CathInfo.com

Phallic or not, that thing comes from Paganism, and it does not look like it has been Christianized enough. I would like to see a reasonable explanation for the design of that strange piazza which does not involve some occult or Pagan logic.

I find it puzzling how far some people will go to defend those terrible Popes who promoted the Renaissance arts.

Of course this is no big deal, considering the very serious problems that we have nowadays, when Popes (?) not only promote Pagan art but are Pagan themselves, placing other gods statues on the altars that were once dedicated to the one true God.

I'm not defending anything just because they were Popes.  As mentioned, I would sandblast Michaelangelo's homo-erotic stuff off there.  I believe, however, that there's nothing wrong with Christianizing the obelisk.  There's a long Tradition, for instance, of early Christians appropriating the image of Helios (the pagan sun God) iconographically to Christ, presenting Him in the same way.  Church converted MANY pagan Roman temples into churches.  We have the Christmas tree, Easter eggs, the very word "Easter" ... all of which the Prots have denounced without understanding that the Church has long appropriated and transformed pagan symbols into Christian ones, and that very practice is actually symbolic of how the Church has converted many pagan nations and Christianized them.

If I did find legitimate reasons to consider them objectionable, I would not hesitate saying so because some possibly wordly and corrupt Renaissance pope decided it was OK.  You'll find that I regularly denounce the exaggeration of papal infallibility and excessive unthinking piety toward them as if they were inerrant demigods in all their actions, and never in a million years would even imply that their artistic and architectural decisions were somehow protected by the Holy Ghost where it would be impious to criticize them.

I simply disagree that obelisks are anywhere near being in the same category as some degenerate / homoerotic stuff, being a symbol pointing upward to Heaven (with Christians differing in terms of who it's pointing up to, clarifying by putting a cross at the top), also being a sign of who runs / owns / has claim to and authority over the territory in which it's visible, also doubling in St. Peter's for a symbol of the key (St. Peter's keys ... see the shape of the entire square), and with the 4 sides pointing to all 4 corners of the world (notice in Easter Vigil how priest sprinkles holy water toward the 4 corners of the earth) ... it all fits and is actually one of the mildest appropriations of pagan symbols, provided one doesn't start seeing phalluses everywhere there's something having that kind of shape and orientation.

I'm not defending anything just because they were Popes.  As mentioned, I would sandblast Michaelangelo's homo-erotic stuff off there.  I believe, however, that there's nothing wrong with Christianizing the obelisk.  There's a long Tradition, for instance, of early Christians appropriating the image of Helios (the pagan sun God) iconographically to Christ, presenting Him in the same way.  Church converted MANY pagan Roman temples into churches.  We have the Christmas tree, Easter eggs, the very word "Easter" ... all of which the Prots have denounced without understanding that the Church has long appropriated and transformed pagan symbols into Christian ones, and that very practice is actually symbolic of how the Church has converted many pagan nations and Christianized them.

If I did find legitimate reasons to consider them objectionable, I would not hesitate saying so because some possibly wordly and corrupt Renaissance pope decided it was OK.  You'll find that I regularly denounce the exaggeration of papal infallibility and excessive unthinking piety toward them as if they were inerrant demigods in all their actions, and never in a million years would even imply that their artistic and architectural decisions were somehow protected by the Holy Ghost where it would be impious to criticize them.

I simply disagree that obelisks are anywhere near being in the same category as some degenerate / homoerotic stuff, being a symbol pointing upward to Heaven (with Christians differing in terms of who it's pointing up to, clarifying by putting a cross at the top), also being a sign of who runs / owns / has claim to and authority over the territory in which it's visible, also doubling in St. Peter's for a symbol of the key (St. Peter's keys ... see the shape of the entire square), and with the 4 sides pointing to all 4 corners of the world (notice in Easter Vigil how priest sprinkles holy water toward the 4 corners of the earth) ... it all fits and is actually one of the mildest appropriations of pagan symbols, provided one doesn't start seeing phalluses everywhere there's something having that kind of shape and orientation.

I was actually not criticizing you. I was talking more generally. Some people seem to think that every Pope from St. Peter to Pius XII was a saint, as you have laready pointed out.

Good catch about the key shape of the square. I had never noticed it.

Phallic or not, that thing comes from Paganism, and it does not look like it has been Christianized enough. I would like to see a reasonable explanation for the design of that strange piazza which does not involve some occult or Pagan logic.

