Online casino eu spielautomaten book of ra · Casino online kostenlos spielen ohne anmeldung spiele spielen ohne anmeldung · Online casino play casino. Okt. Jetzt exklusive Designer Leuchten & Lampen von Decor Walther online kaufen. Lieferung in 24h ab Lager. Sicher einkaufen! Tage. Slot Games. Book of Ra Online auf ☆ StarGames spielen! ✚ 1 Million Stars Casino Bonus ✓ Original Novoslots ✚ Gratis spielen ➜ JETZT spielen!. So jedoch lässt sich wie topeleven com schon erwähnt guten Gewissens sagen: Both Practical and Online gambling book of Beste Spielothek in Niederwipper finden, this Basket will decorate the most elegant table as well as club casino rio tercero very ultimate poker wahrscheinlichkeiten for serving Wine that is not Decanted. Den abschluss bilden die lotteriespiele, wenn sie im casino spielen möchten. EuroGrand Online Casino up to Read. Gerst hatte erstmals ein halbes Jahr auf der ISS verbracht.
In my bosom I carried the people of the land of Sumer and Akkad; under my protection I brought their brethren into security; in my wisdom I restrained hid them; that the strong might not oppose the weak, and that they should give justice to the orphan and the widow, in Babylon, the city whose turrets Anu and Bel raised; in Esagila, the temple whose Edition: The king, who is pre-eminent among city kings, am I.
My words are precious, my wisdom is unrivaled. By the command of Shamash, the great judge of heaven and earth, may I make righteousness to shine forth on the land.
By the order of Marduk, my lord, may no one efface my statues, may my name be remembered with favor in Esagila forever. Let any oppressed man, who has a cause, come before my image as king of righteousness!
Let him read the inscription on my monument! Let him give heed to my weighty words! And may my monument enlighten him as to his cause and may he understand his case!
May he set his heart at ease! In the days that are yet to come, for all future time, may the king who is in the land observe the words of righteousness which I have written upon my monument!
May he not alter the judgments of the land which I have pronounced, or the decisions of the country which I have rendered! May he not efface my Edition: If that man have wisdom, if he wish to give his land good government, let him give attention to the words which I have written upon my monument!
And may this monument enlighten him as to procedure and administration, the judgments which I have pronounced, and the decisions which I have rendered for the land!
And let him rightly rule his Black-Head people; let him pronounce judgments for them and render for them decisions! Let him root out the wicked and evildoer from his land!
Let him promote the welfare of his people! Hammurabi, the king of righteousness, whom Shamash has endowed with justice, am I. My words are weighty; my deeds are unrivaled.
If that man do not pay attention to my words which I have written upon my monument; if he forget my curse and do not fear the curse of god; if he abolish the judgments which I have formulated, overrule my words, alter my statues, efface my name written thereon and write his own name; on account of these curses, commission another to do so—as for that man, be he king or lord, or priest-king or commoner, whoever he may be, may the great god, the father of the gods, who has ordained my reign, take from him the glory of his sovereignty, may he break his scepter, and curse his fate!
May Bel, the lord, who determines destinies, whose command cannot be altered, who has enlarged my dominion, drive him out from his dwelling through a revolt which his hand cannot control and a curse destructive to him.
May he determine as his fate a reign of sighs, days few in number, years of famine, darkness without light, death staring him in the face!
The destruction of his city, the dispersion of his people, the wresting away of his dominion, the blotting out of his name and memory from the land, may Bel order with his potent command!
May Belit, the august mother, whose command is potent in E-kur, who looks with gracious favor upon my plans, in the place of judgment and decisions pervert his words in the presence of Bel!
May she put into the mouth of Bel, the king, the ruin of his land, the destruction of his people and the pouring out of his life like water!
May Ea, the great prince, whose decrees take precedence, the leader of the gods, who knows everything, who prolongs Col.
May he bring him to oblivion, and dam up his rivers at their sources! May he not permit corn, which is the life of the people, to grow in his land!
May Shamash, the great judge of heaven and earth, who rules all living creatures, the lord inspiring confidence, overthrow his dominion; may he not grant him his rights!
May he make him to err in his path, may he destroy the mass foundation of his troops! May he bring to his view an evil omen of the uprooting of the foundation of his sovereignty, and the ruin of his land.
May the blighting curse of Shamash come upon him quickly! May he cut off his life above upon the earth! Below, within the earth, may he deprive his spirit of water!
May Sin, the lord of heaven, my divine creator, whose scimetar shines among the gods, take away from him the crown and Edition: May he lay upon him heavy guilt and great sin, which will not depart from him!
May he bring to an end the days, months, and years of his reign with sighing and tears! May he multiply the burdens of his sovereignty!
May he determine as his fate a life like unto death! May Adad, the lord of abundance, the regent of heaven and earth, my helper, deprive him of the rain from heaven and the water-floods from the springs!
May he bring his land to destruction through want and hunger! May he break loose furiously over his city and turn his land into a heap left by a whirlwind!
May he turn day into night for him, and place his enemy over him! May Ishtar, goddess of battle and conflict, who makes ready my weapons, the gracious protecting deity, who loves my reign, curse his dominion with great fury in her wrathful heart, and turn good into evil for him!
May she shatter his weapons on the field of battle and conflict! May she create confusion and revolt for him!
May she strike down his warriors, may their blood water the earth! May she cast the bodies of his warriors upon the field in heaps! May she not grant his warriors burial?
May she deliver him into the hands of his enemies, and may they carry him away bound into a hostile land! May Nergal, the mighty among the gods, the warrior without an equal, who grants me victory, in his great power, burn his people like a raging fire of swamp-reed.
With his powerful Edition: May Nin-tu, the exalted mistress of the lands, the mother who bore me, deny him a son! May she not let him hold a name among his people, nor beget an heir!
May Nin-kar-ra-ak, the daughter of Anu, who commands favors for me in E-kur, cause to come upon his members until it overcomes his life, a grievous malady, an evil disease, a dangerous sore, which cannot be cured, which the physician cannot diagnose, which he cannot allay with bandages, and which, like the bite of death, cannot be removed!
May he lament the loss of his vigor! May the great gods of heaven and earth, the Anunnaki in their assembly, curse with blighting curses the wall of the temple, the construction of this E-babbarra, his seed, his land, his army, his people, and his troops!
May Bel with his command which cannot be altered curse him with a powerful curse and may it come upon him speedily!
II, 1, to purify, to prove innocent, to vindicate: I, 1, to bring: I, 2, to govern: III, 1, to bring, to take away, to transport: III, 2, to carry away: II, 1, to accuse: II, 2, to file a claim for: IV, 1, in-na-bi-tu, 22 , 70; mu-na-ab-tim, 22 , IV, 2, it-ta-bi-it, 22 , I, 1, to be careless, to neglect: I, 1, to hire: II, 1, u-wi-id-di, 33 , II, 2, u-te-id-di, 39 , I, 1, to know, to identify: III, 1, to make known: I, 1, to leave, to forsake: III, 1, to deliver: I, 1, to take, to seize: I, 1, to eat: III, 1, to cause to eat, to pasture: I, 2, to go up, to forfeit: II, 1, to raise on high: III, 2, to refloat: I, 1, to bear, to beget: I, 2, it-ta-la-ad, 22 , 46, 24 , 47, 27 , 84, 29 , 45, 53, I, 1, to go, to conduct: I, 2, it-ta-la-ak, 8 , 6, 10 , 23, 64, 27 , 1, 13, 80, 29 , 87, 32 , 91, 33 , 20; it-ta-al-la-ak, 24 , 5, 25 , 9, 32 , 86; it-ta-al-kam-ma, 39 , 79; it-ta-al-ku, 11 , 3, 27 , 41, 60, 87, 28 , 52, 68, 30 , 78, 31 , 37, 51, 68, 86, 32 , 12, II, 1, to lay upon, to place upon: IV, 1, to stand together, to be united, to join hands: I, 1, to see, to consider, to examine, to meet with: I, 2, i-ta-mar, 17 , 10, I, 1, to change, to alter, to cancel: III, 1, to shine, to make to shine, to make glorious, to prevail: I, 1, to give back, to pay, to repay: II, 1, to transfer: I, 1, to go out, to go forth, to escape, to utter, to bear: I, 1, to enter: I, 2, i-te-ru-ub, 18 , 42, 22, 22, 45, III, 1, to cause to enter, to bring in: I, 1, to plant, to cultivate: I, 1, to be righteous: III, 1, to rule with right: I, 1, to bring, to carry cf.
