On this bit:
[quote name='Husky' date='28 December 2011 - 10:02 PM' timestamp='1325089458' post='114105']
Of course, it turns out that Jayalalitha (who greenlighted christianism's framing of the Kanchi Swami) is a christian also - though no one wants to say it, presumably since Indians are still too sensitive to fingerpoint christianism - being a regular christian witness to catholic mass no less. From memory/my understanding, one needs to be baptised into the christian faith plus have received the sacrament of the Eucharist in order to attend catholic mass. That means that Jayalalitha has to be christian and a practising catholic if she's allowed at mass.[/quote]
Apparently the details on attending Mis are more intricate. But it turns out Ishwar Sharan has similar suspicions on what Jayalalitha needs to be in order for her to take part in catholic rites. And as IS' relations were (protestant) christian and moreover attempted - and clearly failed - to raise him in that ideology, he is likely to know more about christianity:
The above quotation by IS is stolen from the comments section at:
http://vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayAr...px?id=2140
Jerusalem: Church sheds its Secular Mask by Sandhya Jain
Probably everyone's seen it already and I'd have been the last to read it as usual, but still, thought it an important article. Especially the eerie section on how easily the christoised courts circumvented the constitution - seeing an opportunity to injure Hindus further - and snapped their fingers in Hindoos' faces while doing so.
The Codes of Theodosius and Justinian. Updated for our times.
[quote name='Husky' date='28 December 2011 - 10:02 PM' timestamp='1325089458' post='114105']
Of course, it turns out that Jayalalitha (who greenlighted christianism's framing of the Kanchi Swami) is a christian also - though no one wants to say it, presumably since Indians are still too sensitive to fingerpoint christianism - being a regular christian witness to catholic mass no less. From memory/my understanding, one needs to be baptised into the christian faith plus have received the sacrament of the Eucharist in order to attend catholic mass. That means that Jayalalitha has to be christian and a practising catholic if she's allowed at mass.[/quote]
Apparently the details on attending Mis are more intricate. But it turns out Ishwar Sharan has similar suspicions on what Jayalalitha needs to be in order for her to take part in catholic rites. And as IS' relations were (protestant) christian and moreover attempted - and clearly failed - to raise him in that ideology, he is likely to know more about christianity:
Quote:I have very grave doubts about Jayalalithaa. If Mass is said in her house regularly as has been claimed, then she is Christian. Even an Indian priest who will take any liberty with a Hindu politician for gain, cannot say Mass in a Hindu house. He needs a consecrated altar and who will he give the Eucharist to if not the house-owner who must be a baptised Christian.And that also immediately explains all about the who/what(=christianism), the why and the how behind the framing of the Kanchi Swamigal.
Ishwar Sharan
16 Jan 2012
The above quotation by IS is stolen from the comments section at:
http://vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayAr...px?id=2140
Jerusalem: Church sheds its Secular Mask by Sandhya Jain
Probably everyone's seen it already and I'd have been the last to read it as usual, but still, thought it an important article. Especially the eerie section on how easily the christoised courts circumvented the constitution - seeing an opportunity to injure Hindus further - and snapped their fingers in Hindoos' faces while doing so.
The Codes of Theodosius and Justinian. Updated for our times.