Christian Forums

https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2022/09/19/censorship-catholic-history-libraries-243809

Quoted article below from above.

QuoteThe Catholic Church has been banning books for centuries. Here's what it can teach us about censorship today.

Last fall, the cartoonist Maia Kobabe had the unsettling experience of waking up to find emails waiting from The Washington Post, The Associated Press and elsewhere. Gender Queer, a coming-of-age memoir Kobabe had published years before, had suddenly become the subject of a firestorm at a school board meeting in Fairfax County, Va. "A week later," Kobabe later wrote in The Washington Post, "I found out that 'Gender Queer' had also been banned in a school district in Florida, and within a month, it had been challenged at schools in Rhode Island, New Jersey, Ohio, Washington and Texas."

Kobabe, who identifies as nonbinary and uses the pronouns e/eir/em, was stunned. "Why are they mad about the book? Because I said nonbinary and trans people exist?" Kobabe wondered. "The book has been out for two and a half years. Why now?"

In 2021, Gender Queer would prove to be the most banned, challenged and restricted book in the United States, according to the American Library Association. 2021 was a particularly bad year for censorship. The A.L.A.'s Office of Intellectual Freedom tracked 729 challenges to public library, school and university material last year involving 1,597 books. That's five times as many challenges as the year before, and almost six times as many books. It is by far the most challenges the A.L.A. has recorded over the last 20 years.

And 2022 seems likely to be even worse. In the spring, the Florida legislature passed a law giving parents more power in choosing what books are present in their school districts' libraries. Six other states have similar laws, and five more are considering them. Recent years have also seen an upswing in harassment of teachers and local community librarians.

The Catholic Church is no stranger to the attempt to control what books people are able to read. From 1559 until 1966, we literally wrote the book on condemned texts and authors, often out of the very same instinct to protect the vulnerable that parents and community members are currently expressing. And also much like today, we didn't hesitate to persecute those who opposed our way of thinking about certain literature. But in the end our practice only revealed the reasons why censorship is a terrible strategy for addressing social and moral concerns. Groups calling for censorship today would do well to consider the church's experiences.

Problem One: Censorship tends to get out of control.
Censorship was already very much in the air when Pope Paul IV issued the Vatican's first Index of Prohibited Books in 1559. The printing press, which had been invented a century earlier, had become the internet of its day, enabling ideas to spread with an alacrity and reach that was previously unimaginable. Some governments, seeing the new capacity of writers to quickly foment opposition to state policies, had begun to demand licenses of publishers and to imprison or execute printers and writers over their work.

The church, too, had been intensely affected by the printing press. As the librarian Robert Sarwak points out: "Without the printing press, for example, the '99 Theses' [sic] of Martin Luther (1517) would have to have been copied out by hand.... Simply put, neither Lutheranism nor Protestant Christianity in general may have ever spread without the printing press." By the time Pope Paul IV promulgated his Index, churches in some nations had already produced their own lists of forbidden books. The Inquisition was also active in many countries, prosecuting, jailing and sometimes executing anyone it found spoke or wrote heresy.

But Pope Paul's list would not only condemn individual works; it censored the entire bodies of work of an astonishing 550 authors and dozens of publishers. Even within the church, these moves were considered draconian, so much so that they were often ignored and then officially repealed at the Council of Trent, a few years after Paul died.

Paul's impulse to go too far is not an isolated incident, either for the church or secular society. Today, we see organizations not simply challenging certain books but demanding the banning of whole classes of material, such as L.G.B.T. stories, and engaging in extreme actions to achieve their goals.

Censorship is like lighting a fire. Once started, it tends to get completely out of control. There is no such thing as burning just one book.

Problem Two: Censorship is often a Trojan horse for other agendas.
Looking back on the history of censorship and persecution in the church, we frequently find today that the ideas and authors being suppressed or jailed weren't actually challenging Catholic doctrine. Astronomer Galileo Galilei was condemned for saying the earth revolved around the sun. French Dominican theologian Yves Congar saw his 1950 book True and False Reform in the Church banned not because it took a heretical position on the divinity of Christ or the real presence, but for simply pointing out that the church as a human institution was capable of getting in the way of God's grace and needed reform. "The ecclesiastical apparatus might overshadow the action of the Spirit and of grace in people's lives," he wrote.

Other forms of church action have functioned similarly. The witch hunts which saw tens of thousands of women persecuted and often murdered by Catholic and Protestant authorities in medieval Europe had nothing to do with the Apostles' Creed and everything to do with men's anxiety about the power and sexuality of women. The systematic efforts of the church to annihilate Indigenous cultures in missionary territories were born not of legitimate doctrinal concerns but racism.

And the same problems are to be found in the books people want banned today. Six of the 10 most censored books of 2021 were written by or have as central characters people of color. Roughly half have female protagonists. Looking to prior years, the same patterns persist: The books challenged are often written by people of color, women or members of the L.G.B.T. community, or concern issues of race, gender and sexual orientation.

Those calling for Gender Queer to be banned often cite its graphic depictions of sexuality. But in its 240 pages there is nudity on just a handful of pages and sexual activity portrayed explicitly on only one. Rather than some kind of pornographic comic book, Gender Queer is a heartfelt and often funny story. Kobabe's journey may not be "the norm," but the book actually captures the quest to discover oneself in the universe—and how best to love—that every young person embarks on. Rather than a book to censor, it's the kind of novel that parents could use with older children to help them to talk through their own nascent sense of identity.

"Some people are happy to live in the place they were born," Kobabe writes on a page with a pretty drawing of mountains, forest and a beach, "while others must make a journey to reach the climate where they can flourish and grow. Between the ocean and the mountains is a wild forest. That is where I want to make my home."

Problem Three: Censorship is usually short-sighted.
Things that have gotten the church all hot and bothered at one time have often turned out later to be either no big deal or fundamental to the church's self-understanding. So Congar's book, which called for an ecumenical council, inspired Pope John XXIII to convene the Second Vatican Council. Likewise, science that the church once condemned, from cosmology to the theory of evolution, is now accepted as fact.

If the church's history with censorship has highlighted anything, it is the need for hesitation and humility in the consideration of what constitutes heresy. The stones that the builder rejected have all too often become the cornerstone.

Problem Four: Censorship doesn't work.
By banning books or arresting and executing thinkers deemed heretical, the church has sometimes succeeded in suppressing those points of view—but only for a time, and at great cost. The fact that the church condemned Galileo did not mean that the idea that the earth revolves around the sun went away; nor did the suppression of the work of theologians like Congar or the Jesuits John Courtney Murray, Teilhard de Chardin and Karl Rahner end their influence. Indeed, at Vatican II their work became foundational to the way the church understands itself.

Today book banning is even more ineffective. People can find anything they want online, and in fact the banning of a book usually only feeds its sales. So in February, as America's James T. Keane noted, the Holocaust memoir Maus: A Survivor's Tale returned to best-seller lists again, 36 years after its publication, once the news got around that it was being placed on banned book lists.

Truly, banning books is like kids trying to build a dam in a big river. Their work might divert the water's course a little bit, but it can't stop it.

And in the meantime, the activity of those who would ban books often undermines their credibility. The censorship and imprisonment of notable figures like Galileo remains one of the Catholic Church's greatest disgraces. Even today, such moves continue to be cited as evidence that the church cannot be trusted, that when challenged it always eventually dismisses rational discourse in favor of naked aggression.

In the end, those demanding the removal of certain texts from schools or libraries may succeed for a time. But the history of the church shows that they will not be able to stop those stories from reaching people in their communities. In the end, you can't stop an idea through censorship. And usually the impulse to try comes out of fear of others, rather than love for one's own.

What a load of twisted stinking crap. Comparing the Vatican and Catholic Churches censorship over centuries, with parents rights to allow their children to become adults before being taught or indoctrinated by the state concerning their sexual orientation and or gender. The Catholic church was directly involved in persecuting and killing countless people (adults), who dared to disagree with their views and voice or publish works concerning the same. Most of which were simply religious or scientific in nature. Not just governments as the above article suggests. These were governments where Catholicism was the state enforced religion. What does any of that evilness, have to do with parents not wanting the state to influence their children's sexual orientation and or gender choice? NOTHING! Only an agenda driven, and or complete moron would do such a thing.

Roman Catholics had no problem helping to get the Holy scriptures removed from our schools many years ago, since their Popes had banned the scriptures and placed the bible on their forbidden books list until the 1960's as the article above states. Yet here they are today defending the LGBTQXYZ agenda and crying about their works and influence being kept away from our children by concerned parents. Decrying and demonizing such concerns. Revealing one of the major problems and tendencies of Roman Catholicism throughout its long history. That is, its tendency to side with the state or government over the will of the people, regardless of how immoral doing so might be. Nothing more than BABYLON THE GREAT, committing fornication with the kings of this earth. My next post will be a dissertation by one of our founding fathers John Adams, addressing this very problem among others.

Emphasis in the following quoted dissertation is mine.

QuoteJohn Adams - A Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law (On man's standing in the order of creation)

"Ignorance and inconsideration are the two great causes of the ruin of mankind." This is an observation of Dr. Tillotson, with relation to the interest of his fellow men in a future and immortal state. But it is of equal truth and importance if applied to the happiness of men in society, on this side the grave. In the earliest ages of the world, absolute monarchy seems to have been the universal form of government. Kings, and a few of their great counsellors and captains, exercised a cruel tyranny over the people, who held a rank in the scale of intelligence, in those days, but little higher than the camels and elephants that carried them and their engines to war.

By what causes it was brought to pass, that the people in the middle ages became more intelligent in general, would not, perhaps, be possible in these days to discover. But the fact is certain; and wherever a general knowledge and sensibility have prevailed among the people, arbitrary government and every kind of oppression have lessened and disappeared in proportion. Man has certainly an exalted soul; and the same principle in human nature, -- that aspiring, noble principle founded in benevolence, and cherished by knowledge; I mean the love of power, which has been so often the cause of slavery, -- has, whenever freedom has existed, been the cause of freedom. If it is this principle that has always prompted the princes and nobles of the earth, by every species of fraud and violence to shake off all the limitations of their power, it is the same that has always stimulated the common people to aspire at independency, and to endeavor at confining the power of the great within the limits of equity and reason.

The poor people, it is true, have been much less successful than the great. They have seldom found either leisure or opportunity to form a union and exert their strength; ignorant as they were of arts and letters, they have seldom been able to frame and support a regular opposition. This, however, has been known by the great to be the temper of mankind; and they have accordingly labored, in all ages, to wrest from the populace, as they are contemptuously called, the knowledge of their rights and wrongs, and the power to assert the former or redress the latter. I say RIGHTS, for such they have, undoubtedly, antecedent to all earthly government, -- Rights, that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws -- Rights, derived from the great Legislator of the universe.

Since the promulgation of Christianity, the two greatest systems of tyranny that have sprung from this original, are the canon and the feudal law. The desire of dominion, that great principle by which we have attempted to account for so much good and so much evil, is, when properly restrained, a very useful and noble movement in the human mind. But when such restraints are taken off, it becomes an encroaching, grasping, restless, and ungovernable power. Numberless have been the systems of iniquity contrived by the great for the gratification of this passion in themselves; but in none of them were they ever more successful than in the invention and establishment of the canon and the feudal law.

By the former of these, the most refined, sublime, extensive, and astonishing constitution of policy that ever was conceived by the mind of man was framed by the Romish clergy for the aggrandisement of their own order. All the epithets I have here given to the Romish policy are just, and will be allowed to be so when it is considered, that they even persuaded mankind to believe, faithfully and undoubtingly, that God Almighty had entrusted them with the keys of heaven, whose gates they might open and close at pleasure; with a power of dispensation over all the rules and obligations of morality; with authority to license all sorts of sins and crimes; with a power of deposing princes and absolving subjects from allegiance; with a power of procuring or withholding the rain of heaven and the beams of the sun; with the management of earthquakes, pestilence, and famine; nay, with the mysterious, awful, incomprehensible power of creating out of bread and wine the flesh and blood of God himself. All these opinions they were enabled to spread and rivet among the people by reducing their minds to a state of sordid ignorance and staring timidity, and by infusing into them a religious horror of letters and knowledge. Thus was human nature chained fast for ages in a cruel, shameful, and deplorable servitude to him, and his subordinate tyrants, who, it was foretold, would exalt himself above all that was called God, and that was worshipped.

In the latter we find another system, similar in many respects to the former; which, although it was originally formed, perhaps, for the necessary defence of a barbarous people against the inroads and invasions of her neighboring nations, yet for the same purposes of tyranny, cruelty, and lust, which had dictated the canon law, it was soon adopted by almost all the princes of Europe, and wrought into the constitutions of their government. It was originally a code of laws for a vast army in a perpetual encampment. The general was invested with the sovereign propriety of all the lands within the territory. Of him, as his servants and vassals, the first rank of his great officers held the lands; and in the same manner the other subordinate officers held of them; and all ranks and degrees held their lands by a variety of duties and services, all tending to bind the chains the faster on every order of mankind. In this manner the common people were held together in herds and clans in a state of servile dependence on their lords, bound, even by the tenure of their lands, to follow them, whenever they commanded, to their wars, and in a state of total ignorance of every thing divine and human, excepting the use of arms and the culture of their lands.

1 Rob. Hist. ch. v. pp. 178-9, &c.
But another event still more calamitous to human liberty, was a wicked confederacy between the two systems of tyranny above described. It seems to have been even stipulated between them, that the temporal grandees should contribute every thing in their power to maintain the ascendency of the priesthood, and that the spiritual grandees in their turn, should employ their ascendency over the consciences of the people, in impressing on their minds a blind, implicit obedience to civil magistracy.

Thus, as long as this confederacy lasted, and the people were held in ignorance, liberty, and with her, knowledge and virtue too, seem to have deserted the earth, and one age of darkness succeeded another, till God in his benign providence raised up the champions who began and conducted the Reformation. From the time of the Reformation to the first settlement of America, knowledge gradually spread in Europe, but especially in England; and in proportion as that increased and spread among the people, ecclesiastical and civil tyranny, which I use as synonymous expressions for the canon and feudal laws, seem to have lost their strength and weight. The people grew more and more sensible of the wrong that was done them by these systems, more and more impatient under it, and determined at all hazards to rid themselves of it; till at last, under the execrable race of the Stuarts, the struggle between the people and the confederacy aforesaid of temporal and spiritual tyranny, became formidable, violent, and bloody.

It was this great struggle that peopled America. It was not religion alone, as is commonly supposed; but it was a love of universal liberty, and a hatred, a dread, a horror, of the infernal confederacy before described, that projected, conducted, and accomplished the settlement of America.

It was a resolution formed by a sensible people, -- I mean the Puritans, -- almost in despair. They had become intelligent in general, and many of them learned. For this fact, I have the testimony of Archbishop King himself, who observed of that people, that they were more intelligent and better read than even the members of the church, whom he censures warmly for that reason. This people had been so vexed and tortured by the powers of those days, for no other crime than their knowledge and their freedom of inquiry and examination, and they had so much reason to despair of deliverance from those miseries on that side the ocean, that they at last resolved to fly to the wilderness for refuge from the temporal and spiritual principalities and powers, and plagues and scourges of their native country.

After their arrival here, they began their settlement, and formed their plan, both of ecclesiastical and civil government, in direct opposition to the canon and the feudal systems. The leading men among them, both of the clergy and the laity, were men of sense and learning. To many of them the historians, orators, poets, and philosophers of Greece and Rome were quite familiar; and some of them have left libraries that are still in being, consisting chiefly of volumes in which the wisdom of the most enlightened ages and nations is deposited, -- written, however, in languages which their great-grandsons, though educated in European universities, can scarcely read.2

2 "I always consider the settlement of America with reverence and wonder, as the opening of a grand scene and design in Providence for the illumination of the ignorant, and the emancipation of the slavish part of mankind all over the earth."

Thus accomplished were many of the first planters in these colonies. It may be thought polite and fashionable by many modern fine gentlemen, perhaps, to deride the characters of these persons, as enthusiastical, superstitious, and republican. But such ridicule is founded in nothing but foppery and affectation, and is grossly injurious and false. Religious to some degree of enthusiasm it may be admitted they were; but this can be no peculiar derogation from their character; because it was at that time almost the universal character not only of England, but of Christendom. Had this, however, been otherwise, their enthusiasm, considering the principles on which it was founded and the ends to which it was directed, far from being a reproach to them, was greatly to their honor; for I believe it will be found universally true, that no great enterprise for the honor or happiness of mankind was ever achieved without a large mixture of that noble infirmity. Whatever imperfections may be justly ascribed to them, which, however, are as few as any mortals have discovered, their judgment in framing their policy was founded in wise, humane, and benevolent principles. It was founded in revelation and in reason too. It was consistent with the principles of the best and greatest and wisest legislators of antiquity. Tyranny in every form, shape, and appearance was their disdain and abhorrence; no fear of punishment, nor even of death itself in exquisite tortures, had been sufficient to conquer that steady, manly, pertinacious spirit with which they had opposed the tyrants of those days in church and state. They were very far from being enemies to monarchy; and they knew as well as any men, the just regard and honor that is due to the character of a dispenser of the mysteries of the gospel of grace. But they saw clearly, that popular powers must be placed as a guard, a control, a balance, to the powers of the monarch and the priest, in every government, or else it would soon become the man of sin, the whore of Babylon, the mystery of iniquity, a great and detestable system of fraud, violence, and usurpation. Their greatest concern seems to have been to establish a government of the church more consistent with the Scriptures, and a government of the state more agreeable to the dignity of human nature, than any they had seen in Europe, and to transmit such a government down to their posterity, with the means of securing and preserving it forever. To render the popular power in their new government as great and wise as their principles of theory, that is, as human nature and the Christian religion require it should be, they endeavored to remove from it as many of the feudal inequalities and dependencies as could be spared, consistently with the preservation of a mild limited monarchy. And in this they discovered the depth of their wisdom and the warmth of their friendship to human nature. But the first place is due to religion. They saw clearly, that of all the nonsense and delusion which had ever passed through the mind of man, none had ever been more extravagant than the notions of absolutions, indelible characters, uninterrupted successions, and the rest of those fantastical ideas, derived from the canon law, which had thrown such a glare of mystery, sanctity, reverence, and right reverend eminence and holiness, around the idea of a priest, as no mortal could deserve, and as always must, from the constitution of human nature, be dangerous in society. For this reason, they demolished the whole system of diocesan episcopacy; and, deriding, as all reasonable and impartial men must do, the ridiculous fancies of sanctified effluvia from episcopal fingers, they established sacerdotal ordination on the foundation of the Bible and common sense. This conduct at once imposed an obligation on the whole body of the clergy to industry, virtue, piety, and learning, and rendered that whole body infinitely more independent on the civil powers, in all respects, than they could be where they were formed into a scale of subordination, from a pope down to priests and friars and confessors, -- necessarily and essentially a sordid, stupid, and wretched herd, -- or than they could be in any other country, where an archbishop held the place of a universal bishop, and the vicars and curates that of the ignorant, dependent, miserable rabble aforesaid, -- and infinitely more sensible and learned than they could be in either. This subject has been seen in the same light by many illustrious patriots, who have lived in America since the days of our forefathers, and who have adored their memory for the same reason. And methinks there has not appeared in New England a stronger veneration for their memory, a more penetrating insight into the grounds and principles and spirit of their policy, nor a more earnest desire of perpetuating the blessings of it to posterity, than that fine institution of the late Chief Justice Dudley, of a lecture against popery, and on the validity of presbyterian ordination. This was certainly intended by that wise and excellent man, as an eternal memento of the wisdom and goodness of the very principles that settled America. But I must again return to the feudal law. The adventurers so often mentioned, had an utter contempt of all that dark ribaldry of hereditary, indefeasible right, -- the Lord's anointed, -- and the divine, miraculous original of government, with which the priesthood had enveloped the feudal monarch in clouds and mysteries, and from whence they had deduced the most mischievous of all doctrines, that of passive obedience and non-resistance. They knew that government was a plain, simple, intelligible thing, founded in nature and reason, and quite comprehensible by common sense. They detested all the base services and servile dependencies of the feudal system. They knew that no such unworthy dependencies took place in the ancient seats of liberty, the republics of Greece and Rome; and they thought all such slavish subordinations were equally inconsistent with the constitution of human nature and that religious liberty with which Jesus had made them free.This was certainly the opinion they had formed; and they were far from being singular or extravagant in thinking so. Many celebrated modern writers in Europe have espoused the same sentiments. Lord Kames, a Scottish writer of great reputation, whose authority in this case ought to have the more weight as his countrymen have not the most worthy ideas of liberty, speaking of the feudal law, says, -- "A constitution so contradictory to all the principles which govern mankind can never be brought about, one should imagine, but by foreign conquest or native usurpations." Rousseau, speaking of the same system, calls it, -- "That most iniquitous and absurd form of government by which human nature was so shamefully degraded." It would be easy to multiply authorities, but it must be needless; because, as the original of this form of government was among savages, as the spirit, of it is military and despotic, every writer who would allow the people to have any right to life or property or freedom more than the beasts of the field, and who was not hired or enlisted under arbitrary, lawless power, has been always willing to admit the feudal system to be inconsistent with liberty and the rights of mankind.