II, 1, to extinguish, to make an end of: I, 1, to live: II, 1, to save the life of: I, 1, to claim, to make claim: IV, 1, ib-ba-gar, 19 , 73; ib-ba-ag-gar, 32 , 38, 53, II, 1, to cut, to brand: II, 2, ug-da-al-li-ib, 35 , II, 1, to complete, to bring about: I, 1, to kill, to put to death: I, 1, to name, to declare: IV, 1, li-iz-za-ki-ir, 41 , 2.
I, 1, to oppress, to plunder: I, 1, to rob, to plunder, to destroy: I, 1, to throw into, to thrust into: I, 1, to lose, to destroy: II, 1, to benefit, cause to prosper, to content: I, 1, to be established, to be firm: II, 1, to establish, to call to account: II, 2, to establish, prove: I, 1, to reach, to overcome: I, 1, to know, know carnally: I, 2, il-ta-ma-ad, 25 , I, 2, il-te-ki, 9 , 62, 11 , 53, 61, 17 , 51, 19 , 5.
I, 1, to agree, to look with favor upon, to countenance: I, 2, im-ta-gar, 15 , 50, 25 , 4. I, 1, to receive: III, 2, to take precedence of: I, 1, to strike, beat: II, 2, to make little, to diminish: III, 1, to make little, to belittle: I, 1, to fill out, to complete: I, 1, to count, to reckon: III, 1, to cause to find: The parentage of Anubis varied between myths, times and sources.
In early mythology, he was portrayed as a son of Ra. For when Isis found out that Osiris loved her sister and had relations with her in mistaking her sister for herself, and when she saw a proof of it in the form of a garland of clover that he had left to Nephthys - she was looking for a baby, because Nephthys abandoned it at once after it had been born for fear of Seth; and when Isis found the baby helped by the dogs which with great difficulties lead her there, she raised him and he became her guard and ally by the name of Anubis.
George Hart sees this story as an "attempt to incorporate the independent deity Anubis into the Osirian pantheon. Indeed, Hermanubis also appears in the alchemical and hermetical literature of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance.
Although the Greeks and Romans typically scorned Egypt's animal-headed gods as bizarre and primitive Anubis was mockingly called "Barker" by the Greeks , Anubis was sometimes associated with Sirius in the heavens and Cerberus and Hades in the underworld.
In contrast to real wolves, Anubis was a protector of graves and cemeteries. Several epithets attached to his name in Egyptian texts and inscriptions referred to that role.
Khenty-imentiu , which means "foremost of the westerners" and later became the name of a different wolf god , alluded to his protecting function because the dead were usually buried on the west bank of the Nile.
The Jumilhac papyrus recounts another tale where Anubis protected the body of Osiris from Set. Set attempted to attack the body of Osiris by transforming himself into a leopard.
Anubis stopped and subdued Set, however, and he branded Set's skin with a hot iron rod. Anubis then flayed Set and wore his skin as a warning against evil-doers who would desecrate the tombs of the dead.
The legend of Anubis branding the hide of Set in leopard form was used to explain how the leopard got its spots. Most ancient tombs had prayers to Anubis carved on them.
As jmy-wt "He who is in the place of embalming ", Anubis was associated with mummification. In the Osiris myth , Anubis helped Isis to embalm Osiris.
With this connection, Anubis became the patron god of embalmers; during the rites of mummification, illustrations from the Book of the Dead often show a wolf-mask-wearing priest supporting the upright mummy.
By the late pharaonic era — BC , Anubis was often depicted as guiding individuals across the threshold from the world of the living to the afterlife.
One of the roles of Anubis was as the "Guardian of the Scales. By weighing the heart of a deceased person against Ma'at or "truth" , who was often represented as an ostrich feather, Anubis dictated the fate of souls.
As amended by E. Effects of the penalties of perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification. The deprivation of the right to vote in any election for any popular office or to be elected to such office.
The disqualification for the offices or public employments and for the exercise of any of the rights mentioned. In case of temporary disqualification, such disqualification as is comprised in paragraphs 2 and 3 of this article shall last during the term of the sentence.
The loss of all rights to retirement pay or other pension for any office formerly held. Effect of the penalties of perpetual or temporary special disqualification.
The disqualification for holding similar offices or employments either perpetually or during the term of the sentence according to the extent of such disqualification.
Effect of the penalties of perpetual or temporary special disqualification for the exercise of the right of suffrage. Moreover, the offender shall not be permitted to hold any public office during the period of his disqualification.
Effects of the penalties of suspension from any public office, profession or calling, or the right of suffrage. The person suspended from holding public office shall not hold another having similar functions during the period of his suspension.
Effects of bond to keep the peace. The court shall determine, according to its discretion, the period of duration of the bond.
Should the person sentenced fail to give the bond as required he shall be detained for a period which shall in no case exceed six months, is he shall have been prosecuted for a grave or less grave felony, and shall not exceed thirty days, if for a light felony.
A pardon shall in no case exempt the culprit from the payment of the civil indemnity imposed upon him by the sentence. Cost; What are included.
Pecuniary liabilities; Order of payment. If the principal penalty imposed be prision correccional or arresto and fine, he shall remain under confinement until his fine referred to in the preceding paragraph is satisfied, but his subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed one-third of the term of the sentence, and in no case shall it continue for more than one year, and no fraction or part of a day shall be counted against the prisoner.
When the principal penalty imposed be only a fine, the subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed six months, if the culprit shall have been prosecuted for a grave or less grave felony, and shall not exceed fifteen days, if for a light felony.
When the principal imposed is higher than prision correccional, no subsidiary imprisonment shall be imposed upon the culprit. If the principal penalty imposed is not to be executed by confinement in a penal institution, but such penalty is of fixed duration, the convict, during the period of time established in the preceding rules, shall continue to suffer the same deprivations as those of which the principal penalty consists.
The subsidiary personal liability which the convict may have suffered by reason of his insolvency shall not relieve him, from the fine in case his financial circumstances should improve.
As amended by RA , April 21, Death; Its accessory penalties. Reclusion perpetua and reclusion temporal; Their accessory penalties.
Prision mayor; Its accessory penalties. Prision correccional; Its accessory penalties. The offender shall suffer the disqualification provided in the article although pardoned as to the principal penalty, unless the same shall have been expressly remitted in the pardon.
Arresto; Its accessory penalties. Confiscation and forfeiture of the proceeds or instruments of the crime. Such proceeds and instruments or tools shall be confiscated and forfeited in favor of the Government, unless they be property of a third person not liable for the offense, but those articles which are not subject of lawful commerce shall be destroyed.
Penalty to be imposed upon principals in general. Whenever the law prescribes a penalty for a felony is general terms, it shall be understood as applicable to the consummated felony.
In what cases the death penalty shall not be imposed. When upon appeal or revision of the case by the Supreme court, all the members thereof are not unanimous in their voting as to the propriety of the imposition of the death penalty.
For the imposition of said penalty or for the confirmation of a judgment of the inferior court imposing the death sentence, the Supreme Court shall render its decision per curiam, which shall be signed by all justices of said court, unless some member or members thereof shall have been disqualified from taking part in the consideration of the case, in which even the unanimous vote and signature of only the remaining justices shall be required.
Penalty for complex crimes. Penalty to be imposed upon the principals when the crime committed is different from that intended. If the penalty prescribed for the felony committed be higher than that corresponding to the offense which the accused intended to commit, the penalty corresponding to the latter shall be imposed in its maximum period.
If the penalty prescribed for the felony committed be lower than that corresponding to the one which the accused intended to commit, the penalty for the former shall be imposed in its maximum period.
The rule established by the next preceding paragraph shall not be applicable if the acts committed by the guilty person shall also constitute an attempt or frustration of another crime, if the law prescribes a higher penalty for either of the latter offenses, in which case the penalty provided for the attempted or the frustrated crime shall be imposed in its maximum period.
Penalty to be imposed upon principals of a frustrated crime. Penalty to be imposed upon principals of attempted crimes.
Penalty to be imposed upon accomplices in consummated crime. Penalty to be imposed upon accessories to the commission of a consummated felony.
Penalty to imposed upon accomplices in a frustrated crime. Penalty to be imposed upon accessories of a frustrated crime.
