The Catholic institution, represented by Pope Francis, is attempting, with some success, to portray itself as the seat of humility, caring for the poor and marginalized of the earth, dressing itself in Christ-like compassion. We might then expect that in the ritual conduct of the Catholic institution we would discover the living Christ and might expect that the good offices of the Catholic institution surely lead to the knowledge of Christ as savior and lord.
In actuality, by its core structure and most fundamental precepts, this institution interposes itself between God and the person reaching out to God through his own faith. Such is the slight of hand by which Catholicism gathers its people into an ecclesiastical hall of mirrors which confuses and inhibits the progress of the faithful toward knowledge of the person of God.
Such is the longstanding threat and danger of the Catholic dogma. But now, in this century, the time has come that this Gothic deception is insufficient to satisfy the Catholic lust for designing its own “Christianish” version of the Word of God. Now, in this century, having stunted the expectations of its own people, the Vatican labors to insinuate itself among agnostics, skeptics and atheists by abandoning the divinity of Christ, denying the Creation of man in the image of God, advocating the tenets of evolution, and granting its benediction to the rebel, the homosexual, the Marxist, and the adherents of every sort of religious belief — even those who openly despise the message and divinity of Christ.
The source of the Catholic insult is twofold: on the one hand rooted in the most ancient traditions of its theology, while, more recently, it emanates from the apostasy being crafted by the modern Popes, John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and Francis. Likewise, the damage wreaked by Catholic apostasy is twofold: first in the threat to the individual’s attainment of the knowledge of God, and, second, in the threat to the endurance of our government as a nation founded on rights granted to us by God alone.
This conduct of the Catholic institution cannot be ignored. The affairs of the Vatican and of its secretive Jesuit army are closely entwined with those of our government. The Vatican is well on its way to restoring the tradition of centuries wherein the Pope is the kingmaker of the nations of the earth. The heresy of the American republic has always been that we believed and enshrined it in our founding documents that we have inalienable rights given us by our Creator, not by church or king. So stands every citizen of the United States without dependence upon any ecclesiastical authority. The Vatican, adopting the heresies of George Tyrrell and Teilhard de Chardin, is abandoning the divine individual Jesus Christ and is abandoning the salvation of the individual. Instead it seeks the salvation of the collective. The Vatican is perhaps the prime agent encouraging the dissolution of our constitutional government for the sake of humbling us and joining us into a global society, a self-righteous monolith which shall be little disposed to guaranteeing our freedoms.
The threat to our constitutional government is palpable and immediate. Less obvious and more dangerous is the longstanding threat of Catholicism to the soul of the person who looks to the church for guidance in his search for the knowledge of God.
I address here every person whose passion to grow in the knowledge of God will not tolerate the unjust authority or interference of any institution or hierarchy, no matter how glorious its architecture, no matter how august its history, no matter how rich the robes of its priests, no matter how sonorous the organ and choir.
I offer here a list of warnings on two levels: first, the distortions of God’s word employed by the Catholic church throughout the centuries for the purpose of gathering to itself the loyalties and worship due to God alone, and second, the perversions of all truth being introduced into modern doctrine by the Papacy until it is more accurate to call Catholicism an ecumenical society than to call it a religion.
1.] The inflated authority of the Pope, contravening the sovereign authority of Christ over his kingdom
When Constantine presented himself to the bishops of the early church as Pontifex Maximus, chief Roman arbiter between gods and men, they did not refuse him. Future bishops of Rome ruled the church and held to the title, implying their own claim to both ecclesiastical and mundane political power. Now the Pope claims ultimate authority over the kingdom of God and the kingdoms of earth.