To have holden their lands allodially, or for every man to have been the sovereign lord and proprietor of the ground he occupied, would have constituted a government too nearly like a commonwealth. They were contented, therefore, to hold their lands of their king, as their sovereign lord; and to him they were willing to render homage, but to no mesne or subordinate lords; nor were they willing to submit to any of the baser services. In all this they were so strenuous, that they have even transmitted to their posterity a very general contempt and detestation of holdings by quitrents, as they have also a hereditary ardor for liberty and thirst for knowledge.

They were convinced, by their knowledge of human nature, derived from history and their own experience, that nothing could preserve their posterity from the encroachments of the two systems of tyranny, in opposition to which, as has been observed already, they erected their government in church and state, but knowledge diffused generally through the whole body of the people. Their civil and religious principles, therefore, conspired to prompt them to use every measure and take every precaution in their power to propagate and perpetuate knowledge. For this purpose they laid very early the foundations of colleges, and invested them with ample privileges and emoluments; and it is remarkable that they have left among their posterity so universal an affection and veneration for those seminaries, and for liberal education, that the meanest of the people contribute cheerfully to the support and maintenance of them every year, and that nothing is more generally popular than projections for the honor, reputation, and advantage of those seats of learning. But the wisdom and benevolence of our fathers rested not here. They made an early provision by law, that every town consisting of so many families, should be always furnished with a grammar school. They made it a crime for such a town to be destitute of a grammar schoolmaster for a few months, and subjected it to a heavy penalty. So that the education of all ranks of people was made the care and expense of the public, in a manner that I believe has been unknown to any other people ancient or modern.

The consequences of these establishments we see and feel every day. A native of America who cannot read and write is as rare an appearance as a Jacobite or a Roman Catholic, that is, as rare as a comet or an earthquake. It has been observed, that we are all of us lawyers, divines, politicians, and philosophers. And I have good authorities to say, that all candid foreigners who have passed through this country, and conversed freely with all sorts of people here, will allow, that they have never seen so much knowledge and civility among the common people in any part of the world. It is true, there has been among us a party for some years, consisting chiefly not of the descendants of the first settlers of this country, but of high churchmen and high statesmen imported since, who affect to censure this provision for the education of our youth as a needless expense, and an imposition upon the rich in favor of the poor, and as an institution productive of idleness and vain speculation among the people, whose time and attention, it is said, ought to be devoted to labor, and not to public affairs, or to examination into the conduct of their superiors. And certain officers of the crown, and certain other missionaries of ignorance, foppery, servility, and slavery, have been most inclined to countenance and increase the same party. Be it remembered, however, that liberty must at all hazards be supported. We have a right to it, derived from our Maker. But if we had not, our fathers have earned and bought it for us, at the expense of their ease, their estates, their pleasure, and their blood. And liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people, who have a right, from the frame of their nature, to knowledge, as their great Creator, who does nothing in vain, has given them understandings, and a desire to know; but besides this, they have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge, I mean, of the characters and conduct of their rulers. Rulers are no more than attorneys, agents, and trustees for the people; and if the cause, the interest and trust, is insidiously betrayed, or wantonly trifled away, the people have a right to revoke the authority that they themselves have deputed, and to constitute abler and better agents, attorneys, and trustees. And the preservation of the means of knowledge among the lowest ranks, is of more importance to the public than all the property of all the rich men in the country. It is even of more consequence to the rich themselves, and to their posterity. The only question is, whether it is a public emolument; and if it is, the rich ought undoubtedly to contribute, in the same proportion as to all other public burdens, -- that is, in proportion to their wealth, which is secured by public expenses. But none of the means of information are more sacred, or have been cherished with more tenderness and care by the settlers of America, than the press. Care has been taken that the art of printing should be encouraged, and that it should be easy and cheap and safe for any person to communicate his thoughts to the public. And you, Messieurs printers,3 whatever the tyrants of the earth may say of your paper, have done important service to your country by your readiness and freedom in publishing the speculations of the curious. The stale, impudent insinuations of slander and sedition, with which the gormandizers of power have endeavored to discredit your paper, are so much the more to your honor; for the jaws of power are always opened to devour, and her arm is always stretched out, if possible, to destroy the freedom of thinking, speaking, and writing. And if the public interest, liberty, and happiness have been in danger from the ambition or avarice of any great man, whatever may be his politeness, address, learning, ingenuity, and, in other respects, integrity and humanity, you have done yourselves honor and your country service by publishing and pointing out that avarice and ambition. These vices are so much the more dangerous and pernicious for the virtues with which they may be accompanied in the same character, and with so much the more watchful jealousy to be guarded against.

4 Edes and Gill, printers of the Boston Gazette.

"Curse on such virtues, they've undone their country."

Be not intimidated, therefore, by any terrors, from publishing with the utmost freedom, whatever can be warranted by the laws of your country; nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your liberty by any pretences of politeness, delicacy, or decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for hypocrisy, chicanery, and cowardice. Much less, I presume, will you be discouraged by any pretences that malignants on this side the water will represent your paper as factious and seditious, or that the great on the other side the water will take offence at them. This dread of representation has had for a long time, in this province, effects very similar to what the physicians call a hydropho, or dread of water. It has made us delirious; and we have rushed headlong into the water, till we are almost drowned, out of simple or phrensical fear of it. Believe me, the character of this country has suffered more in Britain by the pusillanimity with which we have borne many insults and indignities from the creatures of power at home and the creatures of those creatures here, than it ever did or ever will by the freedom and spirit that has been or will be discovered in writing or action. Believe me, my countrymen, they have imbibed an opinion on the other side the water, that we are an ignorant, a timid, and a stupid people; nay, their tools on this side have often the impudence to dispute your bravery. But I hope in God the time is near at hand when they will be fully convinced of your understanding, integrity and courage. But can any thing be more ridiculous, were it not too provoking to be laughed at, than to pretend that offence should be taken at home for writings here? Pray, let them look at home. Is not the human understanding exhausted there? Are not reason, imagination, wit, passion, senses, and all, tortured to find out satire and invective against the characters of the vile and futile fellows who sometimes get into place and power? The most exceptionable paper that ever I saw here is perfect prudence and modesty in comparison of multitudes of their applauded writings. Yet the high regard they have for the freedom of the press, indulges all. I must and will repeat it, your paper deserves the patronage of every friend to his country. And whether the defamers of it are arrayed in robes of scarlet or sable, whether they lurk and skulk in an insurance office, whether they assume the venerable character of a priest, the sly one of a scrivener, or the dirty, infamous, abandoned one of an informer, they are all the creatures and tools of the lust of domination.

The true source of our sufferings has been our timidity.

We have been afraid to think. We have felt a reluctance to examining into the grounds of our privileges, and the extent in which we have an indisputable right to demand them, against all the power and authority on earth. And many who have not scrupled to examine for themselves, have yet for certain prudent reasons been cautious and diffident of declaring the result of their inquiries.

The cause of this timidity is perhaps hereditary, and to be traced back in history as far as the cruel treatment the first settlers of this country received, before their embarkation for America, from the government at home. Everybody knows how dangerous it was to speak or write in favor of any thing, in those days, but the triumphant system of religion and politics. And our fathers were particularly the objects of the persecutions and proscriptions of the times. It is not unlikely, therefore, that although they were inflexibly steady in refusing their positive assent to any thing against their principles, they might have contracted habits of reserve, and a cautious diffidence of asserting their opinions publicly. These habits they probably brought with them to America, and have transmitted down to us. Or we may possibly account for this appearance by the great affection and veneration Americans have always entertained for the country from whence they sprang; or by the quiet temper for which they have been remarkable, no country having been less disposed to discontent than this; or by a sense they have that it is their duty to acquiesce under the administration of government, even when in many smaller matters grievous to them, and until the essentials of the great compact are destroyed or invaded. These peculiar causes might operate upon them; but without these, we all know that human nature itself, from indolence, modesty, humanity, or fear, has always too much reluctance to a manly assertion of its rights. Hence, perhaps, it has happened, that nine tenths of the species are groaning and gasping in misery and servitude.

But whatever the cause has been, the fact is certain, we have been excessively cautious of giving offence by complaining of grievances. And it is as certain, that American governors, and their friends, and all the crown officers, have availed themselves of this disposition in the people. They have prevailed on us to consent to many things which were grossly injurious to us, and to surrender many others, with voluntary tameness, to which we had the clearest right. Have we not been treated, formerly, with abominable insolence, by officers of the navy? I mean no insinuation against any gentleman now on this station, having heard no complaint of any one of them to his dishonor. Have not some generals from England treated us like servants, nay, more like slaves than like Britons? Have we not been under the most ignominious contribution, the most abject submission, the most supercilious insults, of some custom-house officers? Have we not been trifled with, brow-beaten, and trampled on, by former governors, in a manner which no king of England since James the Second has dared to indulge towards his subjects? Have we not raised up one family, in them placed an unlimited confidence, and been soothed and flattered and intimidated by their influence, into a great part of this infamous tameness and submission? "These are serious and alarming questions, and deserve a dispassionate consideration."

This disposition has been the great wheel and the mainspring in the American machine of court politics. We have been told that "the word rights is an offensive expression;" "that the king, his ministry, and parliament, will not endure to hear Americans talk of their rights;" "that Britain is the mother and we the children, that a filial duty and submission is due from us to her," and that "we ought to doubt our own judgment, and presume that she is right, even when she seems to us to shake the foundations of government;" that "Britain is immensely rich and great and powerful, has fleets and armies at her command which have been the dread and terror of the universe, and that she will force her own judgment into execution, right or wrong." But let me entreat you, sir, to pause. Do you consider yourself as a missionary of loyalty or of rebellion? Are you not representing your king, his ministry, and parliament, as tyrants, -- imperious, unrelenting tyrants, -- by such reasoning as this? Is not this representing your most gracious sovereign as endeavoring to destroy the foundations of his own throne? Are you not representing every member of parliament as renouncing the transactions at Runing Mede, (the meadow, near Windsor, where Magna Charta was signed;) and as repealing in effect the bill of rights, when the Lords and Commons asserted and vindicated the rights of the people and their own rights, and insisted on the king's assent to that assertion and vindication? Do you not represent them as forgetting that the prince of Orange was created King William, by the people, on purpose that their rights might be eternal and inviolable? Is there not something extremely fallacious in the common-place images of mother country and children colonies? Are we the children of Great Britain any more than the cities of London, Exeter, and Bath? Are we not brethren and fellow subjects with those in Britain, only under a somewhat different method of legislation, and a totally different method of taxation? But admitting we are children, have not children a right to complain when their parents are attempting to break their limbs, to administer poison, or to sell them to enemies for slaves? Let me entreat you to consider, will the mother be pleased when you represent her as deaf to the cries of her children, -- when you compare her to the infamous miscreant who lately stood on the gallows for starving her child, -- when you resemble her to Lady Macbeth in Shakespeare, (I cannot think of it without horror,) who
"Had given suck, and knew
How tender 't was to love the babe that milked her,"
but yet, who could
"Even while 't was smiling in her face,Have plucked her nipple from the boneless gums, And dashed the brains out."

Let us banish for ever from our minds, my countrymen, all such unworthy ideas of the king, his ministry, and parliament. Let us not suppose that all are become luxurious, effeminate, and unreasonable, on the other side the water, as many designing persons would insinuate. Let us presume, what is in fact true, that the spirit of liberty is as ardent as ever among the body of the nation, though a few individuals may be corrupted. Let us take it for granted, that the same great spirit which once gave CÊsar so warm a reception, which denounced hostilities against John till Magna Charta was signed, which severed the head of Charles the First from his body, and drove James the Second from his kingdom, the same great spirit (may heaven preserve it till the earth shall be no more) which first seated the great grandfather of his present most gracious majesty on the throne of Britain, -- is still alive and active and warm in England; and that the same spirit in America, instead of provoking the inhabitants of that country, will endear us to them for ever, and secure their good-will.

This spirit, however, without knowledge, would be little better than a brutal rage. Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write. Let every order and degree among the people rouse their attention and animate their resolution. Let them all become attentive to the grounds and principles of government, ecclesiastical and civil. Let us study the law of nature; search into the spirit of the British constitution; read the histories of ancient ages; contemplate the great examples of Greece and Rome; set before us the conduct of our own British ancestors, who have defended for us the inherent rights of mankind against foreign and domestic tyrants and usurpers, against arbitrary kings and cruel priests, in short, against the gates of earth and hell. Let us read and recollect and impress upon our souls the views and ends of our own more immediate forefathers, in exchanging their native country for a dreary, inhospitable wilderness. Let us examine into the nature of that power, and the cruelty of that oppression, which drove them from their homes. Recollect their amazing fortitude, their bitter sufferings, -- the hunger, the nakedness, the cold, which they patiently endured, -- the severe labors of clearing their grounds, building their houses, raising their provisions, amidst dangers from wild beasts and savage men, before they had time or money or materials for commerce. Recollect the civil and religious principles and hopes and expectations which constantly supported and carried them through all hardships with patience and resignation. Let us recollect it was liberty, the hope of liberty for themselves and us and ours, which conquered all discouragements, dangers, and trials. In such researches as these, let us all in our several departments cheerfully engage, -- but especially the proper patrons and supporters of law, learning, and religion!

Let the pulpit resound with the doctrines and sentiments of religious liberty. Let us hear the danger of thraldom to our consciences from ignorance, extreme poverty, and dependence, in short, from civil and political slavery. Let us see delineated before us the true map of man. Let us hear the dignity of his nature, and the noble rank he holds among the works of God, -- that consenting to slavery is a sacrilegious breach of trust, as offensive in the sight of God as it is derogatory from our own honor or interest or happiness, -- and that God Almighty has promulgated from heaven, liberty, peace, and good-will to man!

Let the bar proclaim, "the laws, the rights, the generous plan of power" delivered down from remote antiquity, -- inform the world of the mighty struggles and numberless sacrifices made by our ancestors in defence of freedom. Let it be known, that British liberties are not the grants of princes or parliaments, but original rights, conditions of original contracts, coequal with prerogative, and coeval with government; that many of our rights are inherent and essential, agreed on as maxims, and established as preliminaries, even before a parliament existed. Let them search for the foundations of British laws and government in the frame of human nature, in the constitution of the intellectual and moral world. There let us see that truth, liberty, justice, and benevolence, are its everlasting basis; and if these could be removed, the superstructure is overthrown of course.

Let the colleges join their harmony in the same delightful concert. Let every declamation turn upon the beauty of liberty and virtue, and the deformity, turpitude, and malignity, of slavery and vice. Let the public disputations become researches into the grounds and nature and ends of government, and the means of preserving the good and demolishing the evil. Let the dialogues, and all the exercises, become the instruments of impressing on the tender mind, and of spreading and distributing far and wide, the ideas of right and the sensations of freedom.

In a word, let every sluice of knowledge be opened and set a-flowing. The encroachments upon liberty in the reigns of the first James and the first Charles, by turning the general attention of learned men to government, are said to have produced the greatest number of consummate statesmen which has ever been seen in any age or nation. The Brookes, Hampdens, Vanes, Seldens, Miltons, Nedhams, Harringtons, Nevilles, Sidneys, Lockes, are all said to have owed their eminence in political knowledge to the tyrannies of those reigns. The prospect now before us in America, ought in the same manner to engage the attention of every man of learning, to matters of power and of right, that we may be neither led nor driven blindfolded to irretrievable destruction. Nothing less than this seems to have been meditated for us, by somebody or other in Great Britain. There seems to be a direct and formal design on foot, to enslave all America. This, however, must be done by degrees. The first step that is intended, seems to be an entire subversion of the whole system of our fathers, by the introduction of the canon and feudal law into America. The canon and feudal systems, though greatly mutilated in England, are not yet destroyed. Like the temples and palaces in which the great contrivers of them once worshipped and inhabited, they exist in ruins; and much of the domineering spirit of them still remains. The designs and labors of a certain society, to introduce the former of them into America, have been well exposed to the public by a writer of great abilities; and the further attempts to the same purpose, that may be made by that society, or by the ministry or parliament, I leave to the conjectures of the thoughtful. But it seems very manifest from the Stamp Act itself, that a design is formed to strip us in a great measure of the means of knowledge, by loading the press, the colleges, and even an almanack and a newspaper, with restraints and duties; and to introduce the inequalities and dependencies of the feudal system, by taking from the poorer sort of people all their little subsistence, and conferring it on a set of stamp officers, distributors, and their deputies. But I must proceed no further at present. The sequel, whenever I shall find health and leisure to pursue it, will be a "disquisition of the policy of the stamp act." In the mean time, however, let me add, -- These are not the vapors of a melancholy mind, nor the effusions of envy, disappointed ambition, nor of a spirit of opposition to government, but the emanations of a heart that burns for its country's welfare. No one of any feeling, born and educated in this once happy country, can consider the numerous distresses, the gross indignities, the barbarous ignorance, the haughty usurpations, that we have reason to fear are meditating for ourselves, our children, our neighbors, in short, for all our countrymen and all their posterity, without the utmost agonies of heart and many tears.