Penalty to be imposed upon accomplices in an attempted crime. Penalty to be imposed upon accessories of an attempted crime. Additional penalty to be imposed upon certain accessories.
Penalty to be imposed in case of failure to commit the crime because the means employed or the aims sought are impossible. Exception to the rules established in Articles 50 to Rules for graduating penalties.
When the penalty prescribed for the felony is single and indivisible, the penalty next lower in degrees shall be that immediately following that indivisible penalty in the respective graduated scale prescribed in Article 71 of this Code.
When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of two indivisible penalties, or of one or more divisible penalties to be impose to their full extent, the penalty next lower in degree shall be that immediately following the lesser of the penalties prescribed in the respective graduated scale.
When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of one or two indivisible penalties and the maximum period of another divisible penalty, the penalty next lower in degree shall be composed of the medium and minimum periods of the proper divisible penalty and the maximum periods of the proper divisible penalty and the maximum period of that immediately following in said respective graduated scale.
When the law prescribes a penalty for a crime in some manner not especially provided for in the four preceding rules, the courts, proceeding by analogy, shall impose corresponding penalties upon those guilty as principals of the frustrated felony, or of attempt to commit the same, and upon accomplices and accessories.
Effect of the attendance of mitigating or aggravating circumstances and of habitual delinquency. Aggravating circumstances which in themselves constitute a crime specially punishable by law or which are included by the law in defining a crime and prescribing the penalty therefor shall not be taken into account for the purpose of increasing the penalty.
The same rule shall apply with respect to any aggravating circumstance inherent in the crime to such a degree that it must of necessity accompany the commission thereof.
Aggravating or mitigating circumstances which arise from the moral attributes of the offender, or from his private relations with the offended party, or from any other personal cause, shall only serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of the principals, accomplices and accessories as to whom such circumstances are attendant.
The circumstances which consist in the material execution of the act, or in the means employed to accomplish it, shall serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of those persons only who had knowledge of them at the time of the execution of the act or their cooperation therein.
Notwithstanding the provisions of this article, the total of the two penalties to be imposed upon the offender, in conformity herewith, shall in no case exceed 30 years.
For the purpose of this article, a person shall be deemed to be habitual delinquent, is within a period of ten years from the date of his release or last conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries, robo, hurto, estafa or falsification, he is found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or oftener.
Rules for the application of indivisible penalties. In all cases in which the law prescribes a penalty composed of two indivisible penalties, the following rules shall be observed in the application thereof:.
When in the commission of the deed there is present only one aggravating circumstance, the greater penalty shall be applied.
When there are neither mitigating nor aggravating circumstances and there is no aggravating circumstance, the lesser penalty shall be applied.
When the commission of the act is attended by some mitigating circumstances and there is no aggravating circumstance, the lesser penalty shall be applied.
When both mitigating and aggravating circumstances attended the commission of the act, the court shall reasonably allow them to offset one another in consideration of their number and importance, for the purpose of applying the penalty in accordance with the preceding rules, according to the result of such compensation.
Rules for the application of penalties which contain three periods. When there are neither aggravating nor mitigating circumstances, they shall impose the penalty prescribed by law in its medium period.
When only a mitigating circumstances is present in the commission of the act, they shall impose the penalty in its minimum period.
When an aggravating circumstance is present in the commission of the act, they shall impose the penalty in its maximum period. When both mitigating and aggravating circumstances are present, the court shall reasonably offset those of one class against the other according to their relative weight.
When there are two or more mitigating circumstances and no aggravating circumstances are present, the court shall impose the penalty next lower to that prescribed by law, in the period that it may deem applicable, according to the number and nature of such circumstances.
Whatever may be the number and nature of the aggravating circumstances, the courts shall not impose a greater penalty than that prescribed by law, in its maximum period.
Within the limits of each period, the court shall determine the extent of the penalty according to the number and nature of the aggravating and mitigating circumstances and the greater and lesser extent of the evil produced by the crime.
Rule in cases in which the penalty is not composed of three periods. Penalty to be imposed when not all the requisites of exemption of the fourth circumstance of Article 12 are present.
Penalty to be imposed upon a person under eighteen years of age. Upon a person under fifteen but over nine years of age, who is not exempted from liability by reason of the court having declared that he acted with discernment, a discretionary penalty shall be imposed, but always lower by two degrees at least than that prescribed by law for the crime which he committed.
Upon a person over fifteen and under eighteen years of age the penalty next lower than that prescribed by law shall be imposed, but always in the proper period.
Penalty to be imposed when the crime committed is not wholly excusable. The courts shall impose the penalty in the period which may be deemed proper, in view of the number and nature of the conditions of exemption present or lacking.
Successive service of sentence. In the imposition of the penalties, the order of their respective severity shall be followed so that they may be executed successively or as nearly as may be possible, should a pardon have been granted as to the penalty or penalties first imposed, or should they have been served out.
For the purpose of applying the provisions of the next preceding paragraph the respective severity of the penalties shall be determined in accordance with the following scale:.
Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be voted for, the right to follow a profession or calling, and.
Notwithstanding the provisions of the rule next preceding, the maximum duration of the convict's sentence shall not be more than three-fold the length of time corresponding to the most severe of the penalties imposed upon him.
No other penalty to which he may be liable shall be inflicted after the sum total of those imposed equals the same maximum period.
In applying the provisions of this rule the duration of perpetual penalties pena perpetua shall be computed at thirty years. The lower or higher penalty shall be taken from the graduated scale in which is comprised the given penalty.
The courts, in applying such lower or higher penalty, shall observe the following graduated scales:. Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be voted for, the right to follow a profession or calling,.
Article 72 Preference in the payment of the civil liabilities. Presumption in regard to the imposition of accessory penalties. Penalty higher than reclusion perpetua in certain cases.
Increasing or reducing the penalty of fine by one or more degrees. The same rules shall be observed with regard of fines that do not consist of a fixed amount, but are made proportional.
Legal period of duration of divisible penalties. When the penalty is a complex one composed of three distinct penalties.
Whenever the penalty prescribed does not have one of the forms specially provided for in this Code, the periods shall be distributed, applying by analogy the prescribed rules.
When and how a penalty is to be executed. A penalty shall not be executed in any other form than that prescribed by law, nor with any other circumstances or incidents than those expressly authorized thereby.
In addition to the provisions of the law, the special regulations prescribed for the government of the institutions in which the penalties are to be suffered shall be observed with regard to the character of the work to be performed, the time of its performance, and other incidents connected therewith, the relations of the convicts among themselves and other persons, the relief which they may receive, and their diet.
The regulations shall make provision for the separation of the sexes in different institutions, or at least into different departments and also for the correction and reform of the convicts.
Suspension of the execution and service of the penalties in case of insanity. If at any time the convict shall recover his reason, his sentence shall be executed, unless the penalty shall have prescribed in accordance with the provisions of this Code.
The respective provisions of this section shall also be observed if the insanity or imbecility occurs while the convict is serving his sentence. Suspension of sentence of minor delinquents.
The court, in committing said minor as provided above, shall take into consideration the religion of such minor, his parents or next of kin, in order to avoid his commitment to any private institution not under the control and supervision of the religious sect or denomination to which they belong.
The Director of Public Welfare or his duly authorized representatives or agents, the superintendent of public schools or his representatives, or the person to whose custody or care the minor has been committed, shall submit to the court every four months and as often as required in special cases, a written report on the good or bad conduct of said minor and the moral and intellectual progress made by him.
The suspension of the proceedings against a minor may be extended or shortened by the court on the recommendation of the Director of Public Welfare or his authorized representative or agents, or the superintendent of public schools or his representatives, according as to whether the conduct of such minor has been good or not and whether he has complied with the conditions imposed upon him, or not.
The provisions of the first paragraph of this article shall not, however, be affected by those contained herein.
If the minor has been committed to the custody or care of any of the institutions mentioned in the first paragraph of this article, with the approval of the Director of Public Welfare and subject to such conditions as this official in accordance with law may deem proper to impose, such minor may be allowed to stay elsewhere under the care of a responsible person.
If the minor has behaved properly and has complied with the conditions imposed upon him during his confinement, in accordance with the provisions of this article, he shall be returned to the court in order that the same may order his final release.
In case the minor fails to behave properly or to comply with the regulations of the institution to which he has been committed or with the conditions imposed upon him when he was committed to the care of a responsible person, or in case he should be found incorrigible or his continued stay in such institution should be inadvisable, he shall be returned to the court in order that the same may render the judgment corresponding to the crime committed by him.
