Jesus was restoring the Jubilee that was abolished before he was born. This got everyone’s attention because most of the world was under the yoke of Roman Slavery. Rome’s army would conquer a people, then send in one of their specialist priests who would assume the head of the folk religion and alter it to suit the gods and the rule of Rome. All mention of LIBERTY was rubbed out. Paul was such a priest, hired by Rome and the Herodians to rub-out all mention of the Jubliee. Paul bids his followers to remain slaves.
Here is a post that anticipates the coming of Pope Francis, and the running of Bernie Sanders for President of the United States. After discovering Jesus was restoring the Jubilee, I went and finished my First Communion and Confession that I walked out of when I was twelve, after the Father called me a liar. I was a Saint.
I walked around with my side-kick ‘Robbing the Rich For The Hood’. There were coins inside my Santa that I rattled. This is Berniehood. Bernie has been compared to Santa Claus, as well as Pope Francis. Both have been titled ‘Socialists’. I had two students sign my petition. One was from Tibet, the other from the United Emarite. He had expensive shoes. He had much money at his asking. His friend took our pic which is one of my favorite.
I have found the chapel where Knight Templars are interred…..in Bellevaux. They owned the Shroud of Turin.
Tonight is the Eve of Yom Kippur. The world will never be the same after the sunsets tomorrow. For it is the Golden Jubilee. That Pope Francis lands in the The Land of the free on this day – is prophetic!
Well, the last Jubilee year occured from Sept. 24, 1966 to Oct. 13, 1967 (these dates are from atonement/yom kippur 1966 to atonement/yom kippur 1967). This entire span of time from Sept. 24, 1966 to Oct. 13, 1967 of the following year was the Jubilee year. And it was WITHIN this period of time (Jubilee) that Israel recaptured Jerusalem on June 7, 1967. So looking to the next Jubilee we count 49 years of 365.25 days, from Sept. 24, 1966 and literally end up at Sept. 22, 2015…with the next day September 23, 2015 being the START of that extra 50th Jubilee year, which would run through to Oct. 12, 2016. Perhaps this is why Rabbi’s in Israel celebrated the last Shmita (Sabbath) year from Sept 22, 2007 to Oct 8, 2008 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shmita, because the next Shmita year ocurrs 7 yrs later from Oct. 4, 2014 to Sept. 22, 2015, the next day being Jubilee from Sept. 23, 2015 to Oct. 11, 2016.
The Jubilee Prophet
Last November I made up a poster, hung it on a tree on the University of Oregon grounds outside the library, rang a bell, and shouted;
“Who wants some Liberty? I got your Liberty right here!”
I posted on this event on my blog that is no more. I sent news of my one man demonstration to the President of the Stuudent Union on November 16, 2010. I call for a Student Bank made up of monies retrieved from offshore bank accounts. It would be an honor bank system, where tax evaders who have a change of heart could put their money they hid from the Fed in a Student National Bank – and invest in America’s future! For doing this, they will be redeemed in the Spirit of the Jubilee Jesus, who I have prepared the way for.
The Occupy Eugene Community has moved to the University of Oregon, and set up camp a hundred yards from my Liberty Tree. I had to do something that day. I wanted to start a New Revolution. It only takes one good man – and the others will follow!
Here is what my brochre and contract with America, said;
“The Sons and Daughters of The Liberty Tree
On this day_____________
I grant to______________________________Patriotic Permission to help Liberate the taxable assets disloyal Americvans have hidden on the Cayman Islands, so that Loyal Americans can help pay for their college tuition, and the tuition of millions of freedom Loving Students.
Great Grandson of Real Patriots”
I just found the Abbey Bellevaux where the Lords of Rougemont, and the Bishops of Besançon are buried. The Rougemonts were Knights Templar and owners of the Shroud of Turin as were the Lords of La Roche. Pons La Roche was the founder of Bellevaux where very possibley my Rougemont ancestors are buried. Pons is close kindred of the De Bar and Habsburg family. Why would the Habsburg keep their connection to the Knights Templar and Shroud of Turin a secret? The Habsburgs were ‘defenders of the Catholic faith’.