When we look at our educational system today, and compare it to the high moral ideas and standard of the founding fathers as addressed in the above dissertation, we can easily identify one of the root causes of this nations moral and intellectual decay. Keeping in mind as well, that this quoted dissertation is in relation to the previous post in which a Jesuit magazine basically came to the defense of the LGBTQXYZ agenda. Being carried out within our children's schools, in decrying censorship of such materials supporting said agenda. This same institution which was so instrumental in removing bibles from our schools, and further dementing all true education within our institutions as a part of creating the very ignorance which allows for their preferred governmental system of intwined Cannon and Feudal law. Bringing us back to the dark ages within which they ruled, is their ultimate goal. Nevertheless, only a truly ignorant and or uneducated people would allow for such. We therefore, are the only thing standing between the dark ages again, or not. So be it.

http://adventmessenger.org/the-elephant-in-the-living-room-that-no-one-wants-to-notice/

Quoted article below from link above.

QuoteThe Elephant in the Living Room that No One wants to Notice

The Need of a Savior

A storm is coming, relentless in its fury and unimaginable in its scope. It is destined to affect every person on planet earth. The ancient Jewish seer, Daniel, describes it: "And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time" (Daniel 12:1).

Unfortunately, most of earth's inhabitants are unaware of the true nature of this conflict of apocalyptic proportions. Even fewer are prepared for what is about to come upon this world as an overwhelming surprise. While men and women are engrossed in the cares of this world, consumed with the challenges of day-to-day survival, and overwhelmed by a plethora of mindless entertainment, events are being orchestrated that, while promising peace, safety, and unity, will result in chaos, confusion, relentless tyranny, and slaughter beyond the human imagination.

The current cultural and political climate in the United States and around the world are but a prelude to what is about to transpire in the human experience. The coronavirus has dissipated; but this will not change the downward spiral of America and the world. The international protests triggered by the murder of George Floyd accelerated the social and cultural divides across international borders. Economic inequalities are broadening, and no structural adjustment to current economic models will narrow the gap. Unusual weather patterns are becoming more dangerous and unpredictable. Nothing will alter the trajectory of planet earth which is moving with increased velocity on an irreversible course to a destructive destiny. The consequences will be dire and beyond the capacity of the mind to imagine or the pen to portray. We are witnessing the steady, protracted, and ultimate demise of human civilization as we know it. The world is on the precipice of a tremendous crisis. It is simply a matter of time before the storm hits. The intermingling of seemingly insoluble, complex crises renders the world ripe for a savior. A self-exalted savior is not only waiting but preparing to assume the helm of a ship seemingly without a rudder, a vessel devoid of a compass. He is confident he has both.

The Elephant

Malachi Martin, historian and late Jesuit scholar, gives some insight into what is percolating on the horizon of international world affairs. In his eye-opening expose of the Vatican's plan to take control of the world, Martin writes, "our way of life as individuals and as citizens of the nations; our families and our jobs; our trade and commerce and money; our educational systems and our religions and our cultures; even the badges of our national identity, which most of us have always taken for granted—all will have been powerfully and radically altered forever. No one can be exempted from its effects. No sector of our lives will remain untouched" (Malachi Martin, Keys of This Blood, pg. 15).

But on what basis does Martin make such an assertion? As you read his book, it becomes clear that he speaks from a position of having privileged information on the strategies and plans of the players vying for control of the New World Order, particularly his own organization, Roman Catholicism. Among other coveted accolades, Martin was a close advisor to the late Pope John Paul II. In his book, Martin proposed that there were three entities that are contending and have the resources for the establishment and governorship of the first one world government ever to exist in the history of the nations. He cited them as: Capitalism, Communism, and his church, Catholicism. Since the publication of his book (circa 1990), two of the players, Capitalism and Catholicism, have joined forces to effectively neutralize the third, Communism.

The contrivance and intriguing gamesmanship that led to Communism's neutralization were detailed in the widely influential publication, Times magazine. The journal dedicated a full edition to the machination entitled, HOLY Alliance ... How Reagan and the Pope conspired to assist Poland's Solidarity Movement and hasten the demise of Communism (February 24, 1992). Of the two remaining players on the grand chessboard for world domination, Malachi Martin assured his readers that his church, Catholicism, is determined to be the victor at any cost necessary.

Much has happened on the stage of this international drama since the publication of Martin's book and his mysterious passing. The most significant scene was the selection of Jorge Bergoglio of Argentina as the first Jesuit Pope of the Roman Catholic enterprise. His rise to the pinnacle of international intrigue was made possible by the sudden 'resignation' of his predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI. That unprecedented shift in leadership only added to the mysterious character of the behemoth that is the Vatican City Church/State organization. It is a conglomeration that is much misunderstood, and her motives are desperately underestimated. As such, it relegates itself to 'the elephant in the living room that no one wants to notice'.

As the oldest continuing, absolute monarchy in the history of humanity, Catholicism certainly has the experience, organization, and influence to ensure victory in its quest for world domination. It is a Religious/Political colossus that defies even the most astute attempt at critical analysis. Encyclopedia Britannica describes it: "Like any intricate and ancient phenomenon, Roman Catholicism can be described and interpreted from a variety of perspectives and by several methodologies. Thus, the Roman Catholic Church itself is a complex institution, for which the usual diagram of a pyramid, extending from the pope at the apex to the believers in the pew, is vastly oversimplified. Within that institution, moreover, sacred congregations, archdioceses and dioceses, provinces, religious orders and societies, seminaries and colleges, parishes and confraternities, and countless other organizations all invite the social scientist to consider power relations, leadership roles, social dynamics, and other sociological phenomena that they uniquely represent. As a world religion among world religions, Roman Catholicism encompasses, within the range of its multicolored life, features of many other world faiths; thus, only the methodology of comparative religion can address them all" (Encyclopedia Britannica, page 877).

With over one billion adherents stationed in every country on the planet, the Roman Church/State forms one vast but closely-knit network of political, financial, religious, and intelligence-gathering resources, all designed to serve the interests of the pope. Therefore, the only rational conclusion that can be drawn is that the Roman Papacy is intimately involved in, if not controlling, every aspect of our lives.

Ellen G. White, a late nineteenth-century Bible commentator, whom the Smithsonian Institution recognized as one of the most popular religious writers and one of the most significant Americans of all time, shares this insightful thought: "The Roman Catholic Church, with all its ramifications throughout the world, forms one vast organization under the control, and designed to serve the interests, of the papal see. Its millions of communicants, in every country on the globe, are instructed to hold themselves as bound in allegiance to the pope. Whatever their nationality or their government, they are to regard the authority of the church as above all other. Though they may take the oath pledging their loyalty to the state, yet back of this lies the vow of obedience to Rome, absolving them from every pledge inimical to her interests. History testifies of her artful and persistent efforts to insinuate herself into the affairs of nations; and having gained a foothold, to further her own aims, even at the ruin of princes and people" (E.G. White, The Great Controversy, pg. 580).

The Biblical identification

The Biblical prophets Daniel and John, under the inspiration of the Creator God, outlined and portrayed the rise and demise of this entity, which many writers have identified as the antichrist power of Bible prophecy. Beginning with the ancient world power of Babylon, John and Daniel traced the rise of this massive religious/political entity down through the ages, from Babylon to Media Persia to Greece. Both seers delineated the prophetic timeline leading to the rise of Imperial Rome, out of which arose the Roman Papacy.

John speaks of her power and influence: "With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication" (Revelation 17:2). Then he reveals her ultimate demise: "And the kings of the earth, who have committed fornication" and lived deliciously with her, shall bewail her, and lament for her, when they shall see the smoke of her burning; standing afar off for the fear of her torment, saying, Alas, alas that great city Babylon, that mighty city! for in one hour is thy judgment come.  And the merchants of the earth shall weep and mourn over her; for no man buyeth their merchandise anymore" (Revelation 17:2; 9–11). God's servant went on to detail the intricate relationship the Roman Papacy will have with the political and economic interests of the world just before her fall.

The Final March

A most notable juncture in Rome's resurgence to world domination was the year 1962. Under the leadership of Pope John XXIII, Catholicism initiated perhaps the most ambitious undertaking in its history, the Vatican II Council. This was a most comprehensive initiative, ostensibly to reform, but in fact detailing Rome's plans, strategies, and tactics for the final takeover of planet earth. The elements and objectives were finitely reported in what is referred to as the Conciliar Documents. In Section 32, page 452, entitled DECREE ON ECUMEMISM, is found this rather profound declaration: "The restoration of unity among all Christians is one of the principal concerns of the Second Vatican Council".

No one can deny the purposeful efficiency with which the Roman church has pursued that objective and the effectiveness of its efforts in achieving it. The European Ecclesiastical Establishment has accomplished what was previously unthinkable: the reunification of Protestants and Catholics. Today, the line of distinction between the two is so blurred, and the level of cooperation existing among these groups is nothing short of amazing. One would be hard pressed to think of the bloody persecutions meted out to the former by the latter. The gulf that had been so costly established by the early Protestants has been unceremoniously bridged beyond recognition. One of the main objectives of the Second Vatican Council has been undeniably accomplished. In fact, so successful it has been in that regard that in the year 2015, fifty years after the Council's conclusion in 1965, the current Jesuit Pope, Francis I, declared that the protest is over and proclaimed a Year of Jubilee.

The Lutheran Church, founded by the most celebrated Protestant Reformer, Martin Luther, has returned to the fold of the mother church. The Anglicans and Eastern Orthodox have done likewise. A wide range of so-called Evangelical churches have followed suit. Just a casual look at church history over the past two hundred years would illustrate the profundity of Rome's accomplishment in the reunification of Protestants and Catholics. For the first time in history, a Roman Catholic Cardinal officially pronounced a blessing on the coronation of the newly appointed King Charles III of England.

In the popularly acclaimed Ecumenical Movement, almost all Christian denominations, which once protested the errors of the Roman Church, are compromising their foundational beliefs to join hands with the Roman Papacy. Hence, the Ecumenical Movement can justifiably be considered the greatest threat to the Christian faith and the American way of life in the twenty-first century. Designed, implemented, and orchestrated by the Roman Papacy, the Ecumenical Movement's fundamental teaching is that all religions should set aside their distinctive doctrines and come together for peace and unity, for the 'common good'. The grave deception and falsity of this policy, which a broad swath of Christendom has embraced, is that it is asking Christians to turn away from the Bible and accept the dogmas and doctrines of the Catholic Church. Ironically, the Roman church has set aside none of her teachings, which led to the Protestant Reformation and the corresponding merciless slaughter of millions who dared to disagree with her. The so-called 'Protestant' world seems to be totally oblivious to the true character and ultimate aims of the pope and his papacy. No one wants to notice the elephant in the living room.

Ellen G. White again writes, "But Romanism as a system is no more in harmony with the gospel of Christ now than at any former period in her history. The Protestant churches are in great darkness, or they would discern the signs of the times. The Roman Church is far-reaching in her plans and modes of operation. She is employing every device to extend her influence and increase her power in preparation for a fierce and determined conflict to regain control of the world, to re-establish persecution, and to undo all that Protestantism has done" (E.G White, The Great Controversy, pg. 565.4)

One needs only to reflect upon the history of Francis' church during the Dark Ages, when that massive state/ecclesiastical establishment slaughtered millions for their simple belief that salvation is available through Jesus Christ and Him alone. Contrariwise to the Protestant belief, Francis' church doctrine, then and now, is that salvation is obtainable only through her by believing its dogmas and practicing its sacraments. Therefore, Francis could boldly declare, "There are those who believe they can maintain a personal, direct, and immediate relationship with Jesus Christ outside the communion and mediation of the church. These are dangerous and harmful temptations" (Vatican City, Wednesday, June 25, 2014). Such is diametrically contrary to the Gospel message of salvation in Jesus alone.

An ancient Jewish seer asks the question, "Can two walk together, except they be agreed? (Amos 3:3). How can any thinking, sincere Christian set aside the most distinctive doctrine of the Christian faith for the sake of unity with Rome? The martyrs of the Dark Ages were verily adhering to the admonition of their Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, who declared, "I AM the Way, the Truth, and the Life; no one cometh unto the Father but by Me? (John 14:6). Nevertheless, abandoning this foundational principle of true Christianity is what Rome's Ecumenical Movement demands, and many are cooperating, hook, line, and sinker.

America's Prophetic Role

Malachi Martin, with no reference to Bible prophecy, was verily elucidating what the God of Creation had revealed to His servant John almost 2,000 years ago on the mount of Patmos. In the thirteenth chapter of the Book of Revelation, John foretells of the time in which the United States of America will, by legislation and force, cause all to submit to the Roman Papacy, thereby restoring it to its former position of world dominance to which it aspires—yeah, is orchestrating.

America, exactly as predicted in Bible prophecy, became the fertile crescent for Europe's Protestantism. Born in Europe, it was nurtured and bred to maturity in the cradle of the American Experiment. This nation has been the undisputed bastion of civil and religious liberty, the search for which birthed Protestantism. James Madison, fourth president, foremost architect of the American Experiment, and author of the United States constitution, remarked, "The experience of the United States is a happy disproof of the error so long rooted in the unenlightened minds of well-meaning Christians, as well as in the corrupt hearts of persecuting usurpers, that without legal incorporation of religious and civil polity, neither could be supported. A mutual independence is found most friendly to practical Religion, to social harmony, and to political prosperity." (James Madison, Letter to F.L. Schaeffer, Dec. 3, 1821).

He would later write to another compatriot, "In the Papal System, Government and Religion are in a manner consolidated, & that is found to be the worst of Govts. In most of the Govts. of the old world, the legal establishment of a particular religion and without or with very little toleration of others makes a part of the Political and Civil organization and there are few of the most enlightened judges who will maintain that the system has been favorable either to Religion or to Govt." (James Madison, Letter to Jasper Adams, September 1833).

But the current Pope Francis disagrees and reiterates his church's position on that issue. He writes in his encyclical: "The church, while respecting the autonomy of political life, does not restrict her mission to the private sphere. On the contrary, she cannot and must not remain on the sidelines in the building of a better world or fail to reawaken the spiritual energy that can contribute to the betterment of society" (Fratelli Tutti, Section 276). Simply put: 'the church and state must be united with the church ruling'.

He also states in the same document, "For my part, that the Christian tradition has never recognized the right to private property as absolute or inviolable and has stressed the social purpose of all forms of property. The principle of the common use of all created goods is the first principle of the whole ethical and social order.; it is a natural and inherent right that takes priority over others ... The right to private property can only be considered a secondary natural right (Fratelli Tutti, Section 120). If this does not engender deep reflection on the part of any thinking American, nothing else can; for the ownership of private property is a fundamental tenet of American life.

Rome has been remarkably successful in the political realm. A significant number of the judges on all levels of the Judicial spectrum are Roman Catholics. On the highest court in the land, the US Supreme court, seven of the nine justices are Roman Catholics. So are the president of the United States and most of his cabinet. The speaker of the House of Representatives, along with a considerable number of its members, and also the US Senate, are Roman Catholics. So is the leadership of the greatest military apparatus in the modern age. The media, often referred to as the fourth branch of the United States government, is not hurting for a lack of Roman Catholic leadership. Is this to suggest that all these players are conscientiously part of a grand conspiracy? Absolutely not. But what it demonstrates is the effective outworking of the strategy of Rome's hierarchy to be the victor in Malachi Martin's three-way competition for world domination.

Long before Malachi Martin, another Jesuit scholar wrote, "Her strength has grown apace under the remarkably able leadership of the present Pope, Pius XI. He has given the best of his singular ability to the supervision and direction of the Catholic campaign in America. For him our country is a battlefield on which is being waged the greatest struggle of the Church's history. The conquest of America is the supreme objective at which he aims. He despairs of the Old World with its interminable outbreaks against the Church and the multiplicity of divisions between peoples that entail internecine strife among his children. Besides, the Old World is in receivership. Pius is well aware that the Catholic Church can never hope again to dominate the civilized world until America kneels, beaten and penitent, at her feet" (E. Boyd Barrett, Rome Stoops to Conquer, pg. 3-4).

Preceding Barrett and Martin by several decades is Charles Chiniquy. This Roman Catholic priest turned Protestant listed a litany of the Roman Church's stated positions against the Constitution of the United States. Then he declared quite emphatically, "I could site many other things, proving that the Church of Rome is an absolute and irreconcilable enemy of the United States; but it would be too long.  These are sufficient to show to the American people that Rome is a viper, which they feed and press upon their bosom. Sooner or later that viper will bite to death and kill this Republic. This was foretold by Lafayette and is now promulgated by the greatest thinkers of our time" (Charles Chiniquy, Fifty Years in the Church of Rome, pg. 478-479).

Bible prophecy foretells that America will meet its demise as it unites with and supports the very same power from which it emerged to become the bastion of the Protestant Reformation. Says John the Revelator, "And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb [America with its fundamental principles of civil and religious liberty as espoused in the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution], and he spake as a dragon" (Revelation 13:11). John proceeds to reveal that America will not only be the chief agent in the restoration of the Roman Papacy as the dominating world power, but will in fact become exactly like her, taking a 180-degree turn from the founders' original intent.

Perhaps the second president of the republic, John Adams, had some insight into the current conditions of the United States. He wrote to the third president, James Madison, "I do not like the late Resurrection of the Jesuits. They have a General, now in Russia, in correspondence with the Jesuits in the U.S. who are more numerous than everybody knows. Shall We not have Swarms of them here? as many Shapes and disguises as ever a King of the Gypsies, Bamfied More Carew himself, assumed? In the shape of Printers, Editors, Writers School masters &c. I have lately read Pascalls Letters over again, and four Volumes of the History of the Jesuits. If ever any Congregation of Men could merit, eternal Perdition on Earth and in Hell; according to these Historians though like Pascall true Catholicks, it is this Company of Loiola. Our System however of Religious Liberty must afford them an Assylum. But if they do not put Purity of our Elections to a Severe Tryal, it will be a Wonder. (May 6th,1816. John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, the Adams/Jefferson letters, Edited by Lester Cappon: page 474). Could John Adams have foreseen 21st-century America?