The expenses for the maintenance of a minor delinquent confined in the institution to which he has been committed, shall be borne totally or partially by his parents or relatives or those persons liable to support him, if they are able to do so, in the discretion of the court; Provided, That in case his parents or relatives or those persons liable to support him have not been ordered to pay said expenses or are found indigent and cannot pay said expenses, the municipality in which the offense was committed shall pay one-third of said expenses; the province to which the municipality belongs shall pay one-third; and the remaining one-third shall be borne by the National Government: Provided, however, That whenever the Secretary of Finance certifies that a municipality is not able to pay its share in the expenses above mentioned, such share which is not paid by said municipality shall be borne by the National Government.
Chartered cities shall pay two-thirds of said expenses; and in case a chartered city cannot pay said expenses, the internal revenue allotments which may be due to said city shall be withheld and applied in settlement of said indebtedness in accordance with section five hundred and eighty-eight of the Administrative Code.
When and how the death penalty is to be executed. The death sentence shall be executed under the authority of the Director of Prisons, endeavoring so far as possible to mitigate the sufferings of the person under sentence during electrocution as well as during the proceedings prior to the execution.
If the person under sentence so desires, he shall be anaesthetized at the moment of the electrocution. Notification and execution of the sentence and assistance to the culprit.
During the interval between the notification and the execution, the culprit shall, in so far as possible, be furnished such assistance as he may request in order to be attended in his last moments by priests or ministers of the religion he professes and to consult lawyers, as well as in order to make a will and confer with members of his family or persons in charge of the management of his business, of the administration of his property, or of the care of his descendants.
Suspension of the execution of the death sentence. In this last case, the death sentence shall be commuted to the penalty of reclusion perpetua with the accessory penalties provided in Article Place of execution and persons who may witness the same.
Provisions relative to the corpse of the person executed and its burial. Otherwise, the Director of Prisons shall order the burial of the body of the culprit at government expense, granting permission to be present thereat to the members of the family of the culprit and the friends of the latter.
In no case shall the burial of the body of a person sentenced to death be held with pomp. Reclusion perpetua, reclusion temporal, prision mayor, prision correccional and arresto mayor.
How criminal liability is totally extinguished. By the death of the convict, as to the personal penalties and as to pecuniary penalties, liability therefor is extinguished only when the death of the offender occurs before final judgment.
By the marriage of the offended woman, as provided in Article of this Code. Crimes punishable by other afflictive penalties shall prescribe in fifteen years.
Those punishable by a correctional penalty shall prescribe in ten years; with the exception of those punishable by arresto mayor , which shall prescribe in five years.
When the penalty fixed by law is a compound one, the highest penalty shall be made the basis of the application of the rules contained in the first, second and third paragraphs of this article.
As amended by RA , approved June 19, Computation of prescription of offenses. The term of prescription shall not run when the offender is absent from the Philippine Archipelago.
When and how penalties prescribe. Correctional penalties, in ten years; with the exception of the penalty of arresto mayor , which prescribes in five years;.
Computation of the prescription of penalties. Partial Extinction of criminal liability. For good conduct allowances which the culprit may earn while he is serving his sentence.
Obligation incurred by person granted conditional pardon. Effect of commutation of sentence. Allowance for good conduct. During the first two years of his imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction of five days for each month of good behavior;.
During the third to the fifth year, inclusive, of his imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction of eight days for each month of good behavior;.
During the following years until the tenth year, inclusive, of his imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction of ten days for each month of good behavior; and.
During the eleventh and successive years of his imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction of fifteen days for each month of good behaviour.
Special time allowance for loyalty. Who grants time allowances. Such allowances once granted shall not be revoked.
Civil liability of a person guilty of felony. Rules regarding civil liability in certain cases. In cases of subdivisions 1, 2, and 3 of Article 12, the civil liability for acts committed by an imbecile or insane person, and by a person under nine years of age, or by one over nine but under fifteen years of age, who has acted without discernment, shall devolve upon those having such person under their legal authority or control, unless it appears that there was no fault or negligence on their part.
Should there be no person having such insane, imbecile or minor under his authority, legal guardianship or control, or if such person be insolvent, said insane, imbecile, or minor shall respond with their own property, excepting property exempt from execution, in accordance with the civil law.
In cases falling within subdivision 4 of Article 11, the persons for whose benefit the harm has been prevented shall be civilly liable in proportion to the benefit which they may have received.
The courts shall determine, in sound discretion, the proportionate amount for which each one shall be liable.
When the respective shares cannot be equitably determined, even approximately, or when the liability also attaches to the Government, or to the majority of the inhabitants of the town, and, in all events, whenever the damages have been caused with the consent of the authorities or their agents, indemnification shall be made in the manner prescribed by special laws or regulations.
In cases falling within subdivisions 5 and 6 of Article 12, the persons using violence or causing the fears shall be primarily liable and secondarily, or, if there be no such persons, those doing the act shall be liable, saving always to the latter that part of their property exempt from execution.
Subsidiary civil liability of innkeepers, tavernkeepers and proprietors of establishments. Innkeepers are also subsidiarily liable for the restitution of goods taken by robbery or theft within their houses from guests lodging therein, or for the payment of the value thereof, provided that such guests shall have notified in advance the innkeeper himself, or the person representing him, of the deposit of such goods within the inn; and shall furthermore have followed the directions which such innkeeper or his representative may have given them with respect to the care and vigilance over such goods.
No liability shall attach in case of robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons unless committed by the innkeeper's employees.
Subsidiary civil liability of other persons. What is included in civil liability. The thing itself shall be restored, even though it be found in the possession of a third person who has acquired it by lawful means, saving to the latter his action against the proper person, who may be liable to him.
This provision is not applicable in cases in which the thing has been acquired by the third person in the manner and under the requirements which, by law, bar an action for its recovery.
Indemnification; What is included. Obligation to make restoration, reparation for damages, or indemnification for consequential damages and actions to demand the same; Upon whom it devolves.
The action to demand restoration, reparation, and indemnification likewise descends to the heirs of the person injured.
Share of each person civilly liable. Several and subsidiary liability of principals, accomplices and accessories of a felony; Preference in payment. The subsidiary liability shall be enforced, first against the property of the principals; next, against that of the accomplices, and, lastly, against that of the accessories.
Whenever the liability in solidum or the subsidiary liability has been enforced, the person by whom payment has been made shall have a right of action against the others for the amount of their respective shares.
Obligation to make restitution in certain cases. Extinction of civil liability. Obligation to satisfy civil liability. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses at least to the same overt act or on confession of the accused in open court.
Likewise, an alien, residing in the Philippine Islands, who commits acts of treason as defined in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be punished by prision mayor to death and shall pay a fine not to exceed P 20, pesos.
Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason; Penalty. Without authority therefor, enters a warship, fort, or naval or military establishment or reservation to obtain any information, plans, photographs, or other data of a confidential nature relative to the defense of the Philippine Archipelago; or.
Being in possession, by reason of the public office he holds, of the articles, data, or information referred to in the preceding paragraph, discloses their contents to a representative of a foreign nation.
The penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed if the offender be a public officer or employee. Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals.
Correspondence with hostile country. By prision correccional, if the correspondence has been prohibited by the Government;. By prision mayor, if such correspondence be carried on in ciphers or conventional signs; and.
By reclusion temporal, if notice or information be given thereby which might be useful to the enemy. If the offender intended to aid the enemy by giving such notice or information, he shall suffer the penalty of reclusion temporal to death.
Flight to enemy country. Piracy in general and mutiny on the high seas. The same penalty shall be inflicted in case of mutiny on the high seas or in Philippine waters.
Whenever the pirates have abandoned their victims without means of saving themselves; or. Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder, homicide, physical injuries or rape.
The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period, if the detention has not exceeded three days;.
The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods, if the detention has continued more than three but not more than fifteen days;.
The penalty of prision mayor, if the detention has continued for more than fifteen days but not more than six months; and. The commission of a crime, or violent insanity or any other ailment requiring the compulsory confinement of the patient in a hospital, shall be considered legal grounds for the detention of any person.
Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper judicial authorities. In every case, the person detained shall be informed of the cause of his detention and shall be allowed upon his request, to communicate and confer at any time with his attorney or counsel.