a.] “I am all in all and above all, so that God Himself and I, the Vicar of God, have but one consistory, and I am able to do almost all that God can do… What therefore can you make of me but God?” –Pope Nicholas [reign 858-867], from “Antichrist” by Ian Paisley
b.] “We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty.” Pope Leo XIII [reign 1878-1903] in “The Great Encyclical Letters of Leo XIII” Benzigen Brothers, New York, 1908, p.304
c.] “We declare, assert, define, and pronounce: to be subject to the Roman pontiff is to every human creature altogether necessary for salvation…” Pope Boniface VIII [reign 1294-1303] in Bull Unam Sanctam
The Pope has another title: Vicarius Christi, “vicarius” meaning “the one who stands in for” or “the substitute for” Christ. And so he makes himself the “Vicar of Christ,” substitute for Christ on earth….when in fact Christ went to the cross in order to establish the universe in such a way that he could rest in immediate communion with his children on earth, without the mediation or interference of any other being. As Alberto Rivera asks rhetorically, Was there ever a religion on earth whose leader had the presumption to label himself the “substitute for God on earth”?
To these abominations we respond with the words of Scripture:
“For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth [as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”] yet for us there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.” I Corinthians 8.5,6
May no person who seeks the face of God ever do anything but refuse the authority of Popes to stand between that person and God! Christ is our only mediator, our only high priest, and in him dwells all the fullness of God: with him we are in the presence of God, and by his Spirit we are held to him inseparably.
2.] The endless repetition of a bloodless sacrifice of Christ in the Mass, and the arrogance by which priests presume to bring down Christ from heaven into the bread and wine of the Eucharist.
The great centerpiece of Catholic worship and dogma is the Mass, at the center of which lies ritual participation in the ingesting of the “Eucharist,” a supposed miraculous presence of Christ in a “host,” so conjured by the supernatural power of the priest. Catholic doctrine claims that in the Mass, the priest is able to consecrate the host and call down God out of heaven so that the bread and wine of the host might become the flesh and blood of God, a miracle known as “transubstantiation.” The claim of transubstantiation is that in the course of the Eucharist the substance of wheat bread and grape wine changes into the substance of the Body and the Blood of Jesus, while all that is accessible to the senses [the appearances] remain as before.
In 1551 at the Council of Trent, the church decreed,
“If any one shall say that …[in the Mass] … there remains the substance of bread and wine together with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ; and shall deny that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the body, and of the whole substance of the wine into blood, the species of bread and wine alone remaining, which conversion the Catholic church most fittingly calls Transubstantiation, let him be anathema [cursed].” Council of Trent, 1551, Session 13, Canon 2
The Eucharist of Catholic dogma presumes to “take control” over the very presence of Christ in the world and put that control in the hands of the church and its priests. This obscene dogma even claims to enshrine the priest with the fantastical power to call down God himself from heaven and conduct him into the gift of his substance to become the substance of the wafer which these victims of the institution then eat:
“When the priest announces the tremendous words of consecration, he reaches up into the heavens, brings Christ down from His throne, and places Him upon our altar to be offered up again as the Victim for the sins of man. It is a power greater than that of saints and angels, greater than that of Seraphim and Cherubim.” O’Brien, The Faith of Millions, pp. 255-256
The object of this arrogance then is to bring about the ad infinitum sacrifice of Christ when Scripture states clearly that Christ’s single death on Calvary is the all- sufficient sacrifice for the sins of the world, beyond which he is present among us through the dispensation of his Spirit to his children, not through the ingestion of his body! There is but one meaningful sacrifice, the moment of victory of Christ our king upon the Roman cross, by which he sent death captive and redeemed his people forever:
“For Christ did not enter a man-made sanctuary that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence. Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself.” Hebrews 9.24-26
3.] The Deification of Mary, which is nothing less than the worship of the ancient “Goddess.”
“It is thus that the Pope and the priests of Rome have entirely disfigured and changed the holy religion of the Gospel! In the Church of Rome it is not Jesus but Mary, who represents the infinite love and mercy of God for the sinner. The sinner is not advised or directed to place his hope in Jesus, but in Mary, for his escape from deserved chastisement! It is not Jesus but Mary who saves the sinner! Jesus is always bent on punishing sinners; Mary is always merciful to them! The Church of Rome has thus fallen into idolatry: she rather trusts in Mary than Jesus. She constantly invites sinners to turn their thoughts, their hopes, their affections, not to Jesus, but to Mary!