Quite ironically, it is in America that the Catholic Church has experienced its most robust and peaceful development since its inception. Says Catholic professor and theologian Peter de Rosa, "To Rome's amazement, the Catholic church flourished under a regime judged by Rome to be hostile to the most basic tenets of the faith. Gregory XII (1831-46) said: 'In no part of the world do I feel myself so much the pope as in the United States'. And Pius IX, in whose reign Catholics in the United States numbered 61/2 million, delivered the famous line: "America is the only country in the world where I could be king.' It seems he not noticed that the Americans had lost the taste for monarchy way back in 1776with the Declaration of Independence" (Peter De Rosa, Vicars of Christ, pg.147)

Unfortunately, most Americans are ignoring the elephant in the living room, even as the nation is rapidly fulfilling its role in Bible prophecy by aiding the Roman Papacy on its trek back to world dominance. John's prediction has become a living reality.

Empty Promises

When we consider the current political climate in the United States, the uneasy nature of contemporary world affairs, the worldwide escalation of natural disasters, and the prevalence of moral indiscretions, it is not unreasonable to conjecture that we are on the precipice of that monumental crisis that would bring about enormous structural changes in the configuration of the world's political and economic architecture. Few are ready for this seismic shift that would reshape human existence.

At the center is the current pope. He is internationally perceived as the most influential moral leader in the world. He no doubt also considers himself most equipped to manage a reorganized world political and economic order. Therefore, he writes, "The same mindset which stands in the way of making radical decisions to reverse the trend of global warming also stands in the way of achieving the goal of eliminating poverty. A more responsible overall approach is needed to deal with both problems: the reduction of pollution and the development of poorer countries and regions. The twenty-first century, while maintaining systems of governance inherited from the past, is witnessing a weakening of the power of nation states, chiefly because the economic and financial sectors, being transnational, tend to prevail over the political. Given this situation, it is essential to devise stronger and more efficiently organized international institutions, with functionaries who are appointed fairly by agreement among national governments and empowered to impose sanctions. As Benedict XVI has affirmed in continuity with the social teaching of the Church: "To manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result; to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration: for all this, there is urgent need of a true world political authority, as my predecessor Blessed John XXIII indicated some years ago".[129] Diplomacy also takes on new importance in the work of developing international strategies which can anticipate serious problems affecting us all (Laudat Si, Section 175).

This declaration epitomizes Francis church's self-appointed position of wielding both the political and religious swords in pursuit of his church's ultimate goal, world domination. While promising equality, peace, and prosperity, this proposed realignment of the world political and economic order will usher in a time of tyranny, oppression, slaughter, and human suffering never before seen in the annals of human history.

Dr. John Robins, Christian minister and authority on Catholicism's role in international politics, paints this revealing picture in his book, Ecclesiastical Megalomania: "Ayn Rand was right when she wrote in 1967, 'The Catholic Church has never given up the hope to re-establish the medieval union of church and state with a global state and global theocracy as its ultimate goal'. The Roman church/state is a hybrid, a monster of ecclesiastical and political power. Its political thought is totalitarian and whenever it has had the opportunity to apply its principles, the result has been bloody repression. If during the last 30 years it has softened its assertions of full, supreme and irresponsible power and has murdered fewer people than before; such changes of behavior are not due to a change in its ideas but to a change in circumstances... It is only when the Roman church/state faced public opinion that disapproved of church/state sanctioned murder, that it slowed its persecutions and attempted to speak with a voice less bloodthirsty. The Roman church/ state in the 20th century, however, is an institution recovering from a deadly wound. If and when it regains its full power and authority, it will impose a regime more sinister than any the planet has ever seen" (John Robins, Ecclesiastical Megalomania, page 195). Considering the Papacy's history, her current plans, and the sure word of Bible prophecy, Professor Robbins' assertion must not be taken lightly.

The Final Chapter

When analyzing current world political and economic affairs, scholars and historians too often refrain from mentioning Catholicism in their calculations. Whether this is by design or not, I cannot tell. However, it seems quite odd that these highly credentialed individuals, in their respective spheres of scholarship, fail to include Catholicism in their equations. As correct as many of them are in observing and reporting on America's rapidly increasing drift into the abyss of fascism and totalitarianism, no analysis of contemporary world affairs can be considered credible and fully transparent without serious consideration of the Roman papacy and her role on the world stage.

The climate change crisis is the engine that drives Francis' grand plan for control of the New World Order. It is his Trojan Horse. This is made abundantly clear in his encyclical, Laudato Si. His later encyclical, Fratelli Tutti, repeats the principles of Laudato Si and provides additional details while demanding the cooperation of all. Cathonomics, the assigned name of Rome's New World Order system of governance, completes the blueprint undergirding the Roman Papacy's ultimate design for establishment and rulership in Malachi Martin's three-way competition for world domination.

Pope Francis is championing his church's march for world domination by projecting his well-manufactured persona as 'most moral world leader'. Despite his well-manicured veneer, the storms of persecution and tyranny are brewing behind the deceptive, velvet glove of Papal Ecumenism and promise of world peace and unity. As he makes his frontal attack on Capitalism, Malachi Martin's prediction of Catholicism becoming the victor of the three-way race for world dominance is manifesting itself before our eyes. Ultimately, however, the conflict will not be between Catholicism and capitalism but rather one in which Catholicism, supported by the economic and political powers of the world, mainly America, leads the vast sea of humanity to make war against the God of Creation in the person of His people.

The United Nations, the World Economic Forum, the World Bank, and the various religious organizations of all stripes and colors are coalescing, knowingly or unknowingly, under the aegis of Francis and his papacy into an alliance that will make war with those who will stand unflinchingly upon the Word of God, which exposes and is in contradiction to their plans and designs. But the God of Creation will be the victor.

John, the seer of Patmos, foretold: "And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ...These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast. These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for He is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful" (Revelation 12:17; 17:9-14).

Jehovah God, through His servant John, has long ago foretold today's state of affairs. In fact, He scripted the final act in the Drama of the Ages: "And he saith unto me, the waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues. And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire" (Revelation 17:5-16). The supporters of the elephant in the living room, whom they all now seem not to notice, will one day recognize its presence and understand its captivating, manipulative nature. Too late, though it will be, they will turn against her with unmitigated fury and vengeance.

Then comes the establishment of the world's final superpower and the true New World Order. Happily, in the gathering storm, Daniel concluded, "...and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book (Daniel 12:1). John assures God's people, "The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever" (Revelation 11:15).

Jesus Christ is the Only Shelter in the gathering storm. Be sure your name is written in His book so that you will live in His eternal kingdom.

I posted this post and the next one in another thread addressing quotes supplied by others. It seems perhaps more appropriate for this thread, thus the reposts here.

"When the last Lateran council was to be concluded in Rome under Pope Leo, among other articles it was decreed that one must believe the soul to be immortal.  From this one may gather that they make eternal life an object of sheer mockery and contempt. In this way they confess that it is a common belief among them that there is no eternal life, but that they now wish to proclaim this by means of a bull." (LW 47:37)

Your quote is above. That quote in far greater context is below. This will be a lengthy one, as it is Luther's attempt to dissuade the Catholic and Protestant Germans from entering into open warfare against each other. Though it is not complete, I will still have to break it down into two posts. It is uniquely recorded history regarding several of the reasons Protestants fought the battles they did for religious freedom and freedom of conscience. Which battles preceded and paved the way for the freedoms and liberties we have enjoyed for so long in this country until now. Which are now under such imminent threat from the exact religio-political entity, and elitist minded politicians and minions today, who agree with the Vatican's religio-political authoritarian views and agenda. Which agenda always includes the destruction of a well educated and independent middle class, without whom government for and by the people is not possible. Therefore has and is the Vaticans ultimate political end, not only helping the poor, but actually creating poor, uneducated, and dependent peoples. Whom they and their political and oligarchical allies and minions, may lord themselves over. All of which they intend to implement this time, on a global scale. 

Your quote is in blue. Emphasis is mine.