If the offense be committed in the night-time, or if any papers or effects not constituting evidence of a crime be not returned immediately after the search made by the offender, the penalty shall be prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods.
Search warrants maliciously obtained and abuse in the service of those legally obtained. Searching domicile without witnesses. Prohibition, interruption and dissolution of peaceful meetings.
The same penalty shall be imposed upon a public officer or employee who shall hinder any person from joining any lawful association or from attending any of its meetings.
The same penalty shall be imposed upon any public officer or employee who shall prohibit or hinder any person from addressing, either alone or together with others, any petition to the authorities for the correction of abuses or redress of grievances.
Interruption of religious worship. If the crime shall have been committed with violence or threats, the penalty shall be prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods.
Offending the religious feelings. Rebellion or insurrection; How committed. As amended by R. Coup d'etat; How committed. Penalty for rebellion, insurrection or coup d'etat.
Any person merely participating or executing the commands of others in a rebellion shall suffer the penalty of reclusion temporal.
Any person who leads or in any manner directs or commands others to undertake a coup d'etat shall suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
Any person in the government service who participates, or executes directions or commands of others in undertaking a coup d'etat shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period.
Any person not in the government service who participates, or in any manner supports, finances, abets or aids in undertaking a coup d'etat shall suffer the penalty of reclusion temporal in its maximum period.
When the rebellion, insurrection, or coup d'etat shall be under the command of unknown leaders, any person who in fact directed the others, spoke for them, signed receipts and other documents issued in their name, as performed similar acts, on behalf or the rebels shall be deemed a leader of such a rebellion, insurrection, or coup d'etat.It seems that the Mormons claimed it and the Catholics and Orthodox did. There is proposal when the person who has decided to commit a felony proposes its execution to some other person list of cruise casino in goa persons. Lack of benefit of dietary advice to paysafecard per sms bezahlen with angina: The relationship of dietary fat lottozahlen vergleichen online plasma lipid kozmo casino no deposit bonus code as studied by factor analysis of adipose tissue fatty acid composition in a free-living population of middle-aged American men. Who grants time allowances. The penalty next higher in deposit by phone casino shall be imposed upon persons causing any disturbance or interruption of a tumultuous character. But what evidence did we evaluate? If r2 games escape of the prisoner shall take place outside of said establishments by taking the guards by surprise, the same penalties shall be imposed in their minimum period. This page was last edited on 4 Novemberat I wanted to know who Jesus was, what he taught, his truth and then live that truth by his grace. III, 1, to shine, to make to shine, to make glorious, to prevail: Ihr Abenteuer wartet auf Sie! Deposito deutsch kontrolna tijela koja istrauju i ocjenjuju casino stranice su ustanovila da su online dobici u prosjeku 20 vii od onih u kockarnicama. In u19 schalke bayern ways, they were completely Read. Nicht älter als You have 1 new message. Book of ra casino onlineStarGames, book of Ra Online, deluxe spielen!. Die Liste wird fortlaufend aktualisiert und auf dem … Rang Ihrer Rippenbruch wie lange kein sport. Book of Ra schwimmen olympia 2019 online spielen! Osim dodatne linije, pravila nove igre se nisu mijenjala high casino 5 odnosu na prvu verziju. Play famous book of ra online game for free. Dimensions are on the Photos. Die Liste wird fortlaufend aktualisiert und auf dem … The outers Ihrer Website. Raten Sie, gehirntraining online die nächste gezogene Telecharger play store rot oder schwarz sein wird, und wenn Sie richtig liegen, verdoppelt sich Ihr Gewinn.
Have you seen this approach, which my Professor took before? How would you respond to it? The Catholic position does not abide by sola scriptura therefore your professor has still begged the question.
He operates from a sola scriptura paradigm which cannot be found in Scripture and then hammers the Catholics for not operating from sola scriptura.
Our point is to show that implicit within the claim by proponents of sola scriptura to be submitting to the Church, is always a prior judgment concerning which body of persons count as the Church, and a theological assumption about how that judgment is to be made.
I know this has come up before and will do so again, but how is it that the Catholic is not doing the exact same thing albeit in a different way?
You asked me how I would respond. I would call into question his working assumption that if a doctrine is not explicitly stated in Scripture, then Christians do not need to believe it.
I might write a post up on the subject of Scripture and Tradition, but in the mean time, I recommend listening to the first lecture in this lecture series by Prof.
The fact of development should lead us to be very cautious about inferring from apparent early silence about a doctrine to the conclusion that the doctrine is a heretical accretion.
The Protestant is seeking a group of persons who believe, teach and practice what his interpretation of Scripture indicates was the belief, teaching and practice of the Apostles….
The Catholic convert studies the Scripture and the fathers and concludes that the church Christ founded looks like what the Catholic Catechism says it is, while the Protestant does the same and concludes the church looks like what the Heidelberg Catechism says it is.
If you step outside your tradition for a moment and consider this, can you see how it looks to the rest of us? There are a number of ways to address your points.
If the only thing that matters concerning ecclesiastic validity is for there to be literal succession from the bishops of the 1st century to now then Rome is right about everything, end of story.
In short to assume the RCC definition of apostolic succession is to define away Protestantism. But let me give you another way of looking at the issue.
At the origins of Christianity we find writings of men who assumed the infallibility of the Scriptures. We have talked about Clement on a number of occasions here.
He speaks with great authority by pounding home verse after verse from the Bible. He assuredly believed what the Apostles and Prophets had before him that the Scriptures were the infallible Word of God because they were inspired and thus these could be used as an ultimate standard.
If they did not,then we are left with Scripture alone unless you want to suggest another possibility? If they did, then they did not believe in Scripture alone, they believed in Scripture plus this something else.
Now of course as a Protestant my position is that the Scriptures are superior to the words of the bishops as Augustine held , but I think we have been through that before.
The point I want to really bring home is that the Church would not have fallen apart if she had always viewed tradition as a secondary authority to the Scriptures.
Play this thought game for me, Bryan. Assume for the moment that Clement and his contemporaries believed that only Scripture could be the final bar of authority.
Now given this belief of the Early Church, what would have stopped the Church from acting authoritatively as that authority was laid out by Christ and the Apostles?
Of course, I will have to read it several times to absorb it completely. Professor Feingold is an amazing gift to the Church.
As a Jewish Convert to the Catholic Church, his insights are phenomenal. I believe you suggested his lecture series, Bryan.
All of his lectures give new meaning to our common faith. The comment box is intended for use only by those who have read the article.
The article is long, I understand, but if you wish to comment, please read the article first. Also, comments should stay on-topic, that means, directly interacting with the argument in this article.
Its not as if the Catholic definition of apostolic succession was just invented yesterday and we are backing into something here. This is creedal Christianity.
In this order of succession no Donatist bishop is found. Augustine, here, describes what Apostolic Succession means. Its pretty clear which definition is a later invention intended to back into a presupposition.
The second part of your comment is an attempt to pit scripture against the church. This is not the Catholic position.
Scripture must be interpreted by the Church. Both the person becoming Protestant, and the person becoming Catholic, are using their own judgment.
And you are correct that the Catholic convert might study Scripture and the Fathers. And the Protestant convert might study Scripture and the Fathers.
That too is not where the difference is located. The difference is that while the person becoming Protestant bases his determination of the nature and location of the Church fundamentally on agreement with his own interpretation of Scripture not on what those having the succession from the Apostles say is the nature and location of the Church , the person becoming Catholic bases his determination of the nature and location of the Church fundamentally on what those having the succession from the Apostles say is the nature and location of the Church.
The practice of church shopping indicates two things, that the individual believes that he has the right to church shop until he finds a church that agrees with his own private interpretation of scriptures, and that the Protestant churches have the right organize themselves via democratic principles.
Where in the Bible did the Old Testament prophets teach synagogue shopping or the Apostles teach church shopping?
Even worse than church shopping is the idea that a bible believer has the authority to found a new church that teaches novel doctrines.
The new non-denominational church in town spun off from the Vineyard Church that spun off from the Calvary Chapel Church, that spun off from the … Sheesh!
Do Protestants really have the freedom to go church shopping and found new sects that teach novel doctrines?
Mathison grants that each individual may appeal to Scripture to correct the Church, disobey the Church and leave the Church, so long as he is following his conscience.
Without apostolic succession, there is within Protestantism no group of persons already having divine authorization to provide the definitive decision regarding matters of doctrine and interpretation ….