“By means of that impious doctrine Rome deceives the intellects, seduces the hearts, and destroys the souls of the young forever. Under the pretext of honoring the Virgin Mary, she insults her by outraging and misrepresenting her adorable Son.
“Rome has brought back the idolatry of old paganism under a new name. She has replaced upon her altars the Jupiter Tonans of the Greeks and Romans, only she places upon his shoulders the mantle and she writes on the forehead of her idol the name of Jesus, in order the better to deceive the world!” Former Catholic priest, Charles Chiniquy, in Fifty Years in the Church of Rome
4.] The inflation of the mortal woman, Mary, into “Co-Redeemer” with Christ.
The incarnation of the divine being in the person of Christ is an actual incarnation because God the Father placed his seed in the womb of an actual human being, the woman named Mary. She was perfectly mortal, therefore she bore a son with a mortal body, who gave his mortal body to die sacrificially for the subjects of his eternal kingdom. She was not without sin, for Scripture assures us that no mortal is without sin. And she is certainly not the Queen of Heaven. That is an ancient pagan title which belonged to Semiramis, to Isis, to Ishtar, to Astarte, and every other foul pagan goddess attempting to usurp the throne of God. Neither is she the mother of God. The very phrase is an abomination that should fill us with disgust. The true and living God is above all things; he is prior to all things; and through Christ alone he reached out into eternity and brought existence to the world of his own creative imagining.
As mortal woman and mother of Christ, the suffering of her son upon the cross unquestionably meant great sorrow for her. But she also was astute enough to see that she herself could not “stand in for her people,” for we are not “her” people, nor is she our king. Only the king can stand in for his people. He alone suffered pain and indignity beyond description, taking upon himself the reward due to generations of rebellion. Christ alone is the Redeemer of the children of the kingdom.
5.] Mary as Mediatrix, “the recipient of the prayers of the faithful.”
Now, shamelessly, Mary is led forward with all the faculties of God Himself! Catholics are encouraged to pray to her directly and to seek from her everything that they would like to ask of Jesus… for, in their mythology, She, not the Son of God, is Mediator! So does Catholicism again work to obscure the face of Christ, the very One who loves us and has given his life to draw us and bind us to himself. The following are the words of Pope John Paul II:
“Thus there is a mediation: Mary places herself between her Son and mankind in the reality of their wants, needs and sufferings. She puts herself ‘in the middle’, that is to say she acts as a mediatrix not as an outsider, but in her position as mother.” Pope John Paul II in Redemptoris Mater [On the Blessed Virgin Mary in the Life of the Pilgrim Church], Encyclical promulgated March 25, 1987
There could not be a more straightforward description of the Catholic plan to hang yet another curtain between man and God. We do not need Mary or anyone else in the middle! We need Christ alone!
Nothing in Scripture even remotely implies that Mary is a goddess. Mary has died and has gone to join Abraham and Moses wherever souls are preserved dear to the heart of God. She is clinically and certifiably among those who have died. Scripture warns us not to pray to those who have died:
Let no one be found among you …who consults the dead.” Deuteronomy 18.11
We might also mention the first commandment:
“You shall have no other gods [or goddesses or demi-goddesses] before me.”
To bring one’s prayers to Mary rather than to God Himself is to despise the omnipresence and omniscience and endless love of God, by which he most gently calls us to Himself.
Our prayers are meant to go directly to God alone. As for the above reference to Mary being “invited into the home,” the spirits of the dead are not to be invited into our homes. Christ our king, however, owns every claim to rule and to share his Spiritual presence with us both in our heart and in our home.