QuoteDr. Martin Luther's Warning to His Dear German People

I issued an urgent and sincere admonition publicly to the clerical members of the Diet of Augsburg in which I implored them not to let the diet—on which all the world set such great hopes and toward which it looked with longing—adjourn inconclusively, but rather work toward the establishment of peace, the cessation of some of their abominations, and freedom for the gospel. I also strove and sighed for these things with all my might in my prayers before God, as did all good Christians. However, since neither our diligent prayer to God nor our sincere warning to them availed, one can readily infer what this means: namely, that God considers them to be hardened and blinded; they are guilty of so much innocent blood, blasphemy, and shameful, impenitent living, that he does not consider that they are worthy to receive a single good thought or emotion or that they will pay any attention to a word of wholesome and peaceful admonition. Their condition is like that of the Jews at the time of Jeremiah, when God said to him (Jeremiah 15 [:1]): "Though Moses and Samuel stood before me, yet my heart would not turn to this people. Send them out of my sight, and let them go!" And in Jeremiah 7 [:16] he said, "As for you, do not pray for this people, or lift up cry or prayer for them, and do not intercede with me, for I do not hear you."
My colleagues and I must now issue this same answer and apply it to ourselves. We have prayed in vain for the clergy. With his actions, God is demonstrating mightily that he does not want to hear our intercession in their behalf, but he is letting them go and sin against the Holy Spirit, as Pharaoh did, until they are beyond hope of repentance and reform. If anything could have been attained through prayer before God and anything achieved with the clergy through admonition, pleas, humility, patience, friendly advances, truth, justice, a good muse, etc., it surely would have been accomplished now at the diet. For I know how earnestly the Christians prayed, what great humility, patience, and fervor was demonstrated there, and what a good and just cause they championed.
But now that they not only have let the diet disband without bearing any fruit and without peace, but have even confirmed the discord and concluded with defiant threats, my followers and I will also withdraw our prayers in compliance with God's command and, as St. John teaches [1 John 5:16], not pray for the sin unto death. Rather we shall see how God will baptize the hardened Pharaoh in the Red Sea. Our prayers and supplications for peace, even though lost on the impenitent, will help us all the more. In fact, they have already performed great miracles at Augsburg. And by the grace of God they will also succeed in the end. For we were heard and must be heard. Our prayers have not failed us in the past, nor will they fail us now—that I know for a certainty. Amen! It will happen as Jesus said, that whenever the apostles' greetings or peace found no reception or no children of peace in a house, their peace returned again to them [Matt. 10:13; Luke 10:6]. So too in this case, since the clergy heed neither prayer nor peace, both prayer and peace will not be lost on that account but will revert to us. And in place of prayers, nothing but curses, in place of peace nothing but discord, and both in abundance, will be the clergy's lot. Amen.
Therefore, because their plans are built exclusively on force and their cause relies on the power of the fist, over against the manifest and known truth of God, no one need fear them. Let everyone be of good cheer and unafraid before such raging foes of God; for they do not cry or pray to God, nor are they able to pray in view of their bad conscience and cause. Out of pride and spite they attack flesh and blood; to do this they need no God, nor do they dare to ask him whether he desires what they are thinking. God surely loves this and takes great delight in it; such defiance and contempt of his grace are most pleasing to him. He makes a practice of rewarding such defiance and arrogance with good fortune and victory—so that both horse and rider lie drowned in the Red Sea and everything is overturned and no one survives. We, however, are quite convinced that their mad undertaking does not rest in their might, but in the hand of God, and that their aims will not so soon be accomplished. He will want to be a Lord over them too, as has always been the case in the past. This they shall indeed experience. But for the present I will assume that there is no God, I will just imagine as in a dream that their plans and plots will proceed and prosper mightily.
If worst comes to worst, then one of two things will happen: either a war or a rebellion will occur, perhaps both at the same time. For there is indeed danger—we are now speaking as in a dream, as if there were no God—that if they initiate a war, an armed troop will organize and a mob band together, perhaps even among their own people, so that both they and we will perish. For in such an event they cannot rely on our teaching and take it for granted that no one will attack them, just because we wrote and taught so emphatically not to resort to rebellion, but to suffer the madness even of tyrants, and not to defend oneself. This is what I teach, but I cannot create the doers of this teaching, since they esteem so little all the other articles of our teaching. If now the masses should reject our teaching against rebellion, especially if they were provoked by such a godless outrage and wanton war, then the devil would make real fools of them and expose them very nicely and neatly. I am still speaking in a dream. But let them see to it that the dream does not come true. The dream does not harm me, but if it hits them, so be it.
All right, if a war or a rebellion should break out as I fear (for God's wrath will have to take its course), I wish to testify before God and all the world here in this writing that we, who are derisively called "Lutherans," neither counseled it or consented to it, nor, indeed, gave any cause for it; rather we constantly and ceaselessly pleaded and called for peace. The papists themselves know and have to admit that we have preached peace up till now and have also kept the peace, and that peace was also our ardent desire now at the diet. Consequently, if a war or a rebellion should break out, it can under no circumstances be said, "See, that is the fruit of Lutheran teaching." It will rather have to be said, "See, that is the papists' teaching and its fruit; they want peace neither for themselves nor for others." Until now we have taught and lived quietly. We drew no sword and did not burn, murder, or rob anyone, as they have done in the past and still do; rather we endured their murder and pillage, their raving and raging with the greatest patience.
Furthermore, when our people were threatened and challenged, defied, jeered, and mocked at the diet by the papists, they humbled themselves most abjectly and let themselves simply be trampled underfoot. Despite all, they asked and pleaded for peace, and they offered to do all that God might want. That would have been more than enough, even if our party were mere beggars, to say nothing of the fact that they are great princes, lords, and godly and honorable people. Therefore, I believe that there have been but few instances of such a confession and of such humility and of such patience as long as Christendom has existed, and I trust this will not be exceeded before the Last Day. Yet all of this was of no avail. Münzer and the insurrectionists did not act thus; they did what the papists are doing now. They, too, neither wanted to have peace nor would they grant it to others. They resorted to violence; they listened to no mediation and no overtures, but insisted on having their own way. Moreover, they refused to submit their teaching to a hearing as our people now have done at Augsburg, but without further ado they condemned all other teaching and exalted their own by every means. In the same way the papists now refuse to make their document public, and yet they condemn our teaching.6 We shall hear more of that later. In brief, we cannot be blamed or accused either before God or before the world of fomenting war or insurrection.
Since our conscience is clear and pure and assured in this matter, and that of the papists must be guilty and impure and filled with misgiving, let come what may, even the worst, be it war or rebellion—whatever God's wrath decrees. If an uprising should result, my God and Lord Jesus Christ is well able to save me and mine, as he rescued dear Lot in Sodom, and as he saved me in the recent uprising when I was in danger of life and limb more than once. And yet this is the thanks I earned by my efforts from those incorrigible scoundrels; I mean the papists. If God does not see fit to rescue me, I will nonetheless praise and thank him. I have lived long enough, I have certainly earned death, and I have begun to avenge my Lord Jesus properly on the papacy. Only after my death will they begin really to take Luther seriously.8 Even now, if I were to be murdered in such a papist and clerical uprising, I would take a throng of bishops, priests, and monks with me, so that people would say that Doctor Martin had been escorted to his grave in a grand procession. For he was a great doctor over all bishops, priests, and monks; therefore it is fitting that they go to the grave with him, lying on their backs. People will sing and talk about it. Thus in the end we will undertake a little pilgrimage together—they, the papists, into the abyss of hell to their god of lies and murder, whom they served with lies and murder; I to my Lord Jesus Christ, whom I served in truth and peace.
For it is easy to figure out that whoever kills Doctor Luther in an uprising will not spare many of the priests either. Thus we shall go to our death together, they to hell in the name of all devils, I to heaven in the name of God. No one can harm me, that I know; nor do I desire to do harm to anyone else. But whatever evil they inflict on me, I will outdo them. No matter how hard their heads may be, they will find mine still harder. Even if they had not only Emperor Charles on their side but also the emperor of the Turks, they would not intimidate or frighten me; rather I will intimidate and frighten them. In the future they will yield to me; I will not yield to them. I will survive, they will perish. They have miscalculated grievously, for my life will be their hangman, my death will be their devil. This is what they will discover, nothing else; just let them laugh impudently about it now.
On the other hand, if this ends in a war, I will again have to resign myself to it, together with my followers, and await what our God will advise and decree in this matter. He has always faithfully assisted and never forsaken us. Here again we enjoy a great advantage. In the first place, it will not harm us if we die or come to grief, for it is written, "Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake" [Matt. 5:10]. We are convinced that he who says that does not lie. The papists themselves know and confess—and may the devil thank them if they should say otherwise—that our teaching is contrary neither to any article of the Creed nor to the Holy Scriptures; rather it is contrary to the customs of their church and the laws of the popes. Therefore they cannot revile us as heretics without giving their own heart and mouth the lie, since no one may be dubbed a heretic who does not teach contrary to Holy Scripture or the articles of faith. Much less may they punish us or wage war against us as heretics. As liars against themselves, as assassins and traitors, they have hitherto defamed Leonard Keiser11 and his like as heretics, burned them at the stake, murdered and persecuted them. And they have not yet shown any contrition or repentance for this, but remain hardened in such blood and lies. Who should be afraid of such warriors?
In the second place, we know that they are unable to begin such a war in the name of God, nor are they able to pray for it and invoke God's help. And I challenge them all, collectively and individually, to say to God with a sincere heart: "Help us, God, to fight in defense of this cause!" For their conscience is too burdened, not only with lying, blaspheming, blood, murder, and all other abominations but, over and above all this, with hardened and impenitent hearts and sins against the Holy Spirit. Consequently, since they wage war with a bad conscience for a blasphemous cause, good fortune and success cannot attend them. Therefore we will speak a blessing over them, which will read as follows: "May God give you success and victory in proportion to your uprightness before God and the goodness of your cause! Amen!" You will fare as we Germans did when we ventured to break the peace with St. John Huss and fought against the Bohemians. On that occasion the pope also handed us over to the slaughter, so that we had to satisfy his pleasure with our blood and heads, and we fought against truth and justice. Now you are doing the same thing, and so the pope, this most holy father and kind shepherd of our souls, will again have occasion to laugh up his sleeve if he can stir up such a welcome bloodbath among us. However, God can easily raise up a Judas Maccabeus13 (even if my followers and I sit by quietly and suffer) who will smash Antiochus with his army and teach him real warfare, as he taught us how to wage war and how to keep the peace through the Bohemians.
Nor will my followers and I leave off praying and imploring God to give them a despondent, timid, and craven heart when on the battlefield, to prick the conscience of one and then another and prompt them to say: "Alas! Alas! I am engaged in a perilous war. We are espousing an evil cause and fighting against God and his word. What will be our fate? Where are we going?" And when they see a Maccabean warrior coming at them, they will disperse and scatter like chaff before the wind. Do you not believe that God is still able to do this? He says to his people, "I will send faintness into your hearts, so that when you go out one way against your enemies, you shall flee seven ways before them; the sound of a driven leaf shall put you to flight" [Lev. 26:36; Deut. 28:25]. Truly, that is what he also did to the obdurate Egyptians in the Red Sea. They were probably as obstinate and secure as the papists are. Yet when the hour came that their conscience smote them, they cried, "Alas, let us flee, for the Lord is fighting against us" [Exod. 14:25]. Let him who does not know what it means to wage war with a bad conscience and a despondent heart try it now. If the papists wage war, he will experience it, just as our ancestors did in a similar situation against the Bohemians and Zizka. And we will not suppress our prayer but will offer it publicly; it will be the seventh psalm, which in its first combat slew all of Israel, so that twenty thousand men, together with Absalom, lay dead on the battlefield, slain by a small number.15 For it has a sufficient stock of guns, powder, and armor—that I know for a certainty.
In the third place, it is not fitting for me, a preacher, vested with the spiritual office, to wage war or to counsel war or incite it, but rather to dissuade from war and to direct to peace, as I have done until now with all diligence. All the world must bear witness to this. However, our enemies do not want to have peace, but war. If war should come now, I will surely hold my pen in check and keep silent and not intervene as I did in the last uprising. I will let matters take their course, even though not a bishop, priest, or monk survives and I myself also perish. For their defiance and boasting are intolerable to God; their impenitent heart is carrying things too far. They were begged, they were admonished, they were implored for peace beyond all reasonable measure. They insist on forcing the issue with flesh and blood; so I, too, will force the issue with them through the Spirit and through God and henceforth set not one or two papists but the entire papacy against me, until the Judge in heaven intervenes with signs. I will not and cannot be afraid of such miserable enemies of God. I disdain their defiance, and I laugh at their wrath. They can do no more than deprive me of a sack of ailing flesh. [/uBut they shall soon discover of what I am able to deprive them.
Furthermore, if war breaks out—which God forbid—I will not reprove those who defend themselves against the murderous and bloodthirsty papists, nor let anyone else rebuke them as being seditious, but I will accept their action and let it pass as self-defense. I will direct them in this matter to the law and to the jurists. For in such an instance, when the murderers and bloodhounds wish to wage war and to murder, it is in truth no insurrection to rise against them and defend oneself. Not that I wish to incite or spur anyone on to such self-defense, or to justify it, for that is not my office; much less does it devolve on me to pass judgment or sentence on him. A Christian knows very well what he is to do—namely, to render to God the things that are God's and to Caesar the things that are Caesar's [Matt. 22:21], but not to render to the bloodhounds the things that are not theirs. I want to make a distinction between sedition and other acts and to deprive the bloodhounds of the pretext of boasting that they are warring against rebellious people and that they were justified according to both human and divine law; for so the little kitten is fond of grooming and adorning itself. Likewise, I do not want to leave the conscience of the people burdened by the concern and worry that their self-defense might be rebellious. For such a term would be too evil and too harsh in such a case. It should be given a different name, which I am sure the jurists can find for it.
We must not let everything be considered rebellious which the bloodhounds designate as such. For in that way they want to silence the lips and tie the hands of the entire world, so that no one may either reprove them with preaching or defend himself with his fist, while they keep their mouth open and their hands free. Thus they want to frighten and ensnare all the world with the name "insurrection," and at the same time comfort and reassure themselves. No, dear fellow, we must submit to you a different interpretation and definition of that term. To act contrary to law is not rebellion; otherwise every violation of the law would be rebellion. No, he is an insurrectionist who refuses to submit to government and law, who attacks and fights against them, and attempts to overthrow them with a view to making himself ruler and establishing the law, as Münzer did; that is the true definition of a rebel. Aliud est invasor, aliud transgressor. In accordance with this definition, self-defense against the bloodhounds cannot be rebellious. For the papists are deliberately starting the war; they refuse to keep the peace, they do not let others rest who would like to live in peace. Thus the papists are much closer to the name and the quality which is termed rebellion.
For they have no law, either divine or human, on their side; rather they act out of malice, like murderers and villains, in violation of all divine and human law. That can easily be proved; for they themselves know that our doctrine is correct, and yet they want to exterminate it. Thus a great Nicholas bishop declared in Augsburg that he could tolerate it if everyone believed as they do in Wittenberg; but what he could not tolerate was that such a doctrine should originate in and emanate from such a remote nook and corner. What do you think? Are those not fine episcopal words? The papal legate, Cardinal Campeggio,19 confessed similarly that he could easily accept such a teaching. However, this would establish a bad precedent, and one would then have to accord other nations and kingdoms the same privilege, which would be out of the question. Another important bishop declared of their scholars: "Our scholars do a fine job of defending us. They themselves concede that our cause is not based on Scripture." Thus they are well aware that our doctrine is not wrong, but that it is founded on the Scriptures. Yet they condemn us arbitrarily and try to exterminate this doctrine in contravention of divine law and truth.
It is also obvious that they are acting contrary to imperial and to natural law; for in the first place, they hardly gave our side a hearing, and then, when they delivered their tardy, flimsy confutation orally, they simply refused to hand us a copy of it, nor did they give us an opportunity to make reply. To the present day they shun the light like bats. It is, of course, in accord with divine, imperial, and natural law, as the heathen Porcius Festus also held in the controversy between the Jews and St. Paul [Acts 25:16], not to condemn a man without a hearing. Even God did not condemn Adam until he first gave him a chance to reply. We appeared voluntarily at Augsburg and offered humbly and eagerly to render an account. This, however, was maliciously and arbitrarily denied us. Nor did they give us their confutation, no matter how often and how much we pleaded for it. Yet we were condemned by the holy fathers in God and by the Christian princes. O excellent teachers! O fine judges, who force all the world to believe and still dare not to publish what is to be believed! I am expected to believe without knowing what to believe. I am told that I am in error, but I am not shown in what I err!
O all you unfortunate people who sided with the pope at Augsburg! All your descendants will forever have to be ashamed of you. They will be unhappy to hear that they had such miserable ancestors. If we had shunned the light and refused to give answer, you would have compelled us to do so. Now we come along, not only willing and glad to give an account, but we plead, implore, and clamor for a chance to do this. We go to great expense to do so, neglect many things, and suffer every indignity, mockery, contempt, and danger, and you shamefully and maliciously refuse our request. If we had not asked for or desired to have your bat or night owl, that is, your confutation, you would have transmitted it to us against our wishes. Now that we ask for it, complain, and persist in demanding it, you deny us your confutation and refuse to receive our reply.
Shame on this diet for its disgraceful action! The like of it was never held or heard of before and never will be held or heard of again. It must be an eternal blemish on all princes and the whole empire, and makes all of us Germans blush with shame before God and all the world. What will the Turk and his whole realm say when they hear of such an unparalleled action of our empire? What will the Tartars and the Muscovites say to this? Who under heaven will henceforth fear us Germans or regard us as honorable when they hear that we permit the accursed pope and his masks to hoax and dupe us, to treat us as children, yes, as dolts and clods, that we, for the sake of their blasphemous, sodomitic, shameful teaching and life, act so disgracefully, so very, very shamefully and contrary to law and truth in a public diet? Every German should on this account rue having been born a German and being called a German.
However, I am very willing to believe that a special portion of shrewdness prompts them to hold back their confutation and their fine little booklet. Their conscience must sense instinctively that it is a flimsy, empty, and meaningless thing of which they would have to be ashamed if it were made public and examined in the light of day, or if it were to be answered. For I know those highly learned doctors very well who no doubt brewed and stewed over it for six weeks. Perhaps with their babbling they can impress those unfamiliar with the subject; but when it is put on paper, it has neither hands nor feet, and lies there confounded and confused, as though a drunkard had spewed it forth. This is especially apparent in the writings of Dr. Schmid and Dr. Eck.23 There is neither head nor tail to it when they commit things to writing. For that reason they apply themselves so much the more to shouting and chattering.
I also heard that many of our opponents were astonished when our confession was read and admitted that it was the simple truth and could not be refuted with Scripture. On the other hand, when their confutation was read, they hung their heads and admitted by their expressions that it was a flimsy and empty thing compared with our confession. Our people and many godly hearts rejoiced greatly and were wonderfully strengthened when they heard that the opponents with the utmost might and skill they could muster at the time could produce no more than this empty confutation, which—God be praised—a woman, a child, a layman, a peasant is now able to refute, buttressed with good arguments from the Scriptures and from truth. That is the true and real reason why they declined to hand us their confutation. Those fugitive, bad consciences shudder at themselves and are not prepared for truth's reply.
It is easy to see that they were very confident when they arranged for this diet and were convinced that our side would lack the courage to appear. They thought that when they brought the emperor in person to Germany, all would be frightened and say, "Gracious lords, what is your wish?" When they proved mistaken in this and the elector of Saxony was the very first to make his appearance, my heavens, how they soiled their breeches in their trepidation! How all their confidence vanished! How they put their heads together, took secret counsel with one another and whispered! No one—not Christ himself, or even I—was permitted to know what it was all about, just as little as we knew about the princes' plotting prior to this year. In the final analysis they were trying to find ways and means to avoid giving our people an opportunity to be heard, for our people were the first to arrive, and they appeared to be very bold and cheerful. As this was impossible, they nevertheless did themselves the honor in the end of refusing to hand us their vapid confutation and to give us an opportunity to make reply.
Their insolent mouthpiece and bloodthirsty sophist, Dr. Eck, one of their foremost advisers, declared openly within the hearing of our people that if the emperor had followed the resolution arrived at in Bologna and attacked the Lutherans promptly and swiftly with the sword upon his entry into Germany, beheading one after the other, then the problem would have been solved; but all that had come to nought when he permitted the elector of Saxony to speak and defend himself through his chancellor. What do you think of such doctors and holy fathers? How imbued with love and truth they are! Thus the secret deliberations had to come to light which the papal holiness had conducted in Bologna with the emperor. What a fine spectacle would have evolved if the emperor had followed such papistic and devilish advice and initiated this event with murder! That would have resulted in such a diet that not a fingernail either of the bishops or of the princes would have remained. And all this in these perilous times when everything is so unsettled and confused and when all the world was looking forward to a benevolent diet, as the summons had intimated and asserted. However, the expectations were not fulfilled.
Someone may interpose that the emperor was willing to hand us their confutation if we had promised not to make it public. That is true; this was suggested to our side. But here let everyone feel and grope, even if he cannot see and hear, to learn what kind of people they are who do not wish or dare to have their cause exposed to the light of day. If it is really such a precious thing and so well grounded in the Scriptures, as they shout and boast, why does it shun the light? What good does it do to conceal such public matters from us and from everyone? After all, they must be taught and observed by them. But if it is unfounded and without meaning, why then did they have the elector of Brandenburg proclaim and publish in writing at the time of the first recess that our confession was refuted by Scripture and sound reason?27 If that were true and if their own conscience did not give them the lie, they would not only have had such a precious and well-documented confutation read, but they would also have handed it to us in writing, saying, "There you have it. We challenge anyone to refute that." That is what we did, and still do, with our confession.
However, Christ must remain truthful when he says: "For every one who does evil hates the light, and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. But he who does what is true comes to the light, that it may be clearly seen that his deeds have been wrought in God" [John 3:20–21]. In accord with this judgment of Christ, God permitted our people to come away from this diet decked with such eternal glory that even our adversaries have to confess that we did not avoid the light but most boldly and cheerfully sought out and expected it. They, on the other hand, were left there covered with such eternal disgrace that they avoided and shunned the light most shamefully and obviously like night owls and bats, yes, like their father of lies and murder, and were unable to expect or tolerate a rejoinder to their loose, hollow, and obscure prattle.
It is also an indication of a fine Christian attitude that they asked our people to pledge themselves to prevent the precious knowledge and well-grounded wisdom of their confutation from leaking out and becoming public. How thoroughly God has blinded and abased the papists, so that they no longer have either reason or shame! How is it possible—to leave aside the question of whether it is right—to promise to keep such a document secret, which had passed through so many hands and had already been read once before the diet? Then if it would have been made public later on by their own faction, we would have been blamed for it.
Godless reason must take recourse to such cleverness and petty artifices because it cannot bear the truth and the light; nor can it find a better excuse for remaining in the dark and refusing to publish its confutation. Well and good, let it remain in the dark where it is; moreover, it shall ever remain in the eternal hellish darkness. But on the day of judgment, if not before, it will come into the light only too clearly.
Yes, you will say, but even though they did not issue their confutation or allow it to be answered, they did appoint instead a committee composed of several princes and scholars from each side and ordered them to discuss the matter at issue in a friendly manner. Little kitten, clean and groom yourself, we are going to have company! How stupid and foolish is that poor man Christ, not to notice such cunning. The committee did convene, that is true; but what was discussed? Nothing at all about their confutation or refutation; that remained in the dark. The committee had to help in preserving appearances, so as to provide some pretense for keeping the inane confutation under cover and not making it public. For it was not their confutation that was submitted in the committee meeting, but our confession. Their deliberations with our people revolved about such questions as how much of our confession we were willing to drop and withdraw, or how they interpreted it, or how we could make it harmonize with their views. Their one aim and objective was to enable them to make a fine pretense and to raise the hue and cry: "You see, dear people, listen, all the world, and hear how stubborn and stiff-necked the Lutherans are! In the first place, their confession was disproven with Scripture and with well-founded reasons, and then we engaged in friendly discussions with them. What more can we do? They refuse to yield, whether they are overcome or whether instructed in a friendly manner."
All right, we must put up with their clamor and their lies; however, I know that this will not help them. God, too, has already given them and they're boasting the lie. For when this recess was announced by the elector of Brandenburg and it was proclaimed that our confession had been refuted with the Scriptures and with valid reason, our people did not accept it, nor did they keep silent, but boldly and publicly contradicted it before the emperor and the empire and affirmed that our confession had not been refuted, but that it was ordered and founded in such a way that even the gates of hell could not prevail against it. They had to swallow this discomfiture again. For, bluntly stated, what the elector of Brandenburg read out in proclaiming the recess is not true; it is a lie. That is correct, for their well-grounded confutation has not yet been brought to light. It is perhaps still slumbering with old Tannhäuser in the Venusberg.
Since it is evident that they are keeping their confutation secret and have not yet brought it to light on their own, their allegation that our confession had been refuted with the Scriptures and with sound reason is not only a manifest and impudent lie, but it represents the devil's own lie when they boast in the bargain and put up a good front and dare to cry that we are defeated but will not retract. This they do though their conscience mightily convicts them of such lies. So it is obvious that they had to resort to this pretense, as do all those who have a bad cause. They cover up miserably and hatch all sorts of dodges to keep their bad cause from coming to light. In brief, it is plain that they, despairing of their cause, expected nothing less than that our people would appear on the scene. They relied entirely on sheer force and were not at all prepared for truth and light.
The friendly intentions which they had regarding the committee are also very evident from the one point which they dared, among other articles, to propose to our people, namely, that we should teach that in addition to taking the sacrament in two kinds, it was not wrong but right to administer and take it also in only one kind. If we consented to that, they would also make a concession and permit us to teach that the sacrament might be taken and given in both kinds. Does that not betoken a great friendship? Who might have looked for such love from these people? Until now they persecuted as heretics all who took the sacrament in both lands and tormented them in every way. And now they are ready to adjudge this as correct and Christian and let it pass as such, if we but admit that they in turn also do the correct and Christian thing when they take the sacrament in one kind. That is, in plain words, speaking out of both sides of your mouth. It is wrong, and yet it is accounted right, depending upon their whims and will. Yet this dare not be called a lie.
If our side had agreed to this and accepted their proposal, then they really would have boasted and shouted throughout the whole world: "See, dear people, the Lutherans are recanting their doctrine. Formerly they taught that it was wrong to take the sacrament in one kind, and now they teach that it is right. Now you note that we taught correctly, and they are found to be in error in their own confession." In that way they tried to confirm all their abominations and devil's tomfoolery in the eyes of the faithful, simple folk and to arraign us as recanters of all our teaching. Furthermore, they would thus have established their pernicious doctrine in our churches by our own lips and at the same time suppressed our doctrine with might in their churches. They would not at all have taught our doctrine among themselves. In that way they wanted to penetrate and entrench themselves in our churches by means of our own lips and, simultaneously, exclude us from their churches. Are these not fine, friendly, fitting means, well suited to friendly dealings?

QuoteDr. Martin Luther's Warning to His Dear German People

Continued.

