ROME: The Egyptian Obelisk that isn’t at the Vatican

https://twitter.com/MilitarisCath/status/1688667236829970433

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

imagine that British armies conquered Egypt and cut a stone in the likeness of an Egyptian Obelisk, and moved it to Piccadilly Circus.

And then centuries later, a tour guide published an article claiming it was an Egyptian Obelisk.

As a tourist, you would feel defrauded of your expensive ticket, would you not, when you found it was only a British copy of something ancient?

And yet that is what has just happened, in article by Travel.com featured by Microsoft’s news platform.

Only the “obelisk” is Roman and it’s known to the whole world as the Obelisk in the center of St Peter’s Piazza just outside Vatican territory. (Contrary to popular opinion, the Piazza is part of the territory of the Italian Republic, and only conceded to the Pope, during Papal masses.)

Because that stone was erected by the Romans at the Julian Forum, in Alexandria, in the Roman Province of Egypt, in the years 30-28 B. C., as a mortuary monument to Julius Caesar (it actually had a small metal sphere on its top until the reign of Pope Sixtus V, containing his ashes), and was later transported to Rome under the Emperor Caligula, where it was incorporated as the spina or principal central stone, of the Circus of Caligula — a circus was a horse-racing track. According to the most ancient accounts, St. Peter and his companions were crucified and burnt alive, having been doused with oil, there. — So, the above article is also wrong, in claiming that the obelisk is older than the city of Rome, herself, because the city was founded in 753 B. C., and the stone was in all probability cut sometime around 30 B. C..

Pope Sixtus V moved the stone, which had never fallen down from its original position to its present one: having first had it exorcised, and after its erection, decorated at its peak with a relic of the True Cross, in the year of Our Lord 1586, with an engineering method worked out by the Renaissance Architect, Domenico Fontana. The Franciscan Pope personally oversaw the re-raising of the stone, and forbade any swears to be uttered during its execution.

Thus, by all sane estimation this “obelisk” is not an Egyptian Obelisk, because the Egyptians never made it, nor does it have any Egyptian inscriptions upon it, which, according to Egyptian religious beliefs, would have had to been inscribed upon it, to dedicate it, as is the case with all other stones of the same shape from antiquity which were cut in Egypt. (Egyptians regarded their obelisks as symbols of the rays of light from Ra, their sun god, and thus it was unthinkable for them not to have a religious inscription upon them.)

Nor was the “obelisk” ever used in the worship of any divinity.

(Save this story to rebut the frequent charge by Protestants who know not history, and often cite this stone at St. Peter’s as proof that the Catholic Church is founded upon Idolatry.)

About the Author: Br. Alexis Bugnolo is the editor of FromRome.info. He holds a B. A. in Cultural Anthropology, with an emphasis in Classical Studies, from the University of Florida, Gainesville, Fl., USA, class of 1986.

With Globalist Censorship growing daily, No one will ever know about the above article, if you do not share it.

10 thoughts on “ROME: The Egyptian Obelisk that isn’t at the Vatican”

  1. HAVE ALWAYS WONDERED ABOUT THIS…And, now consider it yet another maneuver to create an APPEARANCE of heresy where none exists; on Vatican Grounds. Happy to know it’s merely a part of Roman Land…And, definitely secular in origin if not apostate by the Illuminate/Freemasons and other enemies of Catholicism/Christianity.

  2. Someone has to write a book titled “Ridiculous false beliefs some ignoramuses declare about the Catholic Church” They have one about a transvestite female pope who gave birth to a baby while riding a horse. And it has a sequel: that is why they invented the ‘chair of Peter’ a chair with no bottom where the future Pope has to seat thus allowing an inspector to check if he has male genitalia. Not to be picky with such stories … aren’t there easier ways to check for the appropriate genitalia? i.e. giving the guy a few beers and see how he manages to urinate some time later? That would be ‘Peter’s Beer’ ha! but I better don’t give them ideas!

  3. Dear Brother Alexis,

    Thank you for this information. It is very relevant to an issue I have been dealing with for a few years. Are you aware that some particularly hateful Protestants & former Catholics site this stone structure in Rome, and its shape, as proof of that for centuries the Catholic Church has been controlled by Freemasons, and revels in participating in sexual immorality and sin. especially crimes against children? Over the last few years, at the urging of a few of my siblings, I have read infuriating articles or watched vile videos claiming evidence of this accusation. It is very disturbing to know that even my own siblings believe this type of trash-talk about the Church. They tell me to be prepared to learn things so criminal and heinous, especially about the last few popes, that I won’t, in good conscience, be able to remain a Catholic. My response is a bit immature and lacking substance, and is usually something to the effect that “Even if all those horrible crimes are true, those men are not the Church.” Or “I’m not leaving Jesus just because of the modern-day, evil Judases.”

    Can you provide insight or some really strong scriptural references that might make an impact on fallen-away Catholics who are so willing to believe the absolute worst accusations about the Church hierarchy? It’s become obvious that I need help to refute these horrendous claims, and defend Holy Mother Church with biblical and/or historically accurate information.

    Thank you!

    1. They first should look up the history of Freemasonry, and they will find that it is of recent vintage (1717 A. D.) and that it controls all their own institutions already. And then with that knowledge, as them, why they seem obsessed in attributing their problems to the Catholic Church, which is the one institution which has fought against it and is in a fight against it.

  4. Why all these obelisks ? one in Washington DC and in Rome and in London? what is the meaning (symbolism) behind it ?

    1. Yes, there is meaning in the Vatican “obelisk”.

      As for the Vatican stone, it was, metaphorically speaking, a witness to the crucifixion and martyrdom of St. Peter and the first Martyrs of the Roman Church. And Since the Basilica of St. Peter is a monument to their faith in Christ, who redeemed the world on the Cross, a small piece of that cross, placed in a metal ostensorio, on the very peak of this stone, shouts that Christ has triumphed over pagan Rome, and that the faith of Peter and the first Christians is the center and focus of the Catholic religion.

Comments are closed.