From what quarter comes this Catholic fascination with bringing Mary into every corner of a life, while there is not even a whisper suggesting the opening of the heart to the presence of Christ? It is inconceivable that this is an accident or a mere meagerness of understanding. Somewhere deep within the Catholic establishment there is an architectural force eager to build walls between men and God. It appears in such strength that it is difficult not to suspect that the true program of Catholicism is the work of the enemies of God, carefully crafting a counterfeit religion in order to snare the innocent in their search for God and draw them away into darkness through their counterfeit rituals.
We must stand up to such a force, in the power of the Spirit of our king. We must respond: Yeshua alone is our true Redeemer, the only one who says,
“Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door I will come in and sup with him and he with me. And the conqueror I will allow to sit beside me on my throne as I myself have conquered and sat down beside my Father on his throne.” Revelation 3.20,21
- Mary as Queen of heaven.
In the time of Jeremiah God spoke to Jeremiah and condemned the people of Israel for the worship of “the Queen of Heaven.”
“So do not pray for this people nor offer any plea or petition for them; do not plead with me, for I will not listen to you. Do you not see what they are doing in the towns of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem? The children gather wood, the fathers light the fire, and the women knead the dough and make cakes of bread for the Queen of Heaven.” Jeremiah 7.16-18
No one is to be worshipped above our God or in tandem with our God. And yet the Catholic church grants the highest adoration to the mortal mother of Jesus as someone of an importance equal to or greater than Christ.
Pope Pius IX, 1854: “She has been appointed by God to be the Queen of Heaven and Earth.” [made official in 1954 by Pius XII]
Pope Leo XIII, 1891: “With equal truth may it be also affirmed that, by the will of God, Mary is intermediary through whom is distributed unto us this immense treasure of mercies gathered by God, for mercy and truth were created by Jesus Christ. Thus as no man goeth to the Father but by the Son, so no man goeth to Christ but by his Mother… Mary is this glorious intermediary.” [Thus Mary owns all gates of access to God.]
St. Louis de Montfort, in The Secret of Mary: “God chose her to be the treasurer, the administrator and the dispenser of all his Graces, so that all his graces and gifts pass through her hands. Such is the power that she has received from him that, according to St. Bernardine, she gives the graces of the eternal Father, the virtues of Jesus Christ, and the gifts of the Holy Spirit to whom she wills, as and when she wills, and as much as she wills…We must never go to our Lord except through Mary, using her intercession and good standing with him. We must never be without her when praying to Jesus…Beware, chosen soul, of thinking that it is more perfect to direct your work and intention straight to Jesus or straight to God. Without Mary, your work and your intention will be of little value. But if you go to God through Mary, your work will become Mary’s work, and consequently will be most noble and most worthy of God.”
Incredibly M. Montfort would even dare to pen a warning to avoid direct contact with God! This is the worst sort of blasphemy, implying that Christ has not sufficiently covered us by his sacrifice at the cross, implying that we are still not really free to come into his presence without the added merit of another, implying that the very promises of God are false and not to be trusted. This theology manufactured out of whole cloth does nothing but denigrate God himself, encouraging the faithful to imagine that He is mean-spirited and fiercely judgmental, when in fact He is most loving and boldly has entered into history to jealously intervene on behalf of his people. We have the promise of full access to the love of our Savior. By his sovereign mercy and love, by nothing else, our God has opened for us the way to total redemption and intimacy with him:
“God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions – it is by grace you have been saved. And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus [in other words we are to be so totally accepted by him that we are already seen as part of an eternal and transcendent reality], in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith – and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God – not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s workmanship [not Mary’s workmanship] created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.” Ephesians 2.4-10
7.] The Confessional as the Pharisaic presumption of the priest, as mockery of the heart of God, and as mockery of human dignity.