I am going to make a pilgrimage to this Abbey Bellevaux and own the end of my book. I am looking for backers of my expedition. Who would like to go with?
The Lords of Rougemont and Ferrette also owned Florimont (mountain of flowers) castle where modern day (1785) Knights of Ferrette gathered, and a Raja M built a house dedicated to the troubadours. (1892) Are we looking at the first pseudo-history of the Templars?
Thibaud Rougemont was a co-founder of the Priory Marast.
“This James (or Jacob, for these names were once interchangeable) was the son of Hans Ulrich Rosemond, born 1623, a weaver; who was a son of Hans, a weaver, born 1581; who was a son of Fred Rosemond, born 1552, a weaver, member of town council and a local captain; who was the son of another Hans whose date of birth is not known, but he too, was a weaver and became a citizen of Basle in 1534. His father was Erhart de Rougemont who bought in 1495 ¡°the house called Rebleuten-Zunft in Basle in the Freistrasse”
Here is a very good article on the Liberation mentioned in Luke. I am going to publish the whole thing because articles like this have a way of disappearing.
There are many sects having an argument over how to deal with ISIS, the new slave masters. I know Pope Francis is in much pain because of the helplessness he feels in stopping the persecution of Christians in the Levant. The Vatican has called for Christians, or someone, to take up the sword and defend the helpless. I hereby, pick up a sword, and in the name of the Jubilee Jesus, I declare a War of Liberation against all those who take away the Liberty of others, and make them slaves. The real Jesus began a armed Revolution like the one that begot my Democracy.
Jon the Nazarite
How is it that Democrats forgot about the joys Santa Claus can bring? How is it that Republicans managed to steal the Santa idea from the party of FDR and never let go?
Understanding why Bernie Sanders’s presidential candidacy is important requires revisiting the politics of St. Nick. The senator from Vermont has little chance of defeating Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination. But he is reminding his party of something it often forgets: Government was once popular because it provided tangible benefits to large numbers of Americans.
- A year of LIBERATION. Forgiveness of all debts. Consider the Lord’s Prayer. “The effect of this addition in the Gospel is therefore greater insistence on the fact that the jubilee year must be a year of liberation. This aspect was already present in the prophecy of Isaiah 61,1-2 which said they were “to proclaim liberty to captives”; the Gospel underlines this, repeating for a second time “set free” (the Greek text uses twice the same word aphesis, saying literally: “set the downtrodden free”); furthermore the theme is amplified, because the second time it says not only to “proclaim” but actually “to set free”. This evangelical orientation corresponds perfectly with the biblical understanding of the Jubilee in Lev. 25,10. This text in fact says: “You will declare this fiftieth year sacred and proclaim the liberation (Hebrew derur, Greek aphesis)of all the inhabitants of the land. This is to be a jubilee for you”. In the Greek translation of the Old Testament the relation between jubilee and liberation is even closer because the Hebrew term jubel is not translated into Greek as it was in the Latin of the Vulgate (jubilaeus) and in other languages, it has been translated as “liberation (aphesis)” (Lev 25,13), or “year of liberation” (Lev 25,10) or again “sign of liberation” (Lev 25,11-12), so that the word “liberation” is repeated five times in four verses. This liberation was first of all for the Jews who were slaves, but it also included the remission of debts.
The pope: “Inequality is the root of social ills … as long as the problems of the poor are not radically resolved by rejecting the absolute autonomy of markets and financial speculation and by attacking the structural causes of inequality, no solution will be found for the world’s problems or, for that matter, to any problems. … The majority of our contemporaries are barely living from day to day, with dire consequences. A number of diseases are spreading. The hearts of many people are gripped by fear and desperation, even in the so-called rich countries. The joy of living frequently fades, lack of respect for others and violence are on the rise, and inequality is increasingly evident. It is a struggle to live and, often, to live with precious little dignity. … The current model, with its emphasis on success and self-reliance, does not appear to favor an investment in efforts to help the slow, the weak or the less talented to find opportunities in life.”