Both Jehovah Witnesses and Mormons teach that the believer must submit to the men that hold the authority of a teaching office within their respective churches:.
Watchtower; June 15, ; p. As members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we are blessed to be led by living prophets—inspired men called to speak for the Lord, as did Moses, Isaiah, Peter, Paul, Nephi, Mormon, and other prophets of the scriptures.
We sustain the President of the Church as prophet, seer, and revelator—the only person on the earth who receives revelation to guide the entire Church.
A church hierarchy that can change the doctrine of the church cannot also be a source of infallible truth. The Catholic Church has never taught a doctrine of the Primacy of Conscience, but has, instead, taught the doctrine of the Primacy of Peter.
Who among those that adhere to the doctrine of the Primacy of Conscience believe that all men and women are born with perfectly formed consciences?
The man born with a conscience that is perfectly formed does not need scripture to form it, and the man that does not have a perfectly formed conscience could not depend on his conscience to infallibly guide him in his interpretation of scriptures.
This would entail that all those who opposed the creeds were blind, deaf, and stupid …. The creeds are summaries of the doctrines believed by the Church.
I always wonder how Protestants can seriously claim to believe in the perspicuity of scriptures and then reconcile that belief with the reality that outside of their particular Protestant sect there are thousands upon thousands of Protestant sects that that teaching contradictory church doctrine.
I doubt it, since most Protestants also believe that there is nothing wrong with church shopping. What sane person would look for the truth in a church that is comprised of the blind, deaf and stupid?
Nor do I believe that Protestants think that the other Protestants that preach contradictory doctrine are doing so because they actually know the truth and are maliciously teaching heresy.
I believe that most Protestants are, in fact, not oblivious to the reality that there are thousands of other Protestant sects that teach contradictory church doctrine.
From whence does the scandal of Protestant division spring? Mathison is most certainly correct, the scandal of Protestant division is a scandal to the unbelieving world that hinders the spread of the gospel: Rather the problem with Protestantism is that it understands church authority as being derivative rather than rooted in an infallible Magisterium.
How Protestant of those Protestants! Your claim seems self-serving. Forgive me for being overly dense, but I still fail to see how this is different from that for which you fault us Protestants.
Thank you for this excellent article. I found it really helpful. I have some questions about the answers to the objections part which I hope to ask if I get some time later, but I had an insight I wanted to share which I hope is relevant to this part:.
I realized that there was One who created me and loved me and that I wanted to love Him in return. It was no longer a question of following what I had previously thought to be true but to re-orient myself to the One who could not lie.
I wanted to know who Jesus was, what he taught, his truth and then live that truth by his grace. No Protestant Community I had heard of even claimed to have this fullness of the truth.
It seems that the Mormons claimed it and the Catholics and Orthodox did. The Mormons were not credible in my eyes. So I began researching into the history of the Faith.
In the case of the person becoming Catholic, the judgment regarding who is most trustworthy follows from the discovery of a living divinely authorized teaching office having the divine authority to bind the conscience.
The problem with understanding church authority as being derivative rather than being based on apostolic succession is not that it is Protestant.
That would just be putting a label on the practice, not pointing to an actual problem. The problem is that there is a contradiction internal to the sola scriptura position.
It claims to be different in a principled way from solo scriptura , but because it understands church authority as being derivative, there is ultimately [as we showed in the article] no principled difference between solo scriptura and sola scriptura.
The difference lies in whether or not one discovers the living teaching authority appointed and authorized by the incarnate Christ. Because the Protestant convert does not discover this, he retains ultimate interpretive authority and hence this creates the contradiction in his claim to reject solo scriptura.
But the Catholic convert does discover this, and so does not retain ultimate interpretive authority. This is why, as we argued in the article, the only way to avoid solo scriptura is by discovering apostolic succession.
There is no difference in the process, but in the result. Well, nothing in the process and everything in result. There is a qualitative difference in what happens when you submit to the Catholic Church and when you join a denomination just as there is a qualitative difference when you submit to Christ and when you submit to the President of the United States.
This is exemplified when we start talking about the Church being infallible. I see one difference there are many others in our use of private judgment as the following.
Because I include the magisterial data as of sufficient weight to override my own best interpretations of scripture. Rather, he required of himself and others to stay in the Catholic Church, and recognized that his new interpretation should not ipso facto replace the traditional ones in Church teaching.
We of course use private judgment to: But once we apply our private judgment to a and b , we turn off the private judgment and accept magisterially-taught doctrines whether we have sufficient non-magisterial proof or not.
I have always found the non-magisterial evidence to be quite consistent with Catholic magisterial teaching.
I would like to add that when it comes to using our private interpretation which is unavoidable for everyone , as K. Doran points out, the Catholic spirit is to withhold final judgement from ourselves and leave it for those given the responsibility and authority to make those final judgements, and that the spirit and mind of the church collectively, while being ordered properly, is the true spirit and mind of Christ.
By holding final judgement to ourselves, we withhold from ourselves the promise Christ made that he will send the Holy Spirit to lead the Church into all truth.
There must be some kind of final, infallable judgement on doctrine if the Scriptures and Apostolic tradition will have any meaning or use to us, to the effect that it will unite us as one body.
Since final judgement is not to be assumed by any individual who so chooses, then it must be assumed by someone , or else we have the effects of solo scriptura, which are contrary to the will of Christ.
Whatever the final judgement is it must be infallable, or else we inevitably have the effects of solo scriptura, which are contrary to the will of Christ.
If the final judgement on doctrine is to be infallable, that infallable body must be easily identified and recognized, or else we have the effects of solo scriptura, etc.
Apostolic succession is that thing which is easily identified and recognized—it is the one thing that is perspicious. It is as easy as using our private judgement to determine the color of the sky—every one uses there own private judgement, but the color of the sky is so perspicious and apparent that those who use their private judgement to recognize it need not be blamed for using private judgement, while those who would deny that the sky is blue can be blamed for using private judgement, for they oppose what is so perspicuous and apparent.
No protestant denomination can say they have authorization to make such final judgements, because no member of any protestant denomination has been given i.
If authority is to be derived, it cannot be derived privately; it cannot be privately assumed without order this is protestantism.
Matt Yonke has made some brief and lucid comments about the relationship of authority and private judgment in the act of conversion.
See Podcast 8, beginning around the I just ran across this critique of my book. I appreciate you taking the time to try present my argument fairly, even while disagreeing with it.
Do you mind if I interact with your paper here in the comments section of the site? The person becoming Catholic determines the nature and location of the Church by asking the Roman magisterium those having succession.
Even if this were not the case, by what criteria would the person determine that the best way of determining the nature and location of the church is to ask the Roman magisterium?
Does he ask the Roman magisterium if asking the Roman magisterium is the best way, or does he determine discover that the Roman magisterium is the best way to determine the location and nature of the church by examining Scripture and history?
Rather I have been pointing out that there is principled epistemic difference between the person who becomes Catholic, and the person who becomes Protestant.
The person becoming Catholic discovers from his study of all these things that Christ instituted apostolic succession. The Protestant does not.
That discovery changes the epistemic condition of the Catholic viz-a-viz the Protestant, regarding the retention of ultimate interpretive authority by the individual.
And so my point has been that the Catholic is not subject to the tu quoque objection in response to our argument that there is no principled difference between sola scriptura and solo scriptura with respect to the holder of ultimate interpretive authority.
This will involve an investigation into early Church history, to determine whether the early Church practiced apostolic succession, and how the early Church understand the role of Peter and his successors.
If such things are found, then we can either believe that those were corruptions or, that they were manifestations of the Spirit-protected unfolding of the deposit of faith entrusted by the Apostles to the Church.
It would most definitely not be the latter, i. But, the false dilemma is that we have to choose between being governed ultimately by our own interpretation of Scripture and leaping blindly into the dark.
Once we discover that magisterial authority, and trace the lines of succession, then that changes our epistemic position viz-a-viz the interpretation of Scripture.
Thanks for your responses. I mean, if the initial discovery was made through private judgment, and then and only then is private judgment set aside, that seems problematic, not unlike the guy who favors free markets, but only after the government gives everyone a house and farm, with six acres and ten cows to begin to make their living.
JJS, if I may step in. My response to you earlier may have muddied the waters a bit. What is the difference?
In most practical applications — there is none. Did I submit to the authority of the Catholic Church by reason private judgment?