As the confutation is, so is the committee. The confutation is a dark night owl, reluctant to face the light; the committee is sheer cunning and deception. The boast that they tried friendly measures with us is just as truthful and sincere as their boast that they refuted our confession with Holy Scripture and sound reason—both are sheer lying and deceit. To be sure, they would not like to be treated that way by us. However, at present I do not propose to write about the actions of this diet, nor to attack their confutation (though both shall yet be attended to if God wills), but at present I merely wish to show that the papists do not want to have peace, truth, or tranquillity, but insist on enforcing their will and thus are bringing about either a war or an insurrection, whether we like it or not. Nothing will restrain them. We, however, will have to take the risk and await the outcome, since our offers, pleas, and cries for peace are unheeded and our humility and patience go for nought. Let come what cannot be prevented!
But since I am the "prophet of the Germans"—for this haughty title I will henceforth have to assign to myself, to please and oblige my papists and asses—it is fitting that I, as a faithful teacher, warn my dear Germans against the harm and danger threatening them and impart Christian instruction to them regarding their conduct in the event that the emperor, at the instigation of his devils, the papists, issues a call to arms against the princes and cities on our side. It is not that I worry that His Imperial Majesty will listen to such spiteful people and initiate such an unjust war, but I do not want to neglect my duty. I want to keep my conscience clean and unsullied at all events. I would much rather compose a superfluous and unnecessary admonition and warning and impart needless instruction than to neglect my duty and then find, if things go contrary to my expectations, that I am too late and have no other consolation than the words non putassem, I did not intend this. The sages suggest making provision for things even if everything is secure. How much less may we trust any wind and weather, no matter how pleasant it may appear, in these difficult times when the papists' raging provokes God's wrath so terribly! Moreover, in Romans 12 Paul commands those who preside over others to look out for them.
Any German who wants to follow my sincere counsel may do so; and whoever does not want to may disregard it. I am not seeking my own benefit in this, but the welfare and salvation of you Germans. Nothing better could happen to my person than that the papists devour me, tear me, or bite me to pieces, or help me out of this sinful, mortal bag of maggots in any other way. No matter how angry they are, I will say to them: "Dear Sirs, if you are angry, step away from the wall, do it in your underwear, and hang it around your neck!" In brief, I will not have them boast to me and defy me. For I know—God be praised—what my position is and where I shall stay. If they do not want to accept my service for their own good, then may the vile devil thank them if they show me a driblet of love or grace. If they do not need my doctrine, I need their grace still less, and I will let them rage and rant in the name of all devils, while I laugh in the name of God.
This is my sincere advice: If the emperor should issue a call to arms against us on behalf of the pope or because of our teaching, as the papists at present horribly gloat and boast—though I do not yet expect this of the emperor—no one should lend himself to it or obey the emperor in this event. All may rest assured that God has strictly forbidden compliance with such a command of the emperor. Whoever does obey him can be certain that he is disobedient to God and will lose both body and soul eternally in the war. For in this ease the emperor would not only act in contravention of God and divine law but also in violation of his own imperial law, vow, duty, seal, and edicts. And lest you imagine that this is just my own idea or that such advice is dictated by my fancy, I shall submit clear and strong reasons and arguments to convince you that this is not my own counsel, but God's earnest, manifold, and stringent command. Before his anger you surely ought to be terrified and, in the end, must be terrified.
In the first place, I must say a word in defense of dear Emperor Charles' person. For he has to date, also at the diet, conducted himself in such a way that he has gained the favor and affection of all the world and is worthy of being spared all grief. Our people, too, have nothing but praise for his imperial virtues. Let me cite just a few examples to demonstrate this. It demonstrates a wonderful and rare gentleness of character that His Imperial Majesty refused to condemn our doctrine even though he was vehemently incited and urged on by both the spiritual and secular princes, with unrelenting insistence, even before he left Spain. However, His Majesty stood his ground as firmly as a rock. He hurried to the diet and issued a gracious invitation, wanting to discuss matters in a kind and friendly spirit. He is also reported to have declared: "This cannot be such an utterly evil doctrine, since so many great, exalted, learned, and honest people accept it."
And this was borne out at Augsburg. When our confession was read before His Imperial Majesty, the opposition itself discovered that this teaching was not as evil as it had been pictured by their venomous preachers and sycophants and hateful princes. Indeed, they had not expected that it was such sound doctrine. Many of them confessed that it was pure Scripture, that it could not be refuted by Holy Scripture, and that previously they had been entirely misinformed. That is also the reason why permission to read the confession was granted so reluctantly; for the envious princes and the virulent liars were indeed worried that their vile lies would be put to shame if it was read. It was their wish that His Imperial Majesty should condemn everything at once, unread and unheard. But since His Imperial Majesty could not have it read publicly in the presence of all, he at least had it read and heard before the imperial estates, no matter how the other princes and bishops and sophists opposed this and were bitterly vexed by it.
And although the diet involved a great expenditure of money and it seems that nothing was accomplished there, I nevertheless will say for myself that even if it had consumed twice as much money, all is richly compensated for and enough has been achieved, for Sir Envy and Master Liar were disgraced in their envying and lying. They had to see and hear that our doctrine was not found to be contrary to the Scriptures or the articles of faith. For prior to this, their lies and envy portrayed our doctrine everywhere, through their writings, their sermons, and their slander, as more horrible than any other that has ever seen the light of day. This envy, I say, was put to shame at the diet, and these lies were disclosed. Therefore we must be kindly disposed toward our dear Emperor Charles and thank him for this benefit, that God through him initially adorned our doctrine and delivered it from the false and ridiculous labels of heresy and of other shameful names, and that he thus administered a sound slap on the mouth of these lying and envious people. Of course, they are brazen-faced and unashamed. But this does not matter; the beginning is good enough for us, and, I suppose, things will also improve.
Furthermore, His Imperial Majesty is reported to have said that if the priests were godly, they would not need a Luther. What else does that mean other than what Solomon said: "Inspired decisions are on the lips of a king" [Prov. 16:10]. His Majesty wishes to indicate that Luther is the priests' scourge, that they are well deserving of this, and that their conduct is reprehensible. They themselves have admitted that often enough. For the bishop of Salzburg remarked to Master Philip: "Alas, why do you propose to reform us priests? We priests never have been any good." See and hear those godly people! They know and they confess that they are evil and that they are in error; moreover, they want to stay that way, remain unreformed, and not yield to the acknowledged truth. Yet they clamor and call upon the emperor and all princes to go to war for them and to protect them. What else does that mean than this: Dear Emperor, dear Germans, wage war, shed your blood, stake all your property, your life, your wife and child on protecting us in our shameful, devilish life against the truth. Certainly we know the truth but we cannot stomach it; nor do we want to mend our ways. What do you think? If you go to war and shed your blood for such people are you not a fine martyr, and do you not invest your blood and your property very wisely?
Furthermore, when our people wanted to hand His Imperial Majesty their answer to the sophists' confutation—as much of it as had been retained after the reading—and His Imperial Majesty extended his hand to receive it, King Ferdinand pulled the hand of His Imperial Majesty back, restraining him from accepting it. This again reveals the identity of the people who vent their hatred and their envy under the name of His Imperial Majesty; for the latter was minded and inclined otherwise.
Furthermore, when the elector of Brandenburg in the recess argued with fine and high-sounding and haughty words that His Imperial Majesty, the princes, and the estates of the empire had leagued together and were staking land and people, life and property and blood on this, he wanted to intimidate our people with these words. But he failed to add "if God wills," so his words remained mere words and died as soon as they were spoken. When the sound had faded away, no one was afraid. Here His Imperial Majesty again interposed a word. To be sure, he did not say that the speaker was lying, but that he had made an overstatement. Many other great princes and lords were nonplussed and were at a loss to know how to interpret these words. Several suggested that they meant that if our side would attack any of their members by force, then they would ally themselves and come to the defense with life and goods, with blood, land, and people. However, our people never thought of doing that, but always asked and pleaded for peace, as all know very well. Several declared openly before the emperor that they did not concur in this speech of the margrave and that it did not at all reflect their opinion.
It is easy to talk about land and people; but it is another question if anyone has such power over them that he can wager blood, life, and property needlessly and against God and his law. Experience should be able to answer this question. It seems to me that the people will, at least, first have to be consulted, and that one cannot embark on such a venture without announcing it. It should also be remembered that God must not always grant and do what we may venture to think and say. I am sure that the mouths of greater lords have been found to lie miserably and that their schemes thoroughly put them to shame. But the best part of this is that they fail to invoke God in this and that they fail to bear him in mind when they brag so defiantly. However, one can sense the emperor's sentiments in this matter. He is not such a mad bloodhound, and these defiant words do not please him.
But the dear emperor must share the experience of all godly princes and lords. For whenever a prince is not half a devil and wishes to govern with mildness, the greatest rogues and villains inevitably gain a place in the government and the offices and do as they like under the ruler's name. They need not fear because they know that the prince is gentle and is ready to give them an ear. What can this godly emperor do among so many rogues and villains, especially over against that arch-villain, Pope Clement, who is full of all kinds of malice, which he has to date amply demonstrated to the emperor? I, Dr. Luther, am better versed in Scripture than the emperor, and also more experienced in practical daily life, but still I fear that if I were to dwell among so many rogues and constantly heard their venomous tongues, without any information to the contrary, I would also be too gentle for them and they would overwhelm me in some matters. In fact, this has often happened to me at the hands of certain spirits and wiseacres.
Therefore no one need be astonished or alarmed if prohibitions or edicts are issued under the emperor's name which are contrary to God and justice. He cannot prevent this. Rather he may be assured that all of this is a scheme of the supreme rogue in the world, the pope, who instigates this through his tonsured goats and hypocrites in an attempt to initiate a bloodbath among us Germans so that we may perish. And I for one believe that if he fails to accomplish his end through this emperor, he will join with the Turkish emperor and set him upon us. That is where we will then find the money which we have poured into the pope's treasury these many years for his indulgences and business deals to finance the war against the Turks.
Let this suffice for the time being as an apology for the emperor. Now we want to issue a warning, giving reasons why everyone should rightly beware and fear to obey the emperor in such an instance and to wage war against our side. I repeat what I said earlier, that I do not wish to advise or incite anyone to engage in war. My ardent wish and plea is that peace be preserved and that neither side start a war or give cause for it. For I do not want my conscience burdened, nor do I want to be known before God or the world as having counseled or desired anyone to wage war or to offer resistance except those who are enjoined and authorized to do so (Romans 13). But wherever the devil has so completely possessed the papists that they cannot and will not keep or tolerate peace, or where they absolutely want to wage war or provoke it, that will rest upon their conscience. There is nothing I can do about it, since my remonstrances are ignored and futile.
The first reason why you must not obey the emperor and make war in such an instance as this is that you, as well as the emperor, vowed in baptism to preserve the gospel of Christ and not to persecute it or oppose it. Now you are, of course, aware that in this case the emperor is being incited and duped by the pope to fight against the gospel of Christ, because our doctrine was publicly proved at Augsburg to be the true gospel and Holy Scripture. Therefore, this must be your reply to the emperor's or your prince's summons to arms: "Indeed, dear Emperor, dear prince, if you keep your oath and pledge made in baptism, you will be my dear lord, and I will obey you and go to war at your command. But if you will not keep your baptismal pledge and Christian covenant made with Christ, but rather deny them, then may a rascal obey you in my place. I refuse to blaspheme my God and deny his word for your sake; nor will I impudently rush to spring into the abyss of hell with you."
This first reason has awesome, far-reaching implications. For he who fights and contends against the gospel necessarily fights simultaneously against God, against Jesus Christ, against the Holy Spirit, against the precious blood of Christ, against his death, against God's word, against all the articles of faith, against all the sacraments, against all the doctrines which are given, confirmed, and preserved by the gospel, for example, the doctrine regarding government, regarding worldly peace, worldly estates, in brief, against all angels and saints, against heaven and earth and all creatures. For he who fights against God must fight against all that is of God or that has to do with God. But you would soon discover what kind of end that would lead to! What is even worse, such fighting would be done consciously; for these people know and admit that this teaching is the gospel. The Turks and the Tartars, of course, do not know that it is God's word. Therefore no Turk can be as vile as you, and you must be damned to hell ten times more deeply than all Turks, Tartars, heathen, and Jews.
It is indeed terrible that things have come so far among Christians that this warning becomes necessary, just as though they themselves did not realize how abominable and horrible it is knowingly to contend against God and his word. This indicates that among Christians there are few real Christians and that there must be far worse Turks in their number than are found in Turkey, or even in hell. The true Christians, however few they are, know this very well themselves and do not need such a warning; but the papists do need it. Though they bear the name and the outward appearance of Christians, they disgrace them and are ten times worse than the Turks. They must be warned. If it helps, good and well; if it does not help, we, at least, are blameless, and their punishment will be so much more severe. The Turk is not so mad as to fight and to rage against his Muhammad or against his Koran, as our devils, the papists, do when they rave and rage against their own gospel, which they acknowledge to be true. Such an action makes the Turk, by comparison, a pure saint, and they thereby make themselves true devils.
The second reason is this: Even if our doctrine were false—although everyone knows it is not—you should still be deterred from fighting solely by the knowledge that by such fighting you are taking upon yourself a part of the guilt before God of all the abominations which have been committed and will yet be committed by the whole papacy. This reason encompasses innumerable loathsome deeds and every vice, sin, and harm. In brief, the bottomless hell itself is found here, with every sin, all of which you share in if you obey the emperor in this instance. We shall enumerate a few of these and bring them into view, lest they be too easily forgotten. For the papists would like to cover themselves and hide such abominations, unrepented and unreformed, until such a time as they can bring them into the open again and restore them.
Here you will first have to take upon yourself the whole of the shameful life which they have led and still lead. They do not intend to mend this; however, you are to shed your blood and risk your life for the protection and preservation of their accursed, shameless life. Then all the whoring, adultery, and fornication rampant in the cathedrals and convents will be on your neck and on your conscience. Your heart will have the honor and glory of having fought for the greatest and most numerous whoremongers and knaves to be found On the earth and for endorsing their life of whoring and knavery. You will make yourself a partaker of all of that. Oh, that will be a great honor and a fine reason for risking your life and for serving God. For they will not reform such a life, nor can they reform it, since it is impossible that so many thousands of people should live a chaste life in the way that they try to do it.
Over and above that, you must also burden yourself with the chastity of popes and cardinals. This is a special kind of chastity, transcending the common, spiritual type. In Italian it is termed buseron, which is the chastity of Sodom and Gomorrah. For God was constrained to blind and to plague his enemy and adversary, the pope and the cardinals, above others, so that they did not remain worthy of sinning with wenches in a natural way, but, in accord with their merited reward, they had to dishonor their own body and person through themselves and to sink into such perversion and impenitence that they no longer considered this to be sin, but jested about it as though it were a game of cards about which they might laugh and joke with impunity. Oh, this beer is good and strong, and so it is foaming and casting up all their shame and vice, as Jude says [Jude 13]. Now go and risk your life and fight for these impenitent, shameless Sodomites who even laugh and jest about such blasphemous sins.
I am not lying to you. Whoever has been in Rome knows that conditions are unfortunately worse there than anyone can say or believe. When the last Lateran council was to be concluded in Rome under Pope Leo, among other articles it was decreed that one must believe the soul to be immortal. From this one may gather that they make eternal life an object of sheer mockery and contempt. In this way they confess that it is a common belief among them that there is no eternal life, but that they now wish to proclaim this by means of a bull. More remarkable yet, in the same bull they decided that a cardinal should not keep as many boys in the future. However, Pope Leo commanded that this be deleted; otherwise it would have been spread throughout the whole world how openly and shamelessly the pope and the cardinals in Rome practice sodomy. I do not wish to mention the pope, but since the knaves will not repent, but condemn the gospel, blaspheme and revile God's word, and excuse their vices, they, in turn, will have to take a whiff of their own terrible filth. This vice is so prevalent among them that recently a pope caused his own death by means of this sin and vice.42 In fact, he died on the spot. All right now, you popes, cardinals, papists, spiritual lords, keep on persecuting God's word and defending your doctrine and your churches!
No pope, cardinal, bishop, doctor, priest, monk, or nun will condemn such an obviously disgraceful life; rather they laugh about it, excuse it, and gloss over it. They incite kings, princes, country, and people to defend such knaves with life and property, with land and people, and faithfully to protect them so that such vices might not be repented of and reformed, but rather strengthened, sanctioned, and approved. Now you are to hazard blood, body, and life just for the sake of Saddling your neck and conscience with this. I could easily mention more examples of such abominations, but it is too shameful; I fear that our German soil would have to tremble before it. But if an impudent popish ass should come along and dispute this, he will find me ready to do him battle, and it will be quite a battle! If admonition and warning will bring about repentance, these have been and still are being sufficiently administered. However, this will not help. Today it has become a commendable and common practice, almost equal to a great virtue, completely to disregard repentance. In fact, the emperor and you are to protect and preserve them in this, so that their example may be emulated and spread also to other countries, as, alas, has already too obviously happened.
Furthermore, you will have to encumber yourself with all the greed, robbery, and thievery of the entire papacy, the countless sums they have acquired falsely and fraudulently by means of indulgences. Is it not sheer shameful robbery and thievery throughout all Christendom? Is not the incalculable wealth which they raked in through their false and fabricated purgatory sheer shameful robbery and thievery throughout the whole world? The incalculable wealth they have accumulated with their usurious masses and sacrificial masses, is it not sheer shameful robbery and thievery throughout the whole world? The incalculable wealth they procured through licenses to eat butter during Lent, through pilgrimages, the worship of the saints, and innumerable other deceptions, is it not sheer shameful robbery and thievery throughout the whole world? Where did the pope, cardinals, and bishops acquire kingdoms and principalities? How did they become the secular lords of all the world? Is it not entirely through their infinitely shameful robbery and thievery? What else are they than the greatest robbers and thieves on the face of the earth? And yet you find here no thought of repentance or restitution. Indeed, there is not enough good blood in their veins to enable them to administer their office a little, to give their possession of such property at least a slight semblance of honor. Instead, they condemn, revile, and persecute God's name, his word and work. And now they come and demand that you defend such thieves and robbers with your blood, so that they may not only go uncorrected but may also be encouraged to practice this kind of thing all the more. Consider what a great, mighty thief and rogue, robber and traitor you become and are if you assist and protect such robbers and thieves with your blood and life; for you will burden yourself with all of this and share in their guilt.
Then you must also burden yourself with all the blood the pope has shed, with all the murders and all the wars he has instigated, all the misery and grief he has caused throughout the world. Who can relate all the blood, murders, and wretchedness which the pope and his followers have occasioned? Some have computed that for the pope's sake alone eleven hundred thousand men have been slain since the papacy elevated itself above the empire. Some set the figure higher. How will you bear so many murders and so much blood on your conscience, since one single murder is unbearable, and since Christ condemns even anger in one's heart to hellfire, Matthew 5 [:22]? What then are you doing if you risk your life for such murderers? You share in the guilt of all of this and accord the pope your aid and approval, enabling him to do such things forever with security. For there is no sign of repentance among them; indeed, they regard this as honorable and virtuous, so that we cannot possibly hope for reform. Nor do they desire improvement. But they want you to help protect them, to enable them to murder, to shed blood, and to fill the world with misery, as they have done to date and still do without interruption, restraint, or fear. You see, these are the most holy fathers, the holy cardinals, bishops, and priests who presume to be judges over the gospel and who teach and rule the world.
I will say nothing here about the other vices, how they administer poison and engage in treason and in all that pertains to hatred and envy. Who can tell completely the shameful life in the papacy? The aforementioned items and the everyday examples demonstrate sufficiently what their life is like. For it [the papacy] is to be the Antichrist and to be against Christ in all things. Therefore it must follow that as Christ led and taught a beautiful, splendid, chaste, decent, holy, heavenly, and godly life, the Antichrist must lead and teach a correspondingly shameful, blasphemous, unchaste, accursed, hellish, and devilish life. How else could he be Christ's foe or the Antichrist? All of this might be tolerated if they did not presume to defend it and insist with force on being in the right. But all that we have thus far mentioned is, so to speak, sport and jest. We now want to point out the true dregs and the chief abominations with all of which he must burden himself who protects the pope or who helps to preserve and strengthen him in his impenitent, hardened, anti-Christian status and conduct.
One might tolerate an evil life; but one can and must not tolerate, much less help to defend, a person who condemns doctrine and God's word and who elevates himself over God. They have disseminated so many doctrinal abominations within Christendom that these cannot be numbered. They repent of none of them, nor do they want to change them, but they openly defend them all and rigorously insist on being in the right. All of that would rest on your neck and conscience. You would make yourself a partner of all such abominations and you would be guilty if you helped to defend them. Let us mention just a few. How can your conscience bear the shameful, lying fraud of indulgences, with which they scandalously misled so many thousands of souls, yes, all of Christendom and all the world, deceiving them and defrauding them of their money and property? Yet they do not repent of this, nor do they intend to abrogate this practice, although they are well aware of the great villainy they have committed thereby. They taught the people to place their trust in indulgences, and to die in that belief. This in itself is so atrocious and terrible that if they were otherwise as holy and pure as St. John the Baptist, they should properly be condemned to the depths of hell just for this; they should not be worthy that the earth bear them or the sun shine down on them, much less that we fight for them or defend them.
Think for yourself what a supreme villainy indulgences are. Whoever has comforted himself with and relied on indulgences and has died or lived thus, thereby has forfeited the Savior Jesus Christ; he has denied and forgotten him and he renounces all comfort from him. For whoever places his consolation in anything other than in Jesus Christ can have no consolation in Christ. Of course, we all know, and their books also prove this incontrovertibly, that they taught us to place our reliance on indulgences. Otherwise who would have paid them any heed or bought them? Furthermore, like the devil's messengers and rogues they kept shamefully silent about faith in Christ, yes, even suppressed and exterminated it. For whoever knows that his comfort and his reliance are based on Christ cannot tolerate indulgences or any other object of trust. When will they make amends or restitution for such endless harm? Make amends indeed! Hardened in such malice, they even want to force you to defend them with life and blood and burden yourself with it all. If they were not entirely possessed and mad they would be at least a little ashamed to ask for such defense in view of all their unrepentant, shameless, blasphemous wickedness. That really does go to show that "priests are no good."
Furthermore, how will your conscience bear the blasphemous fraud of purgatory, with which they also treacherously duped and falsely frightened all the world and appropriated almost all its property and splendor by lying and thievery? For with this they also completely extinguished that one and only comfort and trust in Christ and taught Christians to place their attention and expectation and reliance in the bequests which they trust will follow them.48 Whoever looks to and hopes in the bequests or works that follow him at death—as they taught and as they all did—must dismiss Christ from his mind and forget him. Therefore, if God had not especially preserved his own, in death they would have plunged unawares into hell's abyss, together with the Jews and heathen. It is the same as when a person falls headlong from a high mountain; he thinks that he is treading on a solid pathway and then steps aside into the air and plunges down into the valley or the sea. Oh, what murderers of souls they are! Before the day of judgment no human heart will know what great murder they have committed on souls with their purgatory. Much less can the damage and the abominable blasphemy be estimated which they thereby have inflicted on faith and confidence in Christ. Yet there is no repentance for this or any end to it. Instead, they demand that you protect them and help defend them in it.
Furthermore, you have to load yourself down with all the abominations and blasphemies they committed, and still daily commit, throughout the entire papacy with the dear mass, with buying and selling, and with innumerable other desecrations of the holy sacrament, in which they sacrifice God's Son to him continually as though they were better and holier than God's Son. They do not let the sacrament be a gift of God, to be received through faith, but convert it into a sacrifice and a work with which they atone for themselves and for other people and acquire all sorts of grace and aid. Thus they appoint a separate mass for each saint, indeed, for each cause or need. In all their books and teachings you will not find as much as a letter alluding to faith. Everything says and sings that the mass is a sacrifice and a work. Yet nowhere else should faith be taught and practiced as firmly and diligently as in the mass or the sacrament, since Christ instituted it in remembrance of himself. It should be an occasion for proclaiming him, remembering him, and believing in him. However, instead of this, they preach their sacrifice and their work; moreover, they sell them most shamefully. There is no repentance there, but only hardened and dreadful wickedness and the attempt to defend themselves and to protect themselves with your life and limb.
The crude, outward misuse [of the sacrament] was atrocious enough in itself. This was seen in the priests' flippant treatment of the sacrament at masses for the dead, the dedication of churches, or festivals of patron saints. They dealt with it as though it were buffoonery. In a vulgar and impudent way they flocked together for the purpose of gorging and swilling and for the sake of money. Then they became intoxicated, vomited, gained, and brawled. All the villages were full of this shameful abuse. Of this they never repented, nor has it ever been reformed, nor is it acknowledged to be sin by these incorrigible popish asses. However, this is as nothing in comparison with the fine abuse by which they perverted and transformed the sacrament from the common sacrament of the common faith into a private work and sacrifice of certain persons, namely, the priests. That is so terrible that I do not like to reflect on it; such thoughts might well kill a person. But even this abomination is surpassed in their concealment and suppression of the words of the sacrament and faith, so that, as already said, not a letter, not an iota, of it remained in the entire papacy in all the masses and books. This vice beggars description by word and thought. To eternity, no one will be able to rebuke and reprove this sufficiently. Any other vice has its own devil or band of devils to promote it; but I believe that the sacrificial mass is the common work of all the devils, in which they pool all hands, all counsel, all ideas, all wickedness and roguery and in that way have instituted and preserved this abomination. This is evident from the fact that wherever poltergeists have appeared as dead souls throughout the world, they have all asked for the mass. No soul ever asked for or desired Christ; all asked for the mass. So this is a strong indication that the devils have their being nowhere else as markedly as in their servants of the mass, where they dwell shamefully with all lewdness, greed, blasphemy, and every vice. This will surely rank as God's greatest and ultimate wrath on earth prior to the day of judgment; for there can be no wrath to exceed this. There you have the true virtue of the papacy in behalf of which you are to go to war and to shed your blood for the impenitent blasphemers, soulmurderers, and malefactors.
Here someone will perhaps object that I am too free with my name calling and that I can do no more than to scold and abuse people. I should like to reply, first of all, that such scolding is nothing in comparison with the inexpressible baseness in question. For what sort of scolding is it when I call the devil a murderer, a villain, a traitor, a blasphemer, a liar? It is just as though a little breeze were striking him. But what are the popish asses other than devils incarnate who have no repentance but only hardened hearts, who knowingly defend such public blasphemy and who ask for protection in this from the emperor and you? My dear man, abuse and call a popish ass whatever you will or can—it rolls off him like water off a duck's back. He has overdone matters and has far, far, far outstripped your ability to abuse him adequately. Call him a papist and you have hit the mark; then you have said more than the world can comprehend. You cannot call him anything worse. Call him anything else and it is just like pricking a bear with a straw or striking a boulder with a feather.........................