THE JUBILEE YEAR IN THE GOSPEL OF LUKE
For the preparation of the Great Jubilee particular importance must surely be given to the passage in the Gospel of Saint Luke which tells us about Jesus’ preaching in Nazareth (Lk 4,16-30). The passage in fact is the only one in the whole of the New Testament which mentions a jubilee year, giving it great importance. Therefore it would seem opportune to offer some reflection on this subject.
1. Saint Luke is not the only evangelist who records Jesus’ visit to Nazareth “where he had been brought up” (Lk 4,16). Saint Mark and Saint Matthew also refer to this episode, although without mentioning the name of the town, referred to simply as “his home town” (Mk 6,1; Mt 13,54). There are however several differences between the story told by Luke and those of Mark and Matthew. We have already implicitly indicated one, when we observed that Luke is the only one who gives the contents of Jesus’ preaching. The other two evangelists limit themselves to saying that Jesus “began to teach in the synagogue” (Mk 6,2; Cf Mt 13,54); but they do not say what he taught. Luke, on the other hand, tells how Jesus “stood up to read, and they handed him the scroll of the prophet Isaiah. Unrolling the scroll he found the place where it is written: The spirit of the Lord has been given to me …!” (Lk 4,16-18; Is 61,1). Very significantly the last line of Isaiah read by Jesus says: “to proclaim the Lord’s year of favour” (Lk 4,19; Is 61,2), and immediately afterwards, Jesus’ message was a declaration that precisely “this text” was being fulfilled on that day. The expression of Isaiah 61,2 “year of the Lord’s favour” clearly refers to the prescriptons in the Book of Leviticus on the jubilee year (Lev 25,10-13). Therefore at Nazareth Jesus was proclaiming a Jubilee year.
The Forty-Eighters were Europeans who participated in or supported the socialist revolutions of 1848 that swept Europe. In Germany, the Forty-Eighters favored unification of the German people, a more democratic government, and guarantees of human rights. Disappointed at the failure of the revolution to bring about the reform of the system of government in Germany or the Austrian Empire and sometimes on the government’s wanted list because of their involvement in the revolution, they gave up their old lives to try again abroad. Many emigrated to the United States, England, and Australia after the revolutions failed. They included Germans, Czechs, Hungarians, and others. Many were respected, wealthy, and well-educated; as such, they were not typical migrants. A large number went on to be very successful in their new countries.
2. Another important difference between Luke and the other two synoptic Gospels concerns the position given to this episode in the books. In Mark, Jesus’ visit to his home town is found not at the beginning of his ministry, but after a long period of preaching the Gospel and healing, even after the discourse in parables (Mk 4,1-34) and the resurrection of Jairus’ daughter (Mk 5,21-43). In Matthew, Jesus has also already pronounced his address on mission to the “Twelve Apostles” (10,2-42). Luke, instead, chose to give this episode first place in his narration of the ministry of Jesus. At first sight we could think that it was Luke’s intention to correct the chronology of Mark and Matthew. A detail of his story demonstrates however that this supposition is incorrect: as Jesus preaches he says that the people in Nazareth will say to him: “We have heard all that has happened in Capernaum, do the same here in your own countryside” (Lk 4,23). These words show that before going to Nazareth, Jesus had begun his ministry in Capernaum and had already provoked great admiration among the people, to the point that his fame had reached Nazareth. It is clear then that Luke’s intention was not to give chronological clarifications. What was his intention then? It was – commentators agree – to confer a programmatic value on the episode. In Nazareth Jesus defines his mission as messianic, saying it is the fulfilment of a prophecy which announced the preaching of a jubilee year. The whole of Jesus’ ministry therefore must be understood in this prospective.
