Translate

Saturday, March 14, 2015

ARMED PATRIOTS STAND AGAINST FEDS IN SPOKANE, WASHINGTON AND WIN FREEDOM


Armed Patriots Stand Against Feds!!!

Spokane: Armed 2nd-Amendment Supporters Confront Feds; Feds Back Down

Written by  

EXCERPT:
The March 6 rally, organized by a group calling itself “Liberty for All” (LFA), was a response to the arrest of military veteran and former Yakima County sheriff candidate Anthony Bosworth. A staunch constitutionalist, open-carry advocate, and LFA leader, Bosworth was participating in the “Our State, Our Rights” rally near Spokane’s federal courthouse February 25 with an unloaded rifle slung over his shoulder. This didn’t sit well with federal agents, who approached Bosworth, asked for identification, and accused him of breaking the law. But Bosworth and his supporters say the feds are the lawbreakers.
The sticking point is over the federal statute that prohibits possession of weapons in federal property (i.e., buildings), but not on federal property. InfoWars relates the exchange Bosworth had with federal officials, writing:
While inquiring on the alleged need to provide ID, Bosworth was accused of being in violation of federal gun laws according to a DHS agent on scene.
“It’s against federal law,” the agent claimed. “18 U.S. C 930 says it’s illegal.”
Bosworth, correctly citing the law’s wordage, asserted that the restriction only applied to the inside of federal buildings.
“On federal property,” the DHS agent argued. “You’re on federal property.”
18 U.S. Code 930 in fact never once uses the words “on federal property,” but instead repeatedly refers to the possession of a firearm inside a federally-run building.
InfoWars then cites the relevant federal code:
(a) Except as provided in subsection (d), whoever knowingly possesses or causes to be present a firearm or other dangerous weapon in a Federal facility (other than a Federal court facility), or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both.
None of this mattered, however, and Bosworth was handcuffed and hauled away. Even more strikingly, it’s alleged that his gun rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment weren’t the only ones violated. As Lynn Finney of theJackson Press wrote, “He was never read his rights; his gun was taken, illegally; he was refused an attorney, although asking for one at least six times; and he was interrogated illegally for several hours. The incident culminated when the Spokane County Sheriff intervened and Mr Bosworth was released after being cited for ‘failure to comply.’”
_________________________________________________________________________
Published on Mar 10, 2015 ON YOUTUBE FROM VIDEO ABOVE:
NEXT NEWS | As you may have seen repeatedly across your newsfeeds and televisions the imagery of President Barack Obama walking the Selma bridge commemorating that historic moment when Martin Luther King led thousands to face off against police who would fire tear gas and beat them with clubs… all because they desired the right to vote. 

Obama - Bush - and other dignitaries celebrated those Americans who stood defiant of the law.

That historical moment was 50 years ago… now… flash forward...Spokane Washington - Federal Courthouse

A story that wasn’t celebrated by the media - where no dignitaries cared to stand for a photo-op. instead American snipers would train their barrels on fellow Americans - Americans who chose to stand their ground and draw a line in the sand on friday March 6th 2015… it was a rally for the right to bear arms.

The rally was a response to the arrest of Anthony Bosworth a week earlier. He was arrested in front of his family, interrogated like a domestic terrorist then later released WITHOUT CHARGE because he had broken no laws. All because he had an unloaded rifle on his back.

A group calling themselves “LIBERTY FOR ALL” decided this would not stand and organized the Rally. However they would take it one step further… they would hold the rally at the courthouse - with loaded rifles.

According to Kit Lange, of the Patrick Henry Society, the rally was monitored by DHS helicopters, and undercover agents under the cold crosshairs of DHS snipers. 

Kit, reflecting on the moment wrote these chilling words on her blog:

“As we reached the courthouse, several DHS vehicles were outside. As we stood on the sidewalk, outside federal property, a few of us started scanning—and found what we were looking for. Aside from the DHS helicopter overhead, there was a roving perimeter manned by SUVs with fake license plates. A homeless man on the sidewalk next to a building, holding a smartphone that was taking video. Another man sitting on a bench pretending to read a book while watching closely. Someone else walking around through the crowd trying to chat up the attendees and get their business cards or contact information. There were snipers on the roof…many of them, positioned in such a way that no matter where we were in the area, we could be taken out any moment.”

Let’s take a look at the moment they reached the Courthouse, led by Bosworth, and peacefully assembled with arms in hand:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJR06...