Martin Luther, Luther's Works, Vol. 47: The Christian in Society IV, ed. Jaroslav Jan Pelikan, Hilton C. Oswald, and Helmut T. Lehmann, vol. 47 (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1999), 11–45.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWYk9S7kEIA&t=63s

Hmmmmm? Predominantly Catholic and Catholic lead country of Mexico facilitating a mass invasion of countless more Catholics into our country, as the obvious papal puppets that they are, are now attacking our nations second amendment rights from without as well. Just as papal puppets would also do, seeing that the Vatican does not believe citizens of any nation should have the right to own and or bear arms.

Quote from: Amo on Tue May 30, 2023 - 23:03:27
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWYk9S7kEIA&t=63s

Hmmmmm? Predominantly Catholic and Catholic lead country of Mexico facilitating a mass invasion of countless more Catholics into our country, as the obvious papal puppets that they are, are now attacking our nations second amendment rights from without as well. Just as papal puppets would also do, seeing that the Vatican does not believe citizens of any nation should have the right to own and or bear arms.

Enter the Papal Guards.... Currently only the Swiss remains.

Little known fact:

The 16th Century pontiff Julian II, remembered today as the "Warrior Pope," founded the Swiss Guard during the six-decade long Italian Wars. After cunningly maneuvering his way into the papacy, the 60-year-old Holy Father sought to safeguard his new-found authority against rival cardinals by raising his own armed regiment. In 1506, Julian sent for 150 Swiss mercenaries to make up the force. The guard has served the Vatican ever since.

The Noble Guard, an Italian cavalry unit, was instituted in 1801 to accompany popes when they travelled.

The Palatine Guard was an all-volunteer rifle regiment formed in 1850 by citizens of the Papal States.

Both the Noble and Palatine Guards (ceremonial units) were disbanded in 1970; only the Swiss Guard remain.

Inside The Arms Room of The Swiss Guard

Quote from: Rella on Wed May 31, 2023 - 08:12:13
Enter the Papal Guards.... Currently only the Swiss remains.

Little known fact:

The 16th Century pontiff Julian II, remembered today as the "Warrior Pope," founded the Swiss Guard during the six-decade long Italian Wars. After cunningly maneuvering his way into the papacy, the 60-year-old Holy Father sought to safeguard his new-found authority against rival cardinals by raising his own armed regiment. In 1506, Julian sent for 150 Swiss mercenaries to make up the force. The guard has served the Vatican ever since.

The Noble Guard, an Italian cavalry unit, was instituted in 1801 to accompany popes when they travelled.

The Palatine Guard was an all-volunteer rifle regiment formed in 1850 by citizens of the Papal States.

Both the Noble and Palatine Guards (ceremonial units) were disbanded in 1970; only the Swiss Guard remain.

Inside The Arms Room of The Swiss Guard

Huh. Just like the lefties and elitists. They believe in armed guards, police and or military protection for themselves, but don't think we should have the right to protect just ourselves and families. Being of course, so very much important than we are.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6unrMcObOuA

AI, the Vatican, and a new world order.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I94Ncv7-ZF8

Catholic papal puppet Newsom, in heavily Catholic populated California, wants new amendment to the Constitution to infringe upon our second amendment rights. According to the Vatican's own dictates of course, which would deny the right of any citizens anywhere, to own and or bear arms. Him and his Catholic cohort Trudeau to the north, working to disarm citizens, that they might be helpless before the globalist elites the Vatican is in bed with worldwide. 

https://archive.org/details/the-vatican-in-world-politics-full-avro-manhattan/mode/2up

Found this interesting book at the above link. Good link for many a read. The following description is from link above, where the book may be read as well.

QuoteThe Vatican In World Politics [full] Avro Manhattan

Publication date 1949

The importance of this book cannot be exaggerated. Properly understood, it offers both a clue and a key to the painfully confused political situation that shrouds the world. No political event or circumstance can be evaluated without the knowledge of the Vatican's part in it. And no significant world political situation exists in which the Vatican does not play an important explicit or implicit part. As Glenn L. Archer, Executive Director of Protestants and Other Americans United for Separation of Church and State, puts it, "this book comes to grips with the most vital social and political problems of our day. The author presents with singular clarity and without bias the conflicts between the Roman Church and the freedoms of democracy. " This book is valuable also in that it brings to light historical facts hitherto kept secret, many of them published here for the Catholic Church, seemingly preoccupied only with its religious tasks, is feverishly engaged in a race for the ultimate spiritual conquest of the world.

Not a single event of importance that has contributed to the present chaotic state of affairs has occurred without the Vatican taking an active part in it. The Catholic population of the world—400 millions—is more numerous than that of the United States and Soviet Russia put together. When it is remembered that the concerted activities of this gigantic spiritual mass depend on the lips of a single man, the apathy of non-Catholic American should swiftly turn to keenest attention. His interest, furthermore, should increase when he is made aware that the United States is intimately involved in the attainment of both the immediate and the ultimate goals of the Vatican.

These goals are:

1. The annihilation of Communism and of Soviet Russia.
2. The spiritual conquest of the U. S. A.
3. The ultimate Catholicization of the world.

Do these goals seem fantastic?

Unfortunately they are neither speculation nor wild and idle dreams. They are as indisputable and as inextricably a part of contemporary history as the rise of Hitler, the defeat of Japan, the splitting of the atom, the existence of Communism. Indeed the inescapable alternative by which mankind today is confronted is not whether this will be the American or the Russian Century, but whether this might not after all become the Catholic Century.

Surely, then, the nature, aims and workings of the Catholic Church deserve some scrutiny. The American citizen, perturbed by the past, bewildered by the present and made increasingly anxious about the future, would do well to ponder the exertions of the Vatican in contemporary American and world politics. His destiny as well as the destiny of the United States, and indeed of mankind, has been and will continue to be profoundly affected by the activities of an institution which, although a church, is nonetheless as mighty a political power as the mightiest nation on the planet.the first time.

Baron AVRO MANHATTAN was born April 6, 1914, in Milan, Italy, of American and Swiss/Dutch parents. He was educated at the Sorbonne in Paris and the London School of Economics. He was jailed in Italy for refusing to serve in the Fascist dictator Mussolini's army.

For his service he was made a Knight of Malta, a Knight of the House of Savoy as well as a Knight Templar, a Knight of the Order of Mercedes as well as a member of the Royal Society of Literature. Of his more than 20 books include the best-selling The Vatican in World Politics, was a best-seller translated into most major languages including Chinese and Russian

Table of contents :
CONTENTS
Chapter Links
FOREWORD
PREFACE TO THE AMERICAN EDITION
1 THE VATICAN IN THE MODERN WORLD
2 THE VATICAN STATE
3 THE VATICAN POWER
CONGREGATIONS
TRIBUNALS
4 SPIRITUAL TOTALITARIANISM OF THE VATICAN
5 RELIGIOUS ORDERS
6 THE VATICAN ON WORLD UNREST
7 VATICAN POLICY BETWEEN THE TWO WORLD WARS
8 SPAIN, THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE CIVIL WAR
9 ITALY, THE VATICAN AND FASCISM
10 GERMANY, THE VATICAN AND HITLER
11 THE VATICAN AND WORLD WAR II
12 AUSTRIA AND THE VATICAN
13 CZECHOSLOVAKIA AND THE VATICAN
14 POLAND AND THE VATICAN
15 BELGIUM AND THE VATICAN
16 FRANCE AND THE VATICAN
17 RUSSIA AND THE VATICAN
18 THE VATICAN AND THE UNITED STATES
19 THE VATICAN, LATIN AMERICA, JAPAN, AND CHINA
20 CONCLUSION

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wN_8UPgd_4s

Catholic Cardinal asks Catholics to voluntarily give up their second amendment rights.

http://adventmessenger.org/when-us-catholic-bishops-met-with-white-house-officials-to-discuss-laudato-si-laudate-deum-and-cop28-the-biden-administration-was-receptive-to-the-popes-message/comment-page-1/?unapproved=48920&moderation-hash=bcdb326a59a246596857a1092b7692c3#comment-48920

Article below from link above.

When US Catholic Bishops Met with White House Officials to Discuss Laudato Si', Laudate Deum, and COP28, the Biden Administration was Receptive to the Pope's Message

A Catholic delegation, consisting of three US Catholic bishops and other church representatives, met with senior White House officials on November 17, 2023, to discuss the Pope's message as outlined in Laudato Si' and Laudate Deum prior to the start of COP28, according to The Tablet, a Roman Catholic news agency. According to the report, White House officials were "receptive" and took these faith leaders very "seriously."

The Tablet reported the following:

• "Three U.S. Catholic bishops and the head of a conference of women religious, met with Biden administration officials Nov. 17 to discuss the Catholic Church's priorities for what Pope Francis has called 'our suffering planet'." [1]

• "Leading members of the delegation included Archbishop John C. Wester of Santa Fe, New Mexico; Bishop Edward J. Weisenburger of Tucson, Arizona; and Bishop Joseph J. Tyson of Yakima, Washington; along with Sister Carol Zinn, a Sister of St. Joseph of Philadelphia and the executive director of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, which represents 302 U.S. religious congregations, who went to the White House to share their concerns in advance of COP28, the United Nations climate change conference held in Dubai, United Arab Emirates." [1]

• "The delegation spoke with the White House's John Podesta, senior adviser to the president for clean energy innovation and implementation; Ali Zaidi, national climate adviser; and John McCarthy, senior adviser for political engagement." [1]

• "We're men and women of the church," Bishop Weisenburger told OSV News. 'And we echo what we find in Scripture, consistent church teaching — and brought into beautiful focus by Pope Francis in Laudato Si' and Laudate Deum— that this is not just a scientific matter or issue. This is a theological and spiritual matter." [1]

• "He [Catholic Bishop Weisenburger] found the Biden administration's representatives receptive to that message." [1]

• "Ellis [a member of the Catholic delegation] was impressed by 'how seriously the White House took these faith leaders'." [1]

The Vatican and the US are forming a new alliance, and it is very concerning to see the two superpowers of Bible prophecy—the US and Rome—uniting to advance the Pope's agenda. It's official now. The US and the Vatican will work together on a shared vision—to promote the teachings of Rome in our nation and the world, exactly as Revelation 13 predicts. Three Catholic social teachings that are enshrined in the Pope's message are the common good (a new just global order), ecological conversion (Sunday laws), and a universal fraternity (the three-fold union of apostate Protestants, Catholics, and spiritualism). These encapsulate the main points taught by Pope Francis.

Brothers and sisters, the handwriting is on the wall. In light of Bible prophecy, in light of this historical collaboration, in light of the dangers against true religious liberty, and in light of the law of God that becomes desecrated by the exaltation of papal falsehoods, Protestant America is truly becoming "an image of the Roman hierarchy" (Spirit of Prophecy, vol. 4, p. 278).

What will be next? Inspiration reveals what comes next:

"Protestantism shall give the hand of fellowship to the Roman power. Then there will be a law against the Sabbath of God's Creation, and then it is that God will do His 'strange work' in the earth" (Bible Commentary, Vol. 7, p. 910).

In any event, prophecy indicates that such public expressions of affection for Rome by our political leaders will continue to escalate until our lawmakers ultimately repeal the US Constitution.

"Our country shall repudiate every principle of its Constitution as a Protestant and Republican government and shall make provision for the propagation of papal falsehoods and delusions, then we may know that the time has come for the marvelous working of Satan and that the end is near" (Testimonies, Vol. 5, p. 451).

"Political corruption is destroying love of justice and regard for truth, and even in free America rulers and legislators, in order to secure public favor, will yield to the popular demand for a law enforcing Sunday observance" (Last Day Events, p. 129).

The Second Coming of Christ must indeed be at the door because we are seeing things today that were unimaginable only a few years ago. The restoration of the papacy to its former glory is a fulfillment of Bible prophecy. The healing of the deadly wound can only take place when the United States enforces the doctrines of Rome by law.

"And he (USA) exerciseth all the power of the first beast (papacy) before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed." Revelation 13:12.

How will the healing of the deadly wound be completed? How will Rome's temporal power be restored to its former prestige? This will happen when our nation begins to implement the Pope's agenda by law. And the Biden Administration appears to be in full alignment with Pope Francis' vision.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlJaFK_lXbg

The above video is a rare admission of papal policy, practice, and support of the globalist "Commy" agenda, on somewhat mainstream media. I am sure there are many conservative Catholics who agree with this assessment of the present and recent popes, whose voices are silenced along with the rest of us. The only fault I find with the video is the impression that popes and the Vatican supporting truly evil government, is somewhat of a new development, though such is not plainly stated. Such has been their agenda and practice since their inception as government supported and enforced religion of the state as far back at least as Constantine. Nevertheless, I am glad to see such frank admission of the papacies evil agenda exposed on a large platform.