3. The way in which Luke quotes Isaiah presents also details which reveal a certain manner of interpreting the jubilee year. After speaking of “proclaiming (…) to the blind new sight” Luke adds: “to set the downtrodden free“, an expression inspired by another passage of Isaiah, (Is 58,6) where its serves to define the “fasting” which pleases God; this authentic fasting does not consist in observing ritual (“hanging your head like a reed, lying down on sackcloth and ashes”: Is 58,5), rather, it is “to break unjust fetters and undo the throngs of the yoke, to let the oppressed go free and break every yoke”: (Is 58,6). The effect of this addition in the Gospel is therefore greater insistence on the fact that the jubilee year must be a year of liberation. This aspect was already present in the prophecy of Isaiah 61,1-2 which said they were “to proclaim liberty to captives”; the Gospel underlines this, repeating for a second time “set free” (the Greek text uses twice the same word aphesis, saying literally: “set the downtrodden free”); furthermore the theme is amplified, because the second time it says not only to “proclaim” but actually “to set free”. This evangelical orientation corresponds perfectly with the biblical understanding of the Jubilee in Lev. 25,10. This text in fact says: “You will declare this fiftieth year sacred and proclaim the liberation (Hebrew derur, Greek aphesis)of all the inhabitants of the land. This is to be a jubilee for you”. In the Greek translation of the Old Testament the relation between jubilee and liberation is even closer because the Hebrew term jubel is not translated into Greek as it was in the Latin of the Vulgate (jubilaeus) and in other languages, it has been translated as “liberation (aphesis)” (Lev 25,13), or “year of liberation” (Lev 25,10) or again “sign of liberation” (Lev 25,11-12), so that the word “liberation” is repeated five times in four verses. This liberation was first of all for the Jews who were slaves, but it also included the remission of debts. It was prescribed for every seventh year (cf Dt 15,1-3,12; Jer 34, 13-14), but in particular after seven times seven years, that is, in the jubilee year. The Gospel insists on this prospective to characterise the mission of Jesus. The fact cannot fail to be enlightening and stimulating for the celebration of the Great Jubilee of the Year 2000, which should contribute considerably towards the liberation of the human person in many ways.
4. One more particularity of Luke’s quotation of Is 4,18-19, completes the prospective. This time it is an omission. In fact the Gospel does not quote the whole phrase of Isaiah, which includes two compliments of the object after the verb “proclaim” in Is 61,2. The Gospel quotes only the first (“the Lord’s year of favour”) neglecting the second which is “a day of vengeance for our God”. The oracle of Isaiah foresees two aspects of divine intervention, the first the liberation of the Jewish people, the other punishment of her enemies. The Gospel has not retained this opposition. The omission has two consequences: a) the message contains nothing negative; b) it is implicitly universal. In fact there is no suggestion of distinction between Jews and non-Jews. This is discreet preparation for the universal nature of the Gospel message, which will become explicit after the death and resurrection of Jesus: when the most fundamental liberation, from sin (aphesis hamartion) will be proclaimed “in his name to all people” (Lk 24,47). In preparation and celebration of the Great Jubilee, universal openness is an essential character.
5. The Gospel passages which follow show how difficult it is for us to attain to a universal vision. Spontaneously our reactions are egoistic; our hearts refuse to open completely. It hurts to open up ourselves! We see this in Jesus’ own people. Listening to Jesus they were filled with admiration for “the gracious words that came from his lips” (Lk 4,22). His message of liberation was marvellous. Then they recognise this young prophet as one of them and they say: “This is Joseph’s son surely?” The question is not explained any further, by them. What is its implicit meaning? Here we must avoid interpreting Luke by looking at the texts of Mark and Matthew. There is a difference. In Mark and Matthew the people consider the humble origin of Jesus who was “the carpenter” (Mk 6,3), “the son of the carpenter” (Mt 13,55) and use it to doubt the greatness of his mission. Luke, on the other hand, makes no mention, here or elsewhere, of Jesus’ humble origin. On the contrary, he underlines from the beginning the noble origin of Joseph “a man of the house of David” (Lk 1,27) and repeats this to explain the birth of Jesus at Bethlehem: “Joseph went to the city of David called Bethlehem because he was of the house and the family of David” (Lk 2,4). After the baptism of Jesus, Luke presents the genealogy of Joseph’s descent from David (Lk 3,23-38). The reader of Luke’s Gospel has just read this genealogy when the evangelist proposes the story of Jesus’ visit to Nazareth; therefore he has no motive to interpret in a derogative sense the people’s question.