Shortly after that video was made the Southern Poverty Law center published an article to their HATEWATCH blog labeling them “anti-government” despite the fact that they were waving American flags and singing the National Anthem.

Despite the magnitude of the events of the day going largely unnoticed by the Mainstream Media, and the rest of America, it is significant to note that the FEDs backed down and arrested no one. Just as they did at Bundy Ranch - because the security and freedom of the free state is preserved ONLY by a well armed militia.

For the moment the people scored a victory in the this modern day revolution - thankfully no blood was spilled on either side… even though they were willing to die.

Kit closed with these thoughts, “I looked around and I saw enemy everywhere. But I also saw people who would have given their lives in a heartbeat, who understand the cost and are willing to pay it next week, tomorrow, or two seconds from now. Yesterday is now part of history, and our children will remember the days that their parents stood. They will tell their children later that this is how it is done. That liberty can NEVER be allowed to fall, even if it means that every single one of us does. We will not comply. Not today, not tomorrow, and not even if our blood pools on the ground. You have our word.

Maybe in 50 years these people will be regarded as heroes who held to their values and stood firm on their rights… much like those who were stuck down at the hands of the state as they crossed the Selma Alabama Bridge.

CREDITS:
Washington State Patriot: History Made 03062015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJR06...

6 March Liberty for All Federal Protest: The Rest of the Story
http://www.patrickhenrysociety.com/6-...

Gun Protester Bosworth Arrested at Spokane Federal Courthouse for 'Open Carry'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkAAp...

Armed Protesters March on Federal Courthouse in Washington:
http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2015/03...



JOHN KERRY HIGH PRIEST OF GLOBAL WARMING RELIGION DESPOTICALLY WARNS THAT DISBELIEF IS IMMORAL

JOHN KERRY HIGH PRIEST 
OF GLOBAL WARMING RELIGION DESPOTICALLY WARNS 
THAT DISBELIEF IS IMMORAL

John Kerry: Climate Change Is an ‘Elementary Truth’ ...
Just like Gravity
SEE VIDEO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LV1hNRd3-ec


John Kerry cites scripture, calls climate change deniers 'immoral',
leading to "utter catastrophe":

SEE VIDEO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qXheXgbtmI



THE "AGW GOSPEL"
EXCERPT:
Donning the robes of High Priest of Science, Secretary of State John Kerry delivered a rousing sermon on March 12 that presumed to speak for both Science and Religion on the supposed existential threat of anthropogenic (manmade) global warming, AGW. Warning that we face “utter catastrophe” and the end of “life as we know it on Earth” if we “do nothing” to stop global warming, Kerry said failing to act “is beyond reckless. It is just plain immoral.”
Secretary Kerry delivered his AGW jeremiad before the Atlantic Council, as part of the globalist organization’s “The Road to Paris” Climate Series, which is aimed at stirring support for the upcoming United Nations Climate Summit in Paris, France.
However, before putting on his preacher’s robe to condemn the unbelievers, Rev. Kerry first got into his scientist’s robe to establish with dogmatic certainty the inerrancy of the AGW gospel.
_______________________________________________________________

'The Road to Paris' Climate Series: The Significance of COP21 with Secretary Kerry (47 Minutes)





AMERICAN BAPTIST COLLEGE INVITES LESBIAN SPEAKER~THEN ACCUSES OTHER CHRISTIANS OF MAKING THE BIBLE AN IDOL


ABC


AMERICAN BAPTIST COLLEGE 
INVITES LESBIAN SPEAKER~
THEN ACCUSES OTHER CHRISTIANS 
OF MAKING THE BIBLE AN IDOL
SEE: http://christiannews.net/2015/03/12/american-baptist-college-defends-invite-to-lesbian-speaker-says-christians-make-idol-of-bible/; by Heather Clark; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

NASHVILLE – An American Baptist College is defending its invitation to an openly lesbian United Church of Christ minister, asserting that Christians are making an “idol” of the Bible.
“It’s sad that people use religion and idolatry of the Bible to demoralize same-gender-loving people,” American Baptist College President Forrest Harris told The Tennessean on Wednesday.
The publication then asked that he clarify his use of the phrase “idolatry of the Bible.”
“When people say [the Bible] is synonymous with God and the truth,” Harris responded. “We can’t be guided and dictated by a first-century world view.”
The college had invited Yvette Flunder, a bishop at the City of Refuge United Church of Christ in Oakland, Calif., to speak at its Garnett-Nabrit lecture series next week, which focuses on Christian leadership. The theme is “Ministry in Motion: Living Faith, Doing Justice.”
Flunder its expected to appear at next Tuesday’s evening worship service, and then again at the Nannie Helen Burroughs luncheon, where she is expected to talk about her work to combat HIV and AIDS. The United Church of Christ leader is “married” to her partner Shirley Miller.
But after word of the invitation reached other pastors in Nashville, several denounced college administrators for their actions. Randy G. Vaughn of Mt. Sinai Baptist Church told local television station KMBT that he and other Baptist pastors from across the country will be present to protest Flunder’s appearance next week.