Scripture assures us repeatedly that God himself desires to share in our times of repentance and hear our private confession directly with no intermediary but the ever present Spirit of Christ our king. Scripture assures us that by the single sacrifice of Christ on the cross we who open our hearts to him and seek his will are made free for eternity. Nothing can express this better than these words from the Letter to the Hebrews:
“By one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.” Hebrews 10.14
We are free to come in total openness before God Himself because of what Christ, our true priest, has done for us:
“Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body, and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water. Let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess, for he who promised is faithful.” Hebrews 10.19-23
“If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” I John 1.9
In situations where we have brought injury to another person, Christ has told us that we need to make things right with our brother as well as bring our repentance before God. But this is entirely different from a standing requirement that we tell our faults to a priest who has no relevant interest in our failures other than his false presumption of authority. Former Catholic priest Charles Chiniquy tells eloquently of the damage that can be done in the Catholic confessional:
“More than once I have seen women fainting in the confessional-box, who told me, afterwards, that the necessity of speaking to an unmarried man on certain things, on which the most common laws of decency ought to have forever sealed their lips, had almost killed them! Not hundreds, but thousands of times I have heard from the dying lips of single girls, as well as of married women, the awful words: “I am for ever lost! All my past confessions and communions have been as many sacrileges! I have never dared to answer correctly the questions of my confessors! Shame has sealed m y lips and damned my soul!”
“How many times I remained as one petrified by the side of a corpse when, these last words having hardly escaped the lips of one of my female penitents, she was snatched out of my reach by the merciless hand of death, before I could give her pardon through the deceitful sacramental absolution! I then believed, as the dead sinner herself believed, that she could not be forgiven except by that absolution.
“For there are not only thousands, but millions, of Roman Catholic girls and women whose keen sense of modesty and womanly dignity are above all the sophisms and diabolical machinations of their priests. They never can be persuaded to answer “Yes” to certain questions of their confessors. They would prefer to be thrown into the flames… rather than to allow the eyes of a man to pry into the sacred sanctuary of their souls. Though sometimes guilty before God, and under the impression that their sins will never be forgiven if not confessed, the laws of decency are stronger in their hearts than the laws of their cruel and perfidious Church. No consideration, not even the fear of eternal damnation, can persuade them to declare to a sinful man sins which God alone has the right to know, for He alone can blot them out with the blood of His Son shed on the cross.” Charles Chiniquy, The Priest, the Woman and the Confessional, chapter 1
Now we compound to this that the priest does not merely pretend to escort men and women to a place of forgiveness under his control, but he also assigns acts of penance, implying that their God is so mean-spirited that the confession of sin in itself is inadequate to inspire him to forgiveness, even when Christ has gone to the cross and by his sacrifice has taken upon himself the punishment for all our sins. The Bible states clearly that “if we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins.” Nowhere is there a word about acts of penance. For the woman caught in adultery, Jesus told her, “I forgive you…go and sin no more.” He did not ask her to punish herself. He directed her to a change of heart. God knows that in a state of alienation from God we are incapable of proving ourselves to him. He is seeking us, continually trying to draw us to himself so that we can experience a new birth of spirit by allowing the very Spirit of Jesus to reign in our hearts and become life for us. Our perfect state of health comes not from vain acts of penance or even “good deeds.” It comes when Christ can say of us, “I am the vine and you are my branch.”
“For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith – and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God – not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.” Ephesians 2.8-10
1.] The installation of “Modernism” through the Jesuit, George Tyrrell
The Jesuit, George Tyrrell, was one of the first to articulate a “Modernist” position. We see in him the restless effort to put off every yoke of traditional ecclesiastical authority. Confidence in what can and should be seen with his own eyes inspired him to reject all authority but the witness of his senses. Certainly he did well to reject the false authority of the Papacy, but, born into a confusion of ecclesiastical authority with the just claims of God, he threw out God along with the Papacy:
“During his own student days, Tyrrell had been very impressed with the results of the ‘higher criticism’ leveled at the Bible, and with the promise of science to open up the universe. ‘The Modernist,’ he wrote later, ‘demands absolute freedom for science in the widest sense of that term.’ … The fixed dogmas of Rome were his target.” Malachi Martin, The Jesuits, Simon & Schuster, p. 273
He turned to reject the fundamental premise of traditional Catholic authority, that the believing church must adhere to the authority of the teaching church.