What was the meaning then of this question? Jesus himself provides the anwer. Jesus knows the working of human hearts. He sees that the question corresponds to a possessive attitude: you are the son of Joseph and therefore one of us; you belong to us and therefore you must do for us all that you are able to do. “We have heard all that happened in Capernaum, do the same here in your own countryside” (Lk 4,23). Jesus resists decisively this possessive attitude; he does not accept it at all. On the contrary he urges the people to open their hearts. They must know that “no prophet is ever accepted in his own country” (Lk 4,24) and not because the people refuse a priori to believe in him, but because the prophet himself refuses to place his extraordinary gifts at their service, putting strangers first. To inculcate this point in their minds Jesus quotes two well known examples: that of the great prophet Elijah sent by God, in view of a miraculous intervention, not to a widow in Israel but to a non-Jewish woman (1 Kings 17,9-16) and that of the prophet Elisha who healed “Naaman the Syrian” from leprosy (2 Kings 5,8-14). The lesson is clear: if the people of Nazareth wish to correspond to the desires of God, they must willingly accept that “his” prophet works his miracles not in Nazareth but in the other towns and villages. Jesus wants his people to be generous of heart.
6. This was a question of a radical reversal of prospective, of difficult conversion. The people of Nazareth did not agree. They refused to renounce their possessive attitude. Now when possessive love is thwarted or obstructed it produces a violent reaction. Many dramas of passion are provoked by this sort of reaction, the drama of jealousy for example. Hearing the words of Jesus “everyone in the synagogue was enraged (Lk 4,28) and they sought to kill him” (4,29). Refusal to open our heart can lead to such extremes. Unfortunately, also in our day we witness similar events; we think of the seven Trappists slaughtered in Algeria, the Bishop killed in Oran, we think also of the inhuman cruelty of “ethnic cleansing” in former Yugoslavia and elsewhere. At the root of these horrible crimes there lies an extremely virulent attitude of possessiveness and exclusion.
Sad to say, not only the first part of the Gospel story, that is, the preaching of Jesus (Lk 4,16-21) is seen to be programmatic but also the second (Lk 4,23-30), that is, the negative reaction of his own people. Jesus was bitterly criticised because he demonstrated great openness of heart, particularly towards ” publicans and sinners”. This attitude of his caused rising opposition which led him to the cross. In the Acts of the Apostles we read more than once that the success of Saint Paul’s preaching to the pagans provoked jealousy among some of the Jews, who opposed the Apostle and stirred up persecution against him (Cf Acts 13,45;17,5; 22,21-22). Also within the Christian community a possessive attitude caused serious harm. In Corinth for example, many believers attached themselves jealously to one apostle or another; this caused conflict and division in the community. Paul had to intervene forcefullly (1 Cor 1,10-3,23).
To conclude: it will undoubtedly be most useful for the preparation of the Great Jubilee to meditate on the gospel narration of Jesus’ visit to Nazareth according to Luke. Because the story indicates the principal orientation of the jubilee year and warns us to be on gurad against certain attitudes which are incompatible with the spirit of the Jubilee Year, the tendency to be possessive and egoistic and to be small in mind and heart. The Great Jubilee must be a time of great openness of heart, in union with the Heart of the “Saviour of the world” (Jn 4,42).
NEW YORK — Compared to many of her unemployed classmates, Gabby Bladdick counts herself among the lucky ones.
Since graduating with a degree in public relations from Valparaiso University in December, Bladdick has landed a full-time job in her chosen field that even includes benefits.