Two close acquaintances of the Pope Urban VIII's were Galileo and Lorenzo Bernini. Then there was Bernini’s friend, Fr Athanasius Kircher SJ (1602-1680), a Jesuit, who devoted his life to researching many things without distinction. Fr Kircher, a Jesuit of his time, studied all in the context of God’s design and plan for the world, a man who was a true ‘Father of science.’ Fr Kircher adhered in his books to the geocentric writings of the Old Testament. When it came to the natural order of the universe, he followed the universal system of Tycho. Fr Kircher also delved deeply into the electromagnetism he believed penetrated the whole universe (and God created light- an effect of magnetism). A brilliant historian, mathematician and linguist (20 languages), Fr Kircher also specialised in all things Egyptian and set up a museum for this purpose. Because of this he was invited to study and lecture at the Jesuit College in Rome in 1635, a mere two years after Galileo’s trial. One of the subjects Fr Kircher devoted his time to was trying to interpret the Egyptian hieroglyphs on their obelisks, an understanding he believed he mastered, reading into them profound mysteries and wisdom. With the passage of time and greater study, men like Jean-François Champollion (1790-1832) and Fr Fernand Crombette (1880-1970) found the hieroglyphs on these obelisks were no more than records of the names of the kings of Egypt since the time of the Flood. It was Fr Kircher’s mistaken interpretation - that the ‘writings’ and signs on Egypt’s ancient obelisks referred to the Trinity God – that made them worthy of preservation and display. For this reason then, churchmen ‘embraced these prophetic obelisks’ and erected many of them in the squares of Rome.

‘Before leaving this subject, we should recall that the suppression of the Jesuits in 1773 was prompted by the “rights of man” illuminists and Masons. When the Jesuits were suppressed, the Church lost her first line of defence in the “war of science against the Church”. The crime of their suppression is one of the worst in the world. Within one generation, the new “scientifically” educated youth embarked on wholesale revolution. The Reign of Terror in France, in 1796, was led by the first generation of non-Jesuit educated men. Every monarchy in Europe fell to revolution. Replaced with Republican, anti-Catholic governments, Europe was changed forever. By the end of 1850, the Masons had revolutionized every Catholic country in Europe and the America’s. Science was “enthroned” as the state religion. Heliocentricity became “fact”; and the Galileo Award became the highest Masonic award for outstanding “citizenship.”’--- KIPDF website: A study by John W. DeTar

To which we could add, that, unlike their predecessors, most of the post-1820 Jesuits took up the heliocentric ‘science’ baton and all it revolutionised.
   
In 1655, the then Pope, Alexander VII, commissioned the now famous Bernini to redesign St Peter’s Square. This work was interrupted when King Louis XIV invited Bernini to Paris. On his return Bernini completed the work, marking out what looks like a circle with the obelisk at its centre point but in fact it is a ‘cosmic’ ellipse, with the phallic obelisk as its centre or generating point as Kepler, Newton and others used it to accommodate their heliocentrism. Bernini’s solution was to design a piazza in the form of an ellipse; the foci of the ellipse are indicated by marble and granite disks embedded within the pavement of the piazza. The elliptical shape also symbolizes the Church’s embrace of all of mankind, “the motherly arms of the church,” as Bernini described his Colonnade. But more than that for Bernini then filled the space with a large eight-rayed sun wheel design – a symbol of Ishtar. At the very centre of the larger wheel there was then created an inner four-pointed sun-wheel, the same symbol as found on the altar-stone in the temple of Baal. All of course symbols taken on board Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ.

‘Coincidence? Could some secret group, capable of sustaining influence over the papacy over many decades, have understood ancient hieroglyphs long before scholars learned to read them in the 19th century? Anu-Heliopolis was the archetypal ‘City of the Sun’ that Bruno and Campanella were determined to restore.’--- Talisman, p.305.

 ‘Satan uniquely entered the Catholic Church at some point over the last century, or even before. For over a century, the organizers of Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ, Liberalism, and Modernism infiltrated the Catholic Church in order to change her doctrine, her liturgy and her mission from something supernatural to something secular.’--- (Taylor Marshall, LifeSiteNews, October 4, 2019.)

So, what happened in the last century or long before that gave birth to Modernism in the Catholic Church by way of ‘Satan’ introducing changes from the traditional supernatural doctrine of Catholicism to a faith based on the secular that led to the demise of traditional Catholic faith on Earth? Well, from 1741 to 1835 and thereafter, for the first time in the history of the Church, popes began to adopt and promote a secular story of Creation rather than abide by the supernatural one of traditional Catholicism. In Scripture, it literally states in 67 places, that the sun (and stars) turn around God’s footstool, the Earth, created fixed at the centre of the universe (geocentrism), a revelation held by all the Fathers and popes of the Church up to that time. Accordingly, the early Church had condemned as heresy the old pagan belief that the Earth moves around a fixed-sun (heliocentrism).This was the same Biblical meaning proposed by Galileo who claimed that the references to a moving-sun in Scripture were metaphors, not literal, an assertion rejected by Pope Paul V in 1616, with Galileo being tried later in 1633 by Pope Urban VIII’s Inquisition, at which he was found guilty of suspected heresy. It was this change of Biblical meaning that began the revision of Church doctrine, her liturgy and her mission from something supernatural to something secular.

And that is how Satan, the Father of lies, using the obelisk in ST Peter's Square after Galileo's trial installed heresy into the womb of the Church that brought about popes like Francis and the empty Catholic churches worldwide.