Nor was there to be any further hierarchy of belief. It is part of the democratizing effect of science to make all things equal… man is man, cat is cat. Tyrrell’s was a world in which “holiness” [the condition in which men are “set apart” by God for his own purposes] achieved little currency. For Tyrrell the Spirit of God could no longer be for the few. For him, like a page out of Hegel, Spirit is that which “expresses itself in the historical process of science, morality, and religion…. For the Spirit of God is in us all.” Once again the life of Christ in the heart of the believer – the encounter of a person and the Spirit of Jesus – is denied. And the majuscule “I” is taken out of the “individual” so that that honor may be given to the “Collective.”
And what does Tyrrell, our warrior in the Society of Jesus, think about Jesus, the Messiah of Israel?
“It is certain that Tyrrell did not believe that Jesus was God-made-man…Christ does not appear as a living Savior dying on the cross to effect the Salvation of the world. Christ’s personal love for all men and women does not appear….
“…for him belief in Christ entailed no faith in Christ as a teacher and in his doctrine, but [merely] an apprehension of his personality as revealing itself within us.” Ibid pp. 278,279
George Tyrrell, in his cheapening of the truths of the gospel and in his assault on Papal authority, became the father of a great field of culture within the Roman institution, particularly among the Jesuits. According to Malachi Martin,
“What makes Tyrrell’s case most relevant in any assessment of a large number of Jesuits today –as well as an equally large number of theologians and bishops – is the uncanny resemblance between their views and Tyrell’s views, between their attitude to papacy and Church hierarchy and Tyrrell’s attitude.”
For Tyrrell there is no historical Jesus, no living Savior, no redemption at the cross, no personal love of the Messiah for man and woman. “We cannot frame our minds to that of a first century Jewish Carpenter.” For Tyrrell, “Christ” is more like a quality of being, something waiting to emerge from all mankind. It is this credo, held at the feet of the god of Science, which leads us to Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, S.J.
2.] Teilhard de Chardin: The sanctification of Darwinism and the death of man- made -in-the-image-of-God.
Pierre Teilhard de Chardin was a French priest, born in 1881, twenty years after George Tyrrell. At eighteen Teilhard became a Jesuit trainee. He was ordained at thirty. His studies focused on paleontology, geology and biology. He took the work of Charles Darwin as essentially inviolable scientific fact, then brought to it a cosmology which would incorporate the presence of “spirit.” In such works as The Phenomenology of Man he described the growth of complexity in organisms leading to animal consciousness, destined by their material/psychical energy to advance to that consciousness which is a consciousness of self. Without the detailed Darwinian beginnings, this seems to be just a re-hashing of Hegel. Hegel, however offered the hope that the consciousness of self can become a consciousness of Self, wherein men discover that their eternal essence is a pre-existent and always living Absolute.
For Teilhard de Chardin, the expansion of consciousness leads to a Collective Consciousness. The energy of physical evolution is married to an energy which is mental/spiritual and directs the overall movement of evolution toward an end. In this process, as the evolution of the individual person may appear to slow, the massive growth of consciousness leads the development of the Collective Consciousness into a kind of Collectivism.
“The outcome of the world, the gates of the future, the entry into the super-human – these are not thrown open to a few of the privileged nor to one chosen people to the exclusion of all others. They will open only to an advance of all together, in a direction in which all together can join and find completion in a spiritual renovation of the earth.”