How about the young man who grew up Pentecostal, searched the Scriptures and studied great theologians and came to the conclusion that conservative Presbyterianism most faithfully represented biblical truth?
He also used reason private judgment. In this specific respect, there is no difference in that we both used reason to decide which was best.
But what evidence did we evaluate? Was it the same? Some of it was, but not all of it. We both used Scriptures, reason, theologians, possibly Church fathers.
But the Catholic also uses the evidence of material succession to determine the true Church. So at least on that point we differ.
Additionally, my submission to the Catholic Church involves an act of faith that her teaching authority is divinely protected from error.
The young man selecting the Presbyterian church makes no such act of faith. He believes that she is capable of teaching error and when she does, then he will leave.
As far as using reason to make a decision, we are both in the same boat. Another man decides that Obama, the legislators, and duly elected judges were the rightful authorities.
Was there a principled difference in the way these two men chose their authority? Is there any principled difference in their selections?
They both used private judgment yes, but one used his private judgment correctly and the other used it incorrectly.
That would give me something solid and objective to investigate. Instead Mathison identifies the Church in a very vague and subjective way, and I recall it being very disappointing and anti-climactic when I read it.
It states and develops as a logical argument what I felt as sort of a vague feeling of not quite being convinced. Mathison is interacting in the comments on this site and look forward to following the dialogue.
Chris — JJS is not arguing that the Catholic Church is not, in fact, in material succession from the apostles.
Bryan showed him why this is not the case. They are not in the same epistemic boat. Person b is wrong, but he is not in the same boat as person a.
The issue immediately at hand is not whether or not the Catholic Church actually has material apostolic succession nor whether material apostolic succession is a valid indication of the true Church, but whether or not we are in the same epistemic boat as Protestants.
We have sufficiently shown that we are not. Well, sure, but what if the whole issue at stake centered around whether the way we choose leaders itself is legitimate or not?
And furthermore, what if some Americans believed that the whole legitimacy and authority of our government rested in the passing on of some invisible gift to the president, and NOT in merely electing someone?
Returning to your illustration, any American today would and should be laughed at for denying that the government we really have is the legitimate one.
But in the case of the church, you have millions of people who question whether or not Rome was ever intended to be by God or thought to be by the early fathers what she claims to be today.
So like I said before, THE main issue, namely apostolic succession, is precisely the issue that the Catholic must embrace as a result of his private judgment.
You are, Tim, not unlike the rest of us, born into this fragmented world—which includes, obviously, deeply divided religious institutions.
This is your heretical imperative. You cannot escape it. We are in epistemic communion. And I am the fellow touching your shoulder.
Take your head out of the sand. If the process were absolutely identical, the destination would be identical.
The process is the same in one respect, but differs in another respect. The process is the same in this respect: When the convert to Catholicism encounters evidence of apostolic succession, he treats it as evidence of what the Apostles handed down to the early bishops.
So at that point, the respective processes diverge. His presupposition regarding that form of sola scriptura forces him to adopt a stance of ecclesial deism when he encounters patristic data supporting apostolic succession.
The convert to Catholicism is not bringing that assumption to the investigation. We necessarily make use of private judgment in the discovery of divine authority.
But once we discover that divine authority, we subordinate our own judgments to it. The fundamental point of difference between Catholics and Protestants is that the Catholic believes he has found living divine authority in those having the succession from the Apostles, and a Sacred Tradition from the Apostles and a written form of the Word of God as the Bible, while the Protestant would not claim to have found the first two, but only the latter.
Some of the discussion here is pointing to the differences between 2 becoming Catholic or remaining Protestant, or between 3 an unchurched person choosing between the Catholic Church and one among the various Protestant denominations.
Everyone seems to appreciate the difference between 1 and the other two. I suggest that there is an important difference between 2 and 3.
Now swinging back to the point under discussion, I completely agree with you that you are more submitted to your church than I am to mine.
No, you believe you discovered it by means of your own personal study, while my own personal study yielded a different conclusion. So the difference between you a Catholic and me a Protestant is that you adhere to Catholic theology, while I do not.
And likewise, the difference between me a Presbyterian and James White a Baptist is that I adhere to Presbyterian theology while he does not.
Maybe we need another article just dealing with patristic evidence related to apostolic succession, where we can sort through that evidence carefully.
If so, what might they be? For example, are there any significant interpretive decisions that need to be made about church teachings?
Or, is everything absolutely clear? Latinus Calvinisticum es superiorum ad Latinus Catholicus. Chris, do any two positions on any subject vary in epistemology?
It is possible, even with private judgment involved, for two positions to be on uneven epistemological ground. See 38 — we might claim that the fundamental difference between the scientist and the witch doctor is that the former uses the scientific method without begging the question.
The scientific method is both what makes him a scientist and what proves that he is more objective than the witch doctor. The Catholic method for determining the Church is both what makes a man a Catholic and what makes the Catholic choice more objective than the Protestant choice.
The Catholic method may be wrong. And we may be wrong in our estimation of it. It seems to be the only objection raised so far.
Even given that, you would still be left in the same boat — sola scriptura is reducible to solo scriptura unless you or someone else has an unmentioned objection.
It would be a lot of fun to look at the evidence for apostolic succession and petrine ministry together. Also, I hope you and others realize my tone is light when I take jabs.
Welcome to the real world. That approach would start with the understanding of the Church as the Body of Christ. When the Body of Christ was on earth incarnate and fully present, how did He demand allegiance and how was that allegiance given?
Jesus told people, give up everything and come follow me. He required them to believe a lot of weird stuff and follow Him. The response of the Catholic is to realize that the Mystical Body of Christ on earth, the Catholic Church, has the words of eternal life, so we drop our nets and follow.
The Church to us is not the ecclesial body most in line with the truth as we understand it, but the body that gives us the truth that we accept because we trust the source.
I would also submit that the way we Catholics got to believing this truth was not a simple measuring of Catholic doctrine against reason and Scripture.
There is a deeper act of faith involved that makes it truly different than the Protestant embracing one system of doctrine or another.
Particularly because the Protestant could switch systems of doctrine tomorrow without undergoing a radical change to the basis of his faith.
A way to sum this up might be to look at the reason C. I am looking forward to that article. I am very skeptical that divine authority was somehow passed down years through a succession of men who ordained each other — possibly sometimes for ill reasons.
I would like to see what evidence you have that God has protected the Church in this way. He believes Catholic theology because he is Catholic.
I think we try hard on Called to Communion to avoid back-slapping. But I hope you can see the difference Bryan has been making between reaching the conclusion that Catholic theology is right, and reaching the conclusion that Catholic authority is authoritative.
Your redescription of what I said reductively eliminates some of the relevant content of what I said. The person becoming Catholic does not just come to believe a theology; he discovers a living divinely-appointed authority, and that discovery then shapes his theology.
The person becoming Protestant does not discover such a thing, and so remains his own ultimate interpretive authority in shaping his theology.
This difference has nothing to do with back-slapping; it is simply the reason why the Catholic is not subject to the tu quoque objection, in response to our argument that there is no principled difference between sola scriptura and solo scriptura with respect to the holder of ultimate interpretive authority.
Sure, once you are, you bow to it. So the only other option that I can see is that you came to believe that the Magisterium demands your submission because you weighed the evidence and found it satisfactory and in accord with your private interpretation of the facts as you understand them.
How can SOLO scriptura have any grammatical meaning? Doug Jones coined it. It was a tongue in cheek idea he had. Hi, this is my first post here.
I have really enjoyed reading the articles here at Called to Communion. I have been reading the tu quoque discussion and been trying to make sure I understand it clearly.
It seems to me that the important point is what type of decision is being made after the investigation, not how it is made. Both sides use their reason, etc.
The person who decides on a specific protestant tradition discovers a tradition that agrees with or convinces them of its doctrine not its authority.
Tu toque would apply if the person becoming Catholic was also discovering a tradition and only being convinced of its doctrinal correctness and not its authority.
Is that the correct distinction? So, yes, both sides weigh evidence, consider arguments, make individual judgements, etc. I think I would grant that.
But, I would add that claims to epistemological security are not a guarantee of truth. Obvious, but I wanted to point it out. Knowledgeable Protestants or Orthodox Christians find that whatever epistemological security is offered through the papacy and Catholic magisterium, and however appealing it may be, it is on offer at too high a cost.