But she’s quickly learning that $1,700 a month doesn’t stretch far, especially with student loan payments now due. Bladdick, who owes about $40,000, devotes more than a third of her salary — or $590 each month — toward paying them back.
“When I first started looking at colleges, I figured I’d take out loans and get a job and that it wouldn’t be that big of a deal,” said Bladdick, now 22. “But I had absolutely no idea how much of a burden $600 a month really is for a recent grad.”
Earlier today, President Obama announced a new program to help make higher education more affordable by helping current college students not only consolidate their loans, but lower their monthly payments.
Borrowers who graduate next year and in the years following will be eligible to consolidate their federal loans at a slightly lower interest rate.
Further, the plan also alters the existing income-based repayment program to allow graduates to pay 10 percent of their discretionary income over a period of 20 years — versus requiring enrollees to pay 15 percent of their discretionary income over a period of 25 years before any education-related debt can be forgiven.
While the new plan will help current college students who take out loans beginning in 2012, Obama’s plan fell short of providing relief to the millions of debt-strapped borrowers who already struggle to make their monthly loan payments.
“It’s a step in the right direction, but a lot of people who need the relief right now won’t be the ones who benefit,” said Mark Kantrowitz, who publishes the financial aid websites Fastweb.com and Finaid.org. “This plan doesn’t do anything for a majority of distressed borrowers. It only helps those still in school.”
Earlier today, during a speech about college affordability at the University of Colorado, Denver, Obama announced his plan while also highlighting the increasing cost of higher education.
“Over the past three decades, the cost of college has nearly tripled. And that is forcing you, forcing students, to take out more loans and rack up more debt,” Obama said. “Last year, graduates who took out loans left college owing an average of $24,000. Student loan debt has now surpassed credit card debt, for the first time ever.”
In addition to Obama’s plan to help future graduates better manage the issue of rising debt loads, the College Board also released its annual “Trends in College Pricing” report.
The report underscored the worsening issue of college affordability. It found that over the past three decades, average costs at four-year public universities have nearly quadrupled.
While the average public in-state tuition rates at four-year institutions are 8.3 percent higher than they were in 2010-2011, tuition and fees at private colleges and universities increased by 4.5 percent.
“While the price of college goes up every year, it’s very clear that public college prices are rising more rapidly than private college prices and that’s certainly related to the decline of state budgets,” said Sandy Baum, an economist at Skidmore College who co-authored the College Board’s report.
Kantrowitz sees today’s report as only the latest indication of the decreasing affordability of college for the average American.
“Everyone is struggling, not just to pay for college, but in all aspects of their lives,” said Kantrowitz, who highlighted that the rising cost of college occurs at a time when family income and starting salaries have largely stagnated over the past decade.
In the longer term, he sees future college students either graduating with thousands of dollars in additional debt, shifting their enrollment to less expensive colleges and subsequently graduating at lower rates — or simply foregoing the dream of a college education altogether.
Given the increasing cost of college, Matthew Segal, the 25-year-old founder of Our Time, a national membership organization for Americans under the age of 30, sees Obama’s plan as a hopeful first step in the right direction.
“More money in the pockets of cash-strapped young people already struggling to pay their rent and buy groceries is definitely a good thing,” said Segal, referring to the future changes in income-based repayment rates. “In a perfect world, this would also address the larger problem of why higher education is so expensive in the first place.”
It’s a question that Bladdick often ponders, especially at the start of each month when her loan payments are due.
Bladdick grew up in a middle class home in St. Louis. Her father is a real estate agent and her mother is a mail carrier.
In recent years, when her family fell on tough financial times, the sole burden of paying for college fell squarely on her shoulders. Still, she can’t help but feel frustrated by how quickly the rules have changed.
“I wouldn’t change having gone to college for anything,” said Bladdick, during her lunch break. “But it’s frustrating to hear that Obama’s new plan won’t really apply to us. We’re the people who went through college and graduated when the economy collapsed and these loans, they’re absolutely killing us.”