“We do not wear our sin as a badge and parade it,” Vaughn said. “When will the downward spiral end?”
“We don’t feel you have the right to live any way [you want] and be respected in the congregation of our faith,” he continued. “There is nothing holy about lesbianism as there is nothing holy about heterosexual adultery.”
According to a statement on the Refuge United Church of Christ website, Flunder believes that one’s self image can be harmed by believing that their lifestyle isn’t acceptable to God.
“Trying to establish a relationship with a God that barely tolerates you but cannot truly accept and certainly will never celebrate you can do incredible damage to ones self-esteem,” she wrote. “City of Refuge UCC welcomes people to be who they are by embracing a theology of acceptance—a radical inclusivity that leaves no one behind.”
Flunder and her partner spoke at an event in 2013 to urge the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down California’s Proposition 8, which enshrined marriage as being between one man and one woman.
As a result, the National Baptist Fellowship of Concerned Pastors is petitioning American Baptist College to reconsider Flunder’s invitation.
“We believe that President Forrest Harris should rescind the invitation for Bishop Yvette Flunder to speak at ABC, solely on the basis that she is a proud, practicing, and public advocate of same-sex marriage,” the petition reads. “We are also requesting that in the future, no male or female involved in a same-sex marriage be invited to speak at ABC.”
“For a Baptist college president to invite a lesbian bishop legally married to a woman, to be a guest speaker and worship leader on a Baptist college campus is irresponsible, scandalous, non-biblical, and certainly displeasing to God,” the organization states.
But Harris does not seem interested in changing the college’s plans for the event.
“It is particularly important for American Baptist College to truly live its educational mission of justice toward creating a community where all persons are able to love and be loved without social, political or ecclesiastical penalty so that all people may enjoy life and wholeness as God intends,” he said.
BE SURE THAT THE GUILTY PLAYING THE VICTIM 
BEFORE A JUST AND RIGHTEOUS GOD WILL NOT FOOL HIM; 
HE WILL NOT BE MOCKED 
BY SELF RIGHTEOUS FALSE DOCTRINES OF DEVILS,
AND PULPIT PIMP HIRELINGS

THE SO-CALLED "STIGMA OF THE AIDS EPIDEMIC" 
IS SELF-IMPOSED BY ACTIVE GAYS
WORLD AIDS DAY 2014 AT THE WHITE HOUSE;
FLUNDER DENIES THAT THE VIRUS IS GOD'S JUDGMENT
ON THE SODOMITE BEHAVIORS OF THE LGBTQ CROWD:
______________________________________________________________

Bishop Yvette Flunder at the Anti Proposition 8
Supreme Court Gathering, Supporting Same Sex Marriage
VIDEO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uni1qq0SwRQ








Friday, March 13, 2015

OBAMA'S FCC TAKEOVER OF INTERNET CONFIRMED~DICTATORIAL POLICE POWERS SEIZED INCLUDE RULES, REGULATIONS, ENFORCEMENT & PENALTIES; ALL WITHOUT LEGISLATION


JUST BECAUSE OBAMA SAID SO, I WILL OBEY;
AND YOU WILL TOO!
FEDERAL POWER GRAB;
ENFORCED WITH ARMED AGENTS,
RAIDS, ARRESTS
OBAMA'S FCC TAKEOVER OF INTERNET CONFIRMED
Published on Mar 13, 2015
Alex Jones breaks down the FCC Internet takeover bill.
The FCC is combining several separate sections of telecommunications law developed for radio, cable TV and broadband access for a regulatory takeover of the Internet and is enforcing it with the same rules and methods as the Justice Department, according to its 400-page report released Thursday.
http://www.infowars.com/fcc-to-seize-...
VIDEOS BELOW CANNOT BE UPLOADED, BUT HERE ARE THE LINKS:

FCC TO SEIZE ENTIRE INTERNET, CABLE SPECTRUM UNDER 400-PAGE “RULES”

FCC cherry picking existing laws for cable, radio & broadband to regulate Internet
SEE: http://www.infowars.com/fcc-to-seize-cable-tv-broadband-regulations-for-internet-takeover/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

by ALEX JONES & KIT DANIELS | INFOWARS.COM 
MARCH 13, 2015

The FCC is combining several separate sections of telecommunications law developed for radio, cable TV and broadband access for a regulatory takeover of the Internet and is enforcing it with the same rules and methods as the Justice Department, according to its 400-page report released Thursday.