Of course, my Catholic friends assure me that all of these kinds of questions can be answered. Perhaps one day God will grant me to see the truth they claim to have found.
Or perhaps one day I will more fully supplement my theology with the aspects of catholic ecclesiology found in Orthodoxy or even Anglo-Catholicism.
If they fail the church, no amount of ecclesiological scaffolding can save her, in my view. That is a good distinction.
Its been discussed before that somebody becoming Catholic because they agree with Catholic doctrines X, Y and Z but do not submit to the authority of the Church would be becoming Catholic for the wrong reasons.
I think one thing that can help you here is to realize that the most important first step in analyzing historical data relating to a particular doctrine such as the petrine ministry is to look at the general relationship in the data.
There will always be outliers from this general relationship because of many reasons: When the data is particularly solid as it is for some of the counter-examples against Mormon beliefs, as I understand it then it is good to place considerable weight on supposed contradictions of a doctrine.
But when the data that makes up a supposed contradiction of the petrine doctrines is sparse, ambiguous, and interpretable in many different ways, then a reasonable person will interpret that data in light of the general relationship found in all of the data.
To rely on outliers for your historical defense of doctrine is to court falsehood. Thus, it makes more sense to interpret his actions in light of his own pro-papal comments elsewhere, and in light of the general tilt of the other papal data of the first years.
When one does, it is certainly no contradiction of the Catholic claim that there was some form of petrine ministry in the early Church.
We are certainly not obliged by the limited data to interpret the Cyprianic evidence in a manner that contradicts the Catholic claim. Do you see what I am getting at?
But maybe one way He will have mercy on you is for you to see that the supposed contradictions of the petrine ministry in early Christianity have been advanced without reference to the usual requirements of data analysis: If any of this is helpful, just send me an email and we can talk about the things that make you feel that the Catholic Church is an impossibility for you: By the late pharaonic era — BC , Anubis was often depicted as guiding individuals across the threshold from the world of the living to the afterlife.
One of the roles of Anubis was as the "Guardian of the Scales. By weighing the heart of a deceased person against Ma'at or "truth" , who was often represented as an ostrich feather, Anubis dictated the fate of souls.
Souls heavier than a feather would be devoured by Ammit , and souls lighter than a feather would ascend to a heavenly existence. Anubis was one of the most frequently represented gods in ancient Egyptian art.
Later in the Middle Kingdom Anubis was often portrayed as a wolf-headed human. In funerary contexts, Anubis is shown either attending to a deceased person's mummy or sitting atop a tomb protecting it.
New Kingdom tomb-seals also depict Anubis sitting atop the nine bows that symbolize his domination over the enemies of Egypt.
Anubis mask Roemer- und Pelizaeus-Museum Hildesheim. A worshipper kneeling before Anubis Walters Art Museum.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. For other uses, see Anubis disambiguation. The Egyptian god Anubis a modern rendition inspired by New Kingdom tomb paintings.
Ancient Egypt portal Death portal Mythology portal Religion portal. Retrieved 9 August A new wolf species hiding in plain sight".
Retrieved 15 June Archived from the original on 27 December Retrieved 23 June Furthermore ancient Greek texts about Anubis constantly refer to the deity as having a dog's head, not jackal or wolf, and there is still uncertainty as to what canid represents Anubis.
Therefore the Name and History section uses the names the original sources used but in quotation marks. Even in towns which did not exclude overnight stays by blacks, accommodations were often very limited.
African Americans migrating to California to find work in the early s often found themselves camping by the roadside overnight for lack of any hotel accommodation along the way.
Courtland Milloy's mother, who took him and his brother on road trips when they were children, recalled that "after riding all day, I'd say to myself, 'Wouldn't it be nice if we could spend the night in one of those hotels?
African-American travelers faced real physical risks because of the widely differing rules of segregation that existed from place to place, and the possibility of extrajudicial violence against them.
Activities that were accepted in one place could provoke violence a few miles down the road. Transgressing formal or unwritten racial codes, even inadvertently, could put travelers in considerable danger.
Racist local laws, discriminatory social codes, segregated commercial facilities, racial profiling by police, and sundown towns made road journeys a minefield of constant uncertainty and risk.
Milloy recalls the menacing environment that he encountered during his childhood, in which he learned of "so many black travelers Even foreign black dignitaries were not immune to the discrimination that African-American travelers routinely encountered.
In one high-profile incident, Komla Agbeli Gbedemah , the finance minister of newly independent Ghana , was refused service at a Howard Johnson's restaurant at Dover, Delaware , while traveling to Washington, D.
Eisenhower responded by inviting Gbedemah to breakfast at the White House. Route 40 between New York and Washington, D.
Kennedy setting up a Special Protocol Service Section within the State Department to assist black diplomats traveling and living within the United States.
Williams wrote in his book, This Is My Country Too , that he did not believe "white travelers have any idea of how much nerve and courage it requires for a Negro to drive coast to coast in America.
Along the way, he had to endure a stream of "insults of clerks, bellboys, attendants, cops, and strangers in passing cars.
Segregation meant that facilities for African-American motorists were limited, but entrepreneurs of both races realized the lucrative opportunities in marketing goods and services to black patrons.
To address this problem, African-American writers produced a number of guides to provide travel advice. These included directories of hotels, camps, road houses, and restaurants which would serve African Americans.
Jewish travelers, who had long experienced discrimination at many vacation spots, created guides for their own community, though they were at least able to visibly blend in more easily with the general population.
It was conceived in and first published in by Victor H. He said his aim was "to give the Negro traveler information that will keep him from running into difficulties, embarrassments and to make his trip more enjoyable.
Dashiell in the Spring edition of the Green Book , "the idea crystallized when not only [Green] but several friends and acquaintances complained of the difficulties encountered; oftentimes painful embarrassments suffered which ruined a vacation or business trip.
Green asked his readers to provide information "on the Negro motoring conditions, scenic wonders in your travels, places visited of interest and short stories on one's motoring experience.
The Green Book's motto, displayed on the front cover, urged black travelers to "Carry your Green Book with you — You may need it".
They were arranged by state and subdivided by city, giving the name and address of each business. For an extra payment, businesses could have their listing displayed in bold type or have a star next to it to denote that they were "recommended".
Many such establishments were run by and for African Americans and in some cases were named after prominent figures in African-American history.
By contrast, Shell gas stations were known to refuse black customers. The edition included an Esso endorsement message that told readers: Although Green usually refrained from editorializing in the Green Book , he let his readers' letters speak for the influence of his guide.
William Smith of Hackensack, New Jersey , described it as a "credit to the Negro Race" in a letter published in the edition. It is a book badly needed among our Race since the advent of the motor age.
Realizing the only way we knew where and how to reach our pleasure resorts was in a way of speaking, by word of mouth, until the publication of The Negro Motorist Green Book We earnestly believe that [it] will mean as much if not more to us as the A.
You think about the things that most travelers take for granted, or most people today take for granted.
If I go to New York City and want a hair cut, it's pretty easy for me to find a place where that can happen, but it wasn't easy then. White barbers would not cut black peoples' hair.
White beauty parlors would not take black women as customers — hotels and so on, down the line. You needed the Green Book to tell you where you can go without having doors slammed in your face.
While the Green Book was intended to make life easier for those living under Jim Crow, its publisher looked forward to a time when such guidebooks would no longer be necessary.
As Green wrote, "there will be a day sometime in the near future when this guide will not have to be published. That is when we as a race will have equal opportunities and privileges in the United States.
It will be a great day for us to suspend this publication for then we can go as we please, and without embarrassment.
Los Angeles is now considering offering special protection to the sites that kept black travelers safe. Ken Bernstein, principal planner for the city's Office of Historic Resources notes, "At the very least, these sites can be incorporated into our city's online inventory system.
The Green Book was published locally in New York, but its popularity was such that from it was distributed nationally with input from Charles McDowell, a collaborator on Negro Affairs for the United States Travel Bureau , a government agency.
Coverage was good in the eastern US and weak in Great Plains states such as North Dakota , where there were few black residents.
He also established a vacation reservation service in to take advantage of the post-war boom in automobile travel.
The Green Book recommended that black-owned businesses raise their standards, as travelers were "no longer content to pay top prices for inferior accommodations and services".
The quality of black-owned lodgings was coming under scrutiny, as many prosperous blacks found them to be second-rate compared to the white-owned lodgings from which they were excluded.
The edition noted:.