cont'd ...

My apologies my earlier post was directed at Josephus.

continued

James Carroll's Constantine's Sword is a 2007 historical documentary film on the relationship between the Catholic Church and Jews.The film is inspired by former priest James P. Carroll's 2001 book Constantine's Sword.

The title page of this film shows the shadow of a cross, with "No war is holy" written across the transept. Constantine’s Sword is the story of James P. Carroll's journey to uncover the roots of war. Carroll, a former Catholic priest implies that there has been a relationship between religiously inspired violence and war, beginning with the adoption of Christianity by the Roman Emperor Constantine I in 312 AD. Constantine was convinced that he had won a battle because he had followed the instructions of a vision, to inscribe a sign of the cross (the Labarum) (as mhaze noted) on the shields of his soldiers. In Carroll's view, this event marked the beginning of an unholy alliance between the military and the Church.

Carroll focuses on Catholic and evangelical anti-Judaism, and invokes the cross as a symbol of the long history of Christian xenophobic violence against Jews and non-Christians,from the Crusades, through the Roman Inquisition and the creation of the Jewish ghetto, to the Holocaust. Carroll also charges that there is an ongoing evangelical infiltration of the U.S. military, and that this has had negative consequences for U.S. foreign policy. The film's final chapter, "No war is holy", concludes with views of military cemeteries as Aaron Neville sings "With God On Our Side".

Thank you so much, David - much appreciated.

There's a book by Taylor R. Marshall -
"The Crucified Rabbi: Judaism and the origins of
Catholic Christianity."

Apparently it explains the Jewish roots of
Catholicism.

I'm going to try to get a hold of it.
The two religions may be more alike than realized.

.

Dear Foxy,

.

You wrote :

« I think the suggested model by the ARM is a step in the right direction. We have to make a start somewhere. No action should not be an option. A Bill of Rights will eventuate »
.

Yes, that’s what I understood, Foxy, but unfortunately, I’m afraid it will be seen by many as all that is necessary – not just the first step, but also the last step.

Obviously, the easiest change to make is to replace the British Crown as the head of state with an elected Australian citizen. But if that’s all we do we’ll be stuck with our old outdated colonial constitution – that has proven impossible to modify – for many more long years to come.

As the ARM and many others will jump for joy at the success of the change of the head of state, declaring Australia a republic, I’m afraid it will be a very long time before the country understands why we should all go back to the polls again and do what we should have done in the first place : vote for a new constitution with an embedded bill of rights.

Queen Elizabeth II has outlasted every one of her predecessors. She is now 95 years old. She lost her husband, Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh, last year. Though I don’t wish her any harm, it is not difficult to foresee that the end of her reign is near.

A major change is coming and, in my view, we should be fully prepared for it and take this historic opportunity to make a meaningful change from our current status as a Constitutional Monarchy to a Republic, and replace our old colonial constitution with a completely new Republican constitution.

We should strike while the iron is hot and not waste such an exceptional historic opportunity by simply satisfying ourselves with what can only be described as a purely symbolic change of head of state.

I think the time is right for us to be a little more ambitious.

.

The Queen of Australia is merely a figure Head, it does not matter to whom we give allegiance providing they uphold the Constitution and Laws formed under the Constitution. They need to be schooled in the Constution and understand the laws. A person voted by popular opinion will polarise sections of the citizens as it has done in America. It is better that a head of State be appointed by a panel of Judges, appointing a person of good character who has held a high office.

Track the Irish Catholic roots of Republican advocates, it might be interesting.