The agency is going to regulate the Internet like broadcast radio and television through a patchwork of telecommunications laws which were developed not only separately of each other but also in different decades.
031315enforcement
“We ground the open Internet rules we adopt today in multiple sources of legal authority – Section 706, Title II and Title III of the Communications Act [of 1934],” page 120 of the 400-page FCC report states.
031315legalauthority
But what are these statues? Here’s a quick breakdown:
  • Section 706, Broadband Internet Regulation and Access, of the Telecommunications Act of 1996
  • Title II, Common Carrier Regulations of the Communications Act of 1934
  • Title III, Broadcast Station Requirements of the Communications Act of 1934
We already knew the FCC was reclassifying Internet Service Providers as “common carriers” under Title II regulations developed in 1934, but the agency is also invoking the regulatory frameworks created for broadcast radio and television stations under Title III and for “Internet broadband services” under Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
The FCC is claiming jurisdiction over the Internet by cherry picking existing regulations and combining them into new authority.
Section 706 in particular grants the FCC and its state commissions “with regulatory jurisdiction over telecommunications services” under the guise of improving “advanced telecommunications capability to all Americans.”
This section allows the FCC to utilize “price cap regulations” and “measures that promote competition in the local telecommunications market,” i.e. de facto favoritism toward select interest groups.
In other words, the government, not the free market, makes the decisions over broadband access.
But what does the FCC plan on doing with these regulations? Well, many current and former members of the FCC were members of a leftist organization called Free Press and through the group they advocated draconian restrictions placed on the Internet.
For example, the FCC’s former chief diversity officer, Mark Lloyd, co-authored a 2007 report calling for the regulation of political talk radio by limiting free speech on AM and FM stations under the guise of “balanced radio programming,” i.e. a fairness doctrine.
“While progressive talk is making inroads on commercial stations, conservative talk continues to be pushed out over the airwaves in greater multiples of hours than progressive talk is broadcast,” the report stated, oversimplifying politics into a false left/right paradigm. “These empirical findings may not be surprising given general impressions about the format, but they are stark and raise serious questions about whether the companies licensed to broadcast over the public airwaves are serving the listening needs of all Americans.”
Media mogul Mark Cuban was proven right when he said the feds would f*** the Internet up.
FCC outlines net neutrality rules in 400-page report: 5 things you need to know
The Federal Communications Commission on Thursday published a 400-page report containing the open internet rules that the agency’s panel moved to adopt last month in a 5-3 vote hailed as a victory by net neutrality advocates.
The report, the FCC says, “once and for all…puts into place strong, sustainable rules, grounded in multiple sources of our legal authority, to ensure that Americans reap the economic, social and civic benefits of an open Internet today and into the future.”
Want to know what that means, but without wrapping your brain around the report’s 270,000 or so words? We’ve outlined a few key takeaways to help explain the FCC’s latest release.
No blocking
The FCC says that strong rules are required in order to protect consumers against past and potentially future tactics that would threaten the existence of an open internet, and first on the agency’s list is a “no blocking” provision. As one might expect, this rule prohibits internet service providers, or ISPs, from keeping customers from accessing content that isn’t against the law.
“A person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service, insofar as such person is so engaged, shall not block lawful content, applications, services or non-harmful devices, subject to reasonable network management,” the FCC says.
In other words, an ISP, such as Comcast or Verizon, for example, can’t take action to keep ordinary customers away from certain websites (or stop them from downloading certain movies or music, for that matter), unless the content in question and the act of obtaining it is otherwise illegal. So while the new rules prohibit ISPs from blocking access to blogs that might be critical of their corporations, web service providers can still take action if a customer is somehow caught downloading illegal content.
“[T]he no-blocking rule only applies to transmissions of lawful content and does not prevent or restrict a broadband provider from refusing to transmit unlawful material, such as child pornography or copyright-infringing materials. We believe that this approach will allow broadband providers to honor their service commitments to their subscribers without requiring a specified level of service to those subscribers or edge providers under the no-blocking rule,” the agency says.
Throughout the report, the FCC notes that, notwithstanding rules such as the “no blocking” provision, certain custodial efforts (or “reasonable network management”) might affect access to the internet. As long as the management is reasonable, however, the FCC says it will find no fault.
No throttling