For Teilhard, mankind is more important to God than the individual man. For him the individual historical Christ is of no consequence. The incarnation of Christ is rather, for him, this whole vast emergence of collective consciousness into the progress of the evolving world, leading to a point which he calls the Omega point, which may be taken as the completion of the incarnation of Christ in the world. Curiously enough this is equally a picture of an evolving “Christ!” Here again Teilhard de Chardin differs little from Hegel, since, for each, their Absolute can not have real existence short of the Phenomenon of human historical existence. So the Geistphenomenologie of Hegel and Teilhard de Chardin’s The Phenomenon of Man are intimately related. Teilhard de Chardin’s compounding of Hegel with a Darwinian “science” of evolution, however, leads to the full rejection of the fundamental pillar of Scripture, the fundamental pillar of human existence: that man and woman were created in the image of God. Short this fact, the Scriptures are without meaning and the progress of our Savior to the cross is a comical melodrama. For God to die to “redeem” lizards and chimpanzees would be a true case of overacting. Where the success of the avowed atheist, Darwin, in peddling evolution is a victory for Satan, certainly the success of Teilhard de Chardin within the halls of religion must reassure Satan of the great value of his efforts to cultivate strong ties within Christian Orthodoxy.
Whatever the lack of originality in de Chardin, and whatever his inconsistencies, of which there are many, it is nevertheless historical fact that he, like Tyrrell, has now evolved from Catholic rebel into a discreetly sanctioned hero, until in this day we have two Popes praising his insights.
3.] The White Popes follow the lead of the children of the Black Pope, Superior General of the “Society of Jesus”
On 22 October, 1996, Pope John Paul II issued a statement to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences in which he endorsed evolution as being “more than just a theory.”
“Today, almost half a century after publication of the encyclical, new knowledge led to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis. It is indeed remarkable that this theory has been progressively accepted by researchers, following a series of discoveries in various fields of knowledge. The convergence, neither sought nor fabricated, of the results of work that was conducted independently is in itself a significant argument in favor of the theory.”
“In 1981, on the 100th anniversary of Teilhard’s birth, speculation erupted about a possible rehabilitation. It was fueled by a letter published in L’Osservatore Romano, the Vatican newspaper, by the then-Cardinal Secretary of State Agostino Casaroli, who praised the ‘astounding resonance of his research, as well as the brilliance of his personality and richness of his thinking.’ Casaroli asserted that Teilhard had anticipated John Paul II’s call to ‘be not afraid,’ embracing ‘culture, civilization and progress.’”
Now, as my final entry on the subject of the Catholic institution, I include again a quote from Father Joseph Ratzinger, become Pope Benedict, from his book, Fe e Futuro. This quotation is an obscenely explicit renunciation of God Himself, and of everything that is sacred. It is the most profane statement from a man who is most obviously profane. As pretender to the throne of the kingdom of God, as pretender to the title of Vicarius Filii Dei, “Substitute for Christ on earth,” this man is a blasphemer and a deceiver of the most extreme kind. With his leadership it can be certain that the projects of his institution are in no way directed toward the true purposes of the kingdom of God. Mr. Ratzinger renounces the truth of creation and explicitly renounces the truth of the very word of God. Without the creation of man in the image of God, without the absolutely solid word of God, there is no humanity, there is no redemption, and there is no hope of salvation. This man is a traitor at the heart of the world, casting the darkest shadow across the world’s perception of the living and true kingdom of God. We thank God that the perfidy of this man and the perfidy of his kingdom of deception shall not last. A day of judgment is coming, in which day the following lies shall all be swept away.
The words of Father Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI:
“Let us look at the critic’s points in broad lines. The difficulty already begins with the first page of the Bible. The idea of the world’s origin developed there is in evident contradiction with everything we know today about the origin of the cosmos. Even if we say that those pages are not a manual of natural history and, therefore, should not be understood as a literal description of the cosmos’ origin, a bad feeling remains. … On almost every page of the Bible such questions persist.
The figure formed of clay that in God’s hand becomes man is largely incomprehensible to us, as well as what happens right afterward with the woman, taken from his side while he sleeps and recognized by him as the flesh of his own flesh, that is, as a response to the question of his solitude.
