – stewardship, anthropocentrism, and gender – as well as key ethical theories. The book revisits some teachings of Aquinas, and explores doctrinal teachings such as that of human beings created in the ‘image of God’, and, with a nod to the Orthodox Tradition, as the ‘priests of creation’. These help form a consistent and authentically Catholic theology which can be viewed as a school of compassion towards animals.

    Deborah M Jones is general secretary of the international organization Catholic Concern for Animals and a Fellow of the Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics, with a doctorate in animal theology. She has also worked as editor of the Catholic Herald, deputy editor of Priests & People, as a writer and lecturer, and diocesan adviser for adult religious education.

    For Love of Animals: Christian Ethics, Consistent Action offers the reader an introduction to animal rights ethics within a Christian framework alongside directly related sanctity-of-life issues, like the rights of unborn children. The book’s foreword is written by Mary Eberstadt, senior fellow with the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, DC, a devout Catholic who identifies herself as “Pro-Animal, Pro-Life.”

    Author Charles Camosy responds to criticisms from academicians Peter Singer and Lynn White, Jr., that the Christian misinterpretation of “human dominion” (versus compassionate stewardship) is responsible for the current ecological crisis. Camosy indicates that Christianity cannot be blamed if humans with their imperfections distort their own religious teachings, that Christianity did not give rise to the industrial revolution, and that real Christianity — as it was meant to be practiced — is at odds with market-driven ethics and mass consumerism (a point made decades ago by liberal Protestant theologian Dr. Harvey Cox).

    Camosy discusses the the moral status of animals in the Bible from Genesis to the Peaceable Kingdom in Isaiah 11:6-9, reconciling animal sacrifices and Jesus’ miracles like the multiplication of loaves and fishes with the vegetarian view, and downplaying the apostle Paul’s dim view of animals by contrasting Paul’s words on animals with those of Jesus. Camosy discusses early Christian saints and other great figures in the Christian tradition. Camosy discusses current Christian teachings on animals, including animal-friendly statements by recent Popes. Subsequent chapters discuss factory farming, eating meat, research, hunting, and pets.

    In 1992, my pro-life friends in Life Chain couldn’t understand my bringing up the issue of animal rights among pro-lifers, and trying to show that the Bible and the Christian tradition support the vegetarian way of life. They compared it to the Pharisees trying to trap Jesus in his own words, whereas I, having researched the long history of animal advocacy and vegetarianism within Christianity, saw it as reasonable and mainstream as someone from a pro-life Christian denomination discussing sanctity-of-life issues with someone from a pro-choice Christian denomination.

    Charles Camosy writes in his 2013 book: “About ten years ago I became convinced that, if I wanted to be authentically and consistently pro-life, I should give up eating meat.”

    The International Network for Religion and Animals (INRA) was founded in 1985, and since then dozens of books have been written on Christianity and animal rights. There is enough of a long history of concern for animals and vegetarianism in Christianity to provide the basis for Christians to be “Pro-Animal, Pro-Life,” but Camosy merely provides an overview of animal rights and animal ethics within a Christian framework.

  13. Vasu, that you think anyone cares to be preached to in such abundance or to believe anyone has the time to dedicate to your word alone, openly displays your obnoxious arrogance. I gave your posts a fair chance and read through a good portion of the first volume you imposed on us but was not fooled by your sanctimoniously superior attitude and tone. Aside from that my only other comment I’d like to post is on the subject matter of the article this forum was supposed to be based on, which is Kanye West and his new album. I echo the sentiments of those who say more power to Kanye for standing up to the forces that want to silence him. I pray for his bravery and wisdom to be noticed and to help towards Gods purpose alone.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here