Similarly, the FCC’s new rules also say that internet providers can’t decide to speed-up and slow-down the delivery to customers of online content at an ISP’s own discretion. Adding to open internet rules adopted by the FCC starting in 2010 (and enforced up until a federal court judge told them otherwise, eventually paving way for the release of this report nearly a half-decade later), the agency says this no throttling rule means ISPs can’t “degrade lawful Internet traffic on the basis of Internet content, application or service, or use of a non-harmful device, subject to reasonable network management.”
“Degrading access to legal content and services can have the same effect as blocking and will not be permitted,” reads a portion of this week’s report.
According to the FCC, “the ban on throttling is necessary both to fulfill the reasonable expectations of a customer who signs up for a broadband service that promises access to all of the lawful Internet, and to avoid gamesmanship designed to avoid the no-blocking rule by, for example, rendering an application effectively, but not technically, unusable.”
“With the no-throttling rule, we ban conduct that is not outright blocking, but inhibits the delivery of particular content, applications or services, or particular classes of content, applications or services.”
Once again, though, illegal content isn’t covered by the FCC’s “no throttling” provision, meaning the agency’s new rules won’t stop ISPs from adjusting the connection speeds of customers caught sharing copywrited material, as RT previously reported.
No paid prioritization
Ahead of the FCC’s decision last month to adopt the rules released in this week’s report, a hot topic among commentators watching the debate was whether the agency would allow for paid prioritization; that is, whether ISPs should be able to cut deals with content creators in which the delivery of web traffic, specifically with regards to the speed, could differ depending on how much those content creators chose to pay.
“Paid prioritization occurs when a broadband provider accepts payment (monetary or otherwise) to manage its network in a way that benefits particular content, applications, services or devices,” the FCC says, and allowing for it would indeed enable the creation of “fast lanes” feared by net neutrality advocates.
“To protect against ‘fast lanes,’ this Order adopts a rule that establishes that: A person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service, insofar as such person is so engaged, shall not engage in paid prioritization,” reads another one of the FCC’s new rules.
Along with no blocking and no throttling, the FCC says this this provision is one of three “clear, bright-line rules” necessary to preserve net neutrality.
Well, almost no paid prioritization
Yet while paid prioritization and “fast lanes” became a central argument to the net neutrality debate, the FCC has included language in its report that doesn’t outright ban that concept 100 percent. According to the FCC, the ban on paid prioritization may be waived “only if the petitioner demonstrates that the practice would provide some significant public interest benefit and would not harm the open nature of the Internet.”
In order to demonstrate as much, the FCC says that the applicant “must demonstrate that the practice will have some significant public interest benefit,” and explain how it wouldn’t harm the concept of net neutrality.
According to the rules, “An applicant seeking waiver relief under this rule faces a high bar.”
“We anticipate granting such relief only in exceptional cases,” wrote the commissioned.
Regulations won’t restrict law enforcement
Speaking of exceptional cases, the FCC made sure to include language in this week’s report that reiterates the importance of ensuring authorities can bypass open internet protections adopted through the ruling for the sake of law enforcement operations.
“The record is generally supportive of our proposal to reiterate that open Internet rules do not supersede any obligation a broadband provider may have – or limit its ability – to address the needs of emergency communications or law enforcement, public safety, or homeland or national security authorities,” the FCC says. According to the report, broadband providers have obligations under statutes such as the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) that “could in some circumstances intersect with open Internet protections,” given that access must always be prioritized “in order to coordinate disaster relief and other emergency response efforts, or for other emergency communications.”
“Most commenters recognize the benefits of clarifying that these obligations are not inconsistent with open Internet rules” the FCC says.
Privacy advocates have raised questions in recent years about the scope of laws like CALEA, FISA and ECPA, however, especially given statements from government officials concerning ways in which authorities may rely on certain legislation to conduct online eavesdropping.
RT reported at the time that a Justice Department attorney said in 2013 that the government wants to use CALEA to monitor the online conversations of suspected criminals in real time, and disclosures that same year from former intelligence contractor Edward Snowden revealed that the government uses Section 702 of FISA to authorize digital surveillance on foreign persons – the likes of which, tech experts have argued, has involved exploiting security weaknesses on behalf of the government and, as a result, secretly undermining the protocols meant to protect online activity.
The language in the report doesn’t provide any new powers to law enforcement, but rather clarifies that open internet provisions shouldn’t in any way preclude the authorities’ already established abilities.