Perhaps today we have to re-learn how to understand these images as profound symbolic expressions regarding man. … In the next chapter (the history of the fall) new questions rise. How can we reconcile them with the concept that man, as demonstrated by natural science, did not begin from above, but from below? He did not fall, but little by little ascended, increasingly becoming a man from an animal. And what about Paradise? Suffering and death already existed in the world long before man existed. …
Let us continue to examine these questions and contradictions that distress the general conscience in order to appraise with all necessary harshness the problem behind the words faith and knowledge.
After the report of the fall, the Bible continues with its image of history, where Adam is described to us in a cultural period situated around 4000 BC. This date agrees with the biblical counting of time, resulting that around 4000 years have passed from the beginning until Christ. But today all of us know that before this event, a period of hundreds of thousands of years of life and human efforts had already passed, a time not taken into consideration in the biblical image of history, which was restricted to the Eastern understanding of that time.
With this we touch the next point: the Bible, which faith venerates as the word of God, became clear to us in its entire human character through the historical-critical method of investigation. It not only follows the literary forms of its ambience, but also is influenced by the world in which it originated. This influence marked its way of thinking and its religious character itself.
Can we still believe in the God who calls Moses in the burning bush? The God who kills the firstborn sons of Egypt and leads His people to war against the inhabitants of Canaan? Who makes Oza fall dead because he touched the sacred ark? Or were all these things nothing but an expression of the old East, interesting, yes; perhaps even significant as a level of the human conscience; but not the expression of the divine word?
(Joseph Ratzinger, Fé e Futuro, São Paulo: Vozes, 1971, pp. 11-13)
4.] The abandonment of every standard of faith under Pope Francis.
Following along the path first marked by John Paul II at Assisi, Pope Francis, increasingly known as “the antipope,” now sets out to open the welcome of his institution to every form of belief and unbelief. His faithlessness does not merit serious discussion, only serious disgust. His popular remark, “Who am I to judge?” is the calling card of an ecclesiastical clown.
It is the sacred work of the people of God to discern the path which leads a man and his brother to God. If there is no expectation of discernment between benefit and harm, between good and evil, then there is no hope of holding to any path to God.
Do not doubt that God’s word calls us to distinguish between good and evil, to stand up for what is good and to oppose what is evil. Psalm 94 calls us to dare to be against what is evil:
“Who will rise up for me against the wicked? Who will take a stand for me against evildoers?” Psalm 94.16
Paul wrote the same:
“Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them.” Ephesians 5.11
There is no such thing as virtue without discernment between good and evil:
“And this is my prayer: that your love may abound more and more in knowledge and depth of insight, so that you may be able to discern what is best and may be pure and blameless until the day of Christ, filled with the fruit of righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ – to the glory and praise of God.” Philippians 1.9-11
The Catholic power, dressed in satin and gold, does everything in its power to divert the faithful from their honest search for the knowledge of God. The quest for the knowledge of God is meaningless without seeking to know the will of God, the heart of God, and the judgments of God. The hope of virtue is not the hope of being a prude. The hope of virtue is the hope of attaining human excellence. For Francis there is no excellence, for all is excellence, even the life which despises the Savior of mankind. A true life of excellence requires discernment and discernment demands the effort of prayer and the study of God’s word:
“For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.” Hebrews 4.12
I would prefer to think that Francis is but a clown, but I fear that the truth is far more grave. He is more like a type of the fabled false prophet, the Pied Piper for the end of the age, dressed in the harlequin suit of the jester, playing his flute, and leading the young and the innocent out of the city to the cliffs of damnation.
Lawrence S. Jones
 a title conferred upon the emperor by the State
 Ibid. p. 276
 Malachi Martin, The Jesuits, p. 275
 Ibid, p. 279
 The Phenomenon of Man, London, 1966, pp. 244-245
Address of John Paul II to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences [October 22, 1996] as in October 30 issue of the English edition of L’Osservatore Romano,
 http://www.traditioninaction.org/ProgressivistDoc/A_073_RatzingerBible.htm Thanks to Tradition in Action, Inc.