TAIZE: FRENCH CATHOLIC/PROTESTANT MONASTIC COMMUNITY RELEASES MYSTICAL/ECUMENICAL MANTRA LIKE CHANTS "MUSIC OF UNITY & PEACE"





UNBIBLICAL, ANTI-CHRISTIAN
"MANTRA LIKE CHANTS" 
(CHANTS REPETITIFS)
NO SERMONS; A "GOSPEL"
WITHOUT SCRIPTURE
AN EXPERIENCE FOLLOWED BY 
MYSTICAL/CONTEMPLATIVE "SILENCE"
Music of Unity and Peace
TAIZÉ RELEASES “MUSIC OF UNITY AND PEACE” 
(Friday Church News Notes, March 13, 2015,www.wayoflife.orgfbns@wayoflife.org, 866-295-4143) - Taizé (pronounced teh-zay), an ecumenical monastic community on the cutting edge of contemplative prayer, has released a collection of chants entitled “Music of Unity and Peace.” Based in Burgundy, France, the community consists of about 100 monastics from Catholic and Protestant backgrounds, but its influence is vast. Hundreds of thousands of young people flock there from all over the world, and thousands of congregations in the U.S. and elsewhere hold Taizé contemplative prayer services and sing Taizé songs. Taizé is a major force for ecumenism. 

Founder Roger Schutz participated in the Second Vatican Council, and Pope John Paul II visited Taizé in October 1986. Since Schutz’s death (he was murdered by a deranged woman during a Taizé service), the community has been led by a Roman Catholic priest named Alois Loeser. The Taizé services are non-dogmatic and non-authoritative. There is no preaching. “It does not dictate what people must believe. No confessions of faith are required. No sermons are given. No emotional, evangelical-style salvation testimonials are expected.” Schutz described the philosophy of Taizé as, “Searching together--not wanting to become spiritual masters who impose; God never imposes. We want to love and listen, we want simplicity” (“Taizé,” Religion and Ethics Newsweekly, Sept. 20, 2002). This is blind mysticism loosed from the authority of Scripture. It is not building the true church of Christ; it is building the Mystery Babylon. Taizé’s non-doctrinal ecumenical Christianity is fueled by mystical practices. A “shadowy medieval” atmosphere is created with the use of such things as candles, icons, and incense (Vancouver Sun, April 14, 2000). The goal is to bring the “worshipper” into a meditative state, “to a place beyond words, a place of just being.” There is a lot of repetition, with “one-line Taizé harmonies repeated up to 15 times each.” Catholic contemplative prayer has swept through “evangelicalism” over the past 20 years, as we have documented in Evangelicals and Contemplative Prayer, available in print and as a free eBook from www.wayoflife.org.
_______________________________________________________
SEE OUR PREVIOUS POSTS ABOUT TAIZE HERE:
http://ratherexposethem.blogspot.com/2012/12/contemplative-prayer-taize-worship.html

http://ratherexposethem.blogspot.com/2014/02/nazarene-road-to-romefast-becoming.html

http://ratherexposethem.blogspot.com/2014/04/ex-catholic-priest-richard-bennett-key.html


GERMAN/ENGLISH SHORT VERSION:
GERMAN/ENGLISH LONG VERSION:
FRENCH/ENGLISH LONG VERSION:
PHOTOS:






MUSIC:

INTERVIEW IN ENGLISH WITH BROTHER GHISLAIN:
THE HISTORY OF TAIZE:
Published on Jun 11, 2014
Description: As France prepared to enter the Second World War, Roger Schutz-Marsauche, a 25 year old Swiss man, inspired by the Gospel ideals of reconciliation and fraternity sought to establish a community of men where kindness of heart and simplicity would be at the centre of everything. What started out as a small group of brothers living out the Gospel in the remote French village of Taizé has today blossomed into a vibrant ecumenical, monastic community where more than a 100 000 pilgrims gather each year. Join host Cheridan Sanders as she speaks with Brother Emile about this extraordinary community of faith.