I just saw this article which somebody gave me the link to.

https://thepeoplesvoice.tv/pope-francis-declares-klaus-schwab-is-more-important-than-jesus-christ/

Quoted article below from link above. My comments in blue.

Pope Francis Declares Klaus Schwab Is 'More Important' Than Jesus Christ

The world has entered dark and stormy times, according to Pope Francis who says humanity must put its faith in World Economic Forum founder Klaus Schwab who is the man with the plan to restore nature to its position of primacy in the world order.

According to Pope Francis, Klaus Schwab has emerged as a "more important figure" than Jesus Christ in the current era because Jesus wants to save souls, and Schwab understands that we need less souls.

Pope Francis' comments have caused a storm in the Vatican, but should we really be surprised by his support for Schwab's Nazi-style eugenics program? As an Agenda Contributor at the WEF, Pope Francis is fluent in blasphemy and is actively working to subvert the church and Christianity in general.

Should we really be surprised that the blasphemous Pope is siding with the globalists?

This is the pope who joined forces with Bill Clinton last month to announce that humanity must be urgently depopulated to save the planet.

And this is the pope who informed his flock that "relationships with Jesus are dangerous and harmful." Breaking with centuries of Christian tradition, Francis sparked fears that he is an illegitimate pope with a sinister agenda when he told a crowd of 33,000 pilgrims in St. Peter's Square that "a personal, direct, immediate relationship with Jesus Christ" must be avoided at all costs.

As though that wasn't disturbing enough, Francis followed up by ordering Christians to stop bringing people from other faiths to Jesus and Christianity.

And then he ordered his lackeys in the Vatican to proclaim that Lucifer is the God of the Catholic Church.

Pope Francis is a Satanist hiding in plain sight.

That's right, according to Pope Francis' twisted mind, Lucifer is Jesus Christ's father and the God of the Catholic Church.

Pope Francis' inverted version of Christianity is confusing for many, however the picture becomes clear when you understand who the pontiff is really serving.

To quote French presidential candidate Marine Le Pen, Pope Francis is a "globalist bulldog" who is loyal to the New World Order.

WikiLeaks emails taught us that Francis was installed in the Vatican in a globalist coup orchestrated by George Soros, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

And the globalist bulldog wasted no time repaying his globalist masters by repeating disturbing globalist rhetoric at every opportunity.

In 2017, Pope Francis called for a "one world government" and "political authority", arguing that the creation of the one world government is needed to combat issues such as "climate change."

Speaking with Ecuador's El Universo newspaper, the Pope said that the United Nations does not have enough power and must be granted full governmental control "for the good of humanity."

Disturbingly, world religious leaders are also beginning to come together as one to preach from the same hymn sheet, instructing their sheep to accept the components of the New World Order's one world government.

Now, Pope Francis is actively defying Biblical scripture by working to create a "one world religion."

First Francis shocked the Christian world by hosting Islamic prayers and Quran recitals in the Vatican.

Christians around the world should visit mosques and praise Allah, according to Pope Francis who led by example on his visit to Istanbul by entering the Blue Mosque, taking off his shoes, facing Mecca, and praising the Muslim god.

Then came the pagan ceremony and brazen idol worship on Vatican grounds.

Somebody needs to remind Francis that the Bible says "You shall have no other gods before me." This is expressed in Exodus 20:3, Matthew 4:10, Luke 4:8 and elsewhere.

But it's unlikely Francis would be interested. He is more interested in overruling God's word and eradicating Christianity in favor of what he calls "Chrislam."

In case you missed it, world leaders from a diverse collection of communities called for world unity at an inter-religious conference in Kazakhstan last year. According to Francis, "religious pluralism," which is expressly forbidden in the Bible, is an expression of "the wisdom of God's will."

Here is some of the story from the Catholic News Agency:

QuoteThe interreligious congress in which Pope Francis participated this week in Kazakhstan adopted a declaration calling religious pluralism an expression "of the wisdom of God's will in creation."

The 35-point declaration was "adopted by the majority of the delegates" of the Seventh Congress of the Leaders of World and Traditional Religions Sept. 15 in the capital city of Nur-Sultan.

Pope Francis participated in the opening and closing ceremonies of the interreligious summit during his Sept. 13–15 visit to the Central Asian country.

It's not the first time the pope has encouraged humanity to accept the New World Order and all that it entails.

In 2019, Pope Francis signed a historic covenant with leaders of the world's major faiths, pushing us much closer to a one-world religion, one of the major goals of the New World Order.

According to the document produced by Pope Francis and published on the Vatican's official website, all religions must be considered equal, and Islam is as acceptable to God as Christianity.

In reality, the call for global government and one world religion by Pope Francis and other wealthy elites has nothing to do with lifting up impoverished nations or "saving humanity." Such a government would instead guarantee global wealth inequality, global surveillance of the kind promoted by Klaus Schwab's WEF, and a world run by the exact corrupt interests who used the pandemic to consolidate wealth and power worldwide.

Is Pope Francis the antichrist?

From the moment that Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio became pope in 2013, "prophecy experts" took to the airwaves, claiming that the new pope is "Peter the Roman," the fulfillment of the "prophecy of St. Malachy" and that Francis will be the final pope and the end of the world.

According to St. Malachy, an Irish saint who had correctly predicted the past 111 popes ahead of the naming of the 112th pope, "Peter the Roman" would be the antichrist.

Doomsday fans have found ways to link each phrase to a corresponding pope through the centuries. That includes John Paul II, who is associated with phrase No. 110, "From the labor of the sun," because he was born on the day of a solar eclipse and was entombed on the day of a solar eclipse as well. Benedict XVI, No. 111, is supposedly "glory of the olive" because some members of a branch of the monastic order founded by St. Benedict are known as Olivetans.

Then there's No. 112. According to St. Malachy: "In the extreme persecution of the Holy Roman Church, there will sit ... Peter the Roman, who will nourish the sheep in many tribulations; when they are finished, the city of seven hills will be destroyed, and the dreadful judge will judge his people. The end."

So how does "Peter the Roman" link to Pope Francis, who was born in Argentina? His parents were Italian immigrants, from Rome, and his birth name contained the name Peter. One theologian, Michael K. Lake, is quoted as saying that "Catholic and evangelical scholars have dreaded this moment for centuries."

The world is now at a tipping point, with a fierce battle raging for the soul of humanity. The globalists and their technocratic dreams of totalitarian rule threaten to consume humanity and destroy civilisation as we know it.

It's clear whose side Francis is on. And we haven't even covered the pedophilia scandal that is rotting the Catholic church from the inside out.

We should keep a very close eye on this Jesuit pope during these pivotal years.

Here at the People's Voice we are determined to continue exposing the agenda of the globalist elite but we need your help. Subscribe to the channel and join the People's Voice Locals community to join our amazing team and gain access to exclusive and uncensored content. I hope to see you there.


The problem with the above article is of course, that the papacy has always been a globalist institution. Believing it their God given right to be the highest moral authority upon earth, and defining authority of the "Common Good" to be enforced upon all the world. Apart from this is the reversal of roles portrayed between the Vatican and politicians. The Vatican has been around much longer than any of today's politicians, preaching these same principles spelled out and published in papal encyclicals and doctrinal notes throughout history. Therefore, politicians of today are increasingly leaning toward and supporting the papacy, not the other way around. While I agree with much of what the above article states, I do not agree with all of it. I do wholly support the idea of much more scrutiny concerning the papacy though, than present politics and or media exercise or even allow for. This institution has proved to be extremely dangerous throughout it's abusive and blood stained history.

  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpCpGmDmPkg

Good video regarding globalization. While the video does briefly address the Holy Roman empire, it as usual, basically leaves the papacy out of the picture. So just add the Vatican and papacy as the original and actual leader of globalists, to the list of globalists in the video, and you will correctly perceive the rest.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ey2bICaV5bo

Excellent video regarding papal politics, practice, and vision throughout history. Addressing much which I have addressed on this thread and these boards, and more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncvWXaImjog

Revelation 13 & Papal Attitudes to Economic, Political, & Religious Liberty | Conrad Vine

Another great one by Conrad Vine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLqItWC0kk0

Classic right wing misdirection from Glenn Beck. The truth in certain areas about what is happening, without really identifying the "culprits" as it were. The papacy, the largest, wealthiest, and most politically influential globalist institution on earth, is right at the center of much Glenn is speaking of. Yet never mentioned by him. It is in cahoots or agreement with the international organizations he mentioned, some whom have obviously been influenced by papal Encyclicals and documents concerning their agenda's. The papacy is also notoriously infamous for its fear of dissent, in labeling dissenters as heretics in the past, to be considered dangerous and dealt with accordingly.

It is in fact the rise of papal religious and political influence once again, that has and continues to fuel the elitist mentality developing the world over. Viewing all dissenters, as terrorists because of the threat they represent to their elitist ideas. To the contrary though, it is these elitist minded leaders under direct papal influence, who are a real live threat to the rest of humanity. Who will destroy the rights and liberties of all in the name of "the common good", and bring the literal destruction of this world to fruition by the direct judgements of God. Precipitating the Lord's return unto this present world's end.   

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQQK70jPzZ0

Video about Vatican influenced globalist embracing paganism as they do.

https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2024-01/marxists-and-christians-to-fight-together-corruption-illegality.html

Quoted article below from link above. My comments in blue.

QuotePope encourages Marxists and Christians to fight corruption, uphold rule-of-law

Pope Francis meets with representatives of the Dialop Transversal dialogue project, an initiative that invites socialists and Christians to work for a common ethic, and invites them to build a better future for our polarised world.

By Salvatore Cernuzio

People who are poor, unemployed, homeless, immigrants, or exploited, as well as all those killed by past dictatorships and turned into rubbish by the "throwaway culture" of the present: the level of a society's civilisation is measured by the way they are treated, the Pope said.

Pope Francis reiterated the centrality of the vulnerable as well as the urgency of countering the triple "scourge" of corruption, abuse of power, and lawlessness—both in politics and in society—in his address on Wednesday with representatives of the DIALOP transversal dialogue project.

This is a dialogue project between socialists/Marxists, communists, and Christians aimed at formulating a common social ethic that can be proposed as a new narrative for a Europe in search of its identity, with an integral ecology between the Social Doctrine of the Church and Marxist social critique at its core.

The initiative was born in 2014 after a meeting between Pope Francis, Alexis Tsipras, then president of the Syriza party and later Greek prime minister after 2015, Walter Baier, president of the Party of the European Left, and Franz Kronreif of the Focolare Movement (both present at the audience).

"Do not stop dreaming"

Pope Francis received this morning, in the Paul VI Hall, before the General Audience, 15 members—7 from the left and 8 Catholics from different European countries—of this association.

He shared with them his pain for a world that today appears "divided by wars and polarizations" and, on the other hand, his encouragement to look to the future and try to imagine a "better world."

"We Argentinians say: don't wrinkle, don't go backwards. And this is the invitation I extend to you too: don't back down, don't give up, don't stop dreaming of a better world."

Freedom, equality, dignity, fraternity

"It is in the imagination, in fact, that intelligence, intuition, experience, and historical memory meet to create, venture, and risk," the Pope stressed.

He recalled how, over the centuries, "it has been the great dreams of freedom and equality, of dignity and fraternity, a reflection of God's dream, that have produced progress and advances."

In this sense, the Pope indicated three attitudes for DIALOP to carry out its commitment: the courage to break the mould, attention to the weak, and promotion of a culture based on the rule-of-law.

Turning the tide

Having the courage to break the mould means "opening up, in dialogue, to new ways."

"In an era marked at various levels by conflicts and disagreements, let us not lose sight of what can still be done to reverse the course," he said.

"Against rigid approaches that divide, let us cultivate confrontation and listening with an open heart, without excluding anyone, at the political, social, and religious levels, so that the contribution of each one can, in his or her concrete peculiarity, be positively accepted in the processes of change to which our future is committed," Pope Francis exhorted.

Criticism of finance and market mechanisms

The Pope then called for constant attention to be paid to the weak because the measure of a civilisation is evident in how it treats those on the margins of society.

In off-the-cuff remarks, the Pope recalled the history of the recent past. "Let us not forget that the great dictatorships—think of Nazism—discarded the vulnerable and killed them," he said.

He urged world leaders to put in place policies that are "truly at the service of humanity," saying society "cannot allow itself to be dictated by finance and market mechanisms."

"Solidarity, besides being a moral virtue, is a requirement of justice, which requires correcting distortions and purifying the intentions of unjust systems, as well as radical changes of perspective in the sharing of challenges and resources among men and among peoples," the Pope said.

And he defined "social poets" those who dedicate themselves to this field, because "poetry is creativity," and here it is a question of "putting creativity at the service of society, so that it becomes more human and fraternal."

Fighting corruption and illegality

Finally, Pope Francis encouraged a culture based on the rule-of-law.

"Fight the scourge of corruption, abuses of power, and illegality," he said, because "only in honesty, in deeds, can healthy relationships be established and we can cooperate with trust and efficiency in the construction of a better future."

Hence he expressed his gratitude for the "courage" to work "for a more just and peaceful world" and the recommendation that "the Gospel of Jesus Christ may always inspire and illuminate your research and actions."

During the audience, the DIALOP group presented to the Pope the results of the work of the last ten years, carried out also with the support of the Dicastery for Catholic Culture and Education.

"Beyond religious and ideological boundaries, Christians and Marxists, as well as people of good will," the association explained in a note, "recognise today that they are united in their commitment to the end of armed conflicts in the world and the security of the most basic human rights, in order to guarantee social equilibrium and peace for humanity."

Well isn't this special, the Pope bringing "socialists, Marxists, communists, and Christians" together. Top formulate "a common social ethic that can be proposed as a new narrative for a Europe in search of its identity, with an integral ecology between the Social Doctrine of the Church and Marxist social critique at its core." Yea, let's make sure we leave those evil Capitalists out of this new union of Government and "Christianity". They are all just part of the "throwaway culture".

Yes, let socialists, Marxists, and communists come together with "Christianity" and form new rules of law "in order to guarantee social equilibrium and peace for humanity." That is such a good idea, "Christianity" uniting with world governments and governing authorities to establish the rule of law concerning equity for all. Only, we already know from history, that there is nothing equal about the results of the same. Which always end in an elitist class subjugating and living upon the backs of the ignorant masses they themselves create.

The rule of law, is only as good as those laws are. Governments have used laws to persecute and rob peoples all throughout history, as they are doing presently as well. With more than just a little guidance from the Vatican. Either individuals have financial and market freedom, or all are subjected to complete dependents upon government elites. We all know what a disaster that has been in the past for all but those very elites. Surprise surprise, the papacy wants us to reset our world back to the dark ages when church and government combined forces to subjugate all others, under their heavy hand of the rule of their own contrived laws.

Gee, I wonder why Europe is "in search of its identity", when did it lose it? Has mass migration which the Vatican fully supports and facilitates, caused confusion and cultural identity crisis among nations?  Creating a vacuum of power and moral authority into which the Pope and his minions can enter and seize said power?  Recreating the conditions of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire largely caused by mass migration and invasion from countless issues of barbarians from the north? Conditions which helped shape events leading directly to the establishment of the Holy Roman Empire? Such causing a reset of European politics back toward those of the Feudalist Catholic states of the dark ages? An identity which the Vatican itself surely sorely misses? Nah, nothing to see here, move along.

Frankie is another old man. 87 years old.

I wont finish my thoughts but he IS demented

I am not a Catholic, but to think that a pope can be the prophesied Antichrist to come at the end of this world only shows how soaked in one is with men's false leaven doctrines.

JERUSALEM is where the final Antichrist-beast king is prophesied to appear, working great signs and wonders that IF it were possible, would deceive even Christ's very elect (Matthew 24).

In 2 Thessalonians 2:4 by Apostle Paul, when he said the "man of sin" would appear sitting in the "temple of God", Paul was pointing to the 'traditional' stone temple of the Jews in Jerusalem, not to the Christian Church and a pope.

As per Lord Jesus in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14, He quoted from Daniel 11:31 about the placing of an IDOL abomination inside a stone temple in Jerusalem. That means a standing STONE temple built by the Jews for the end of this world MUST happen to fulfill that Daniel "abomination of desolation" prophecy.

And it will NOT be a pope in Jerusalem as that "man of sin" that will kill God's "two witnesses" in Jerusalem, and leaving their dead bodies unburied in the street. Jesus showed us who it will be...

Rev 11:7
7 And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them.
KJV

Let's see, ever heard of a pope that ascends out of the bottomless pit? No, I don't think so.

What about the 'angel' of the bottomless pit?...

Rev 9:11
11 And they had a king over them, which is the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon, but in the Greek tongue hath his name Apollyon.
KJV

There is the future Antichrist that is coming, "the angel of the bottomless pit", that will be that "man of sin" Apostle Paul pointed to that is going to work supernatural signs and lying wonders, and that Jesus pointed to in Matt.24 that will works the signs and wonders that IF it were possible, would deceive even His very elect.

Don't want to believe Satan is coming to earth, in OUR earthly dimension, in plain sight, as the final Antichrist, to Jerusalem to rule over the whole earth as "king of the world"? If you rather not think about that, then stay deceived if that's what you want. Lord Jesus told showed us in His Word, believe Him.

Quote from: dpr on Sun Feb 18, 2024 - 16:31:04I am not a Catholic, but to think that a pope can be the prophesied Antichrist to come at the end of this world only shows how soaked in one is with men's false leaven doctrines.

JERUSALEM is where the final Antichrist-beast king is prophesied to appear, working great signs and wonders that IF it were possible, would deceive even Christ's very elect (Matthew 24).

In 2 Thessalonians 2:4 by Apostle Paul, when he said the "man of sin" would appear sitting in the "temple of God", Paul was pointing to the 'traditional' stone temple of the Jews in Jerusalem, not to the Christian Church and a pope.

As per Lord Jesus in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14, He quoted from Daniel 11:31 about the placing of an IDOL abomination inside a stone temple in Jerusalem. That means a standing STONE temple built by the Jews for the end of this world MUST happen to fulfill that Daniel "abomination of desolation" prophecy.

And it will NOT be a pope in Jerusalem as that "man of sin" that will kill God's "two witnesses" in Jerusalem, and leaving their dead bodies unburied in the street. Jesus showed us who it will be...

Rev 11:7
7 And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them.
KJV

Let's see, ever heard of a pope that ascends out of the bottomless pit? No, I don't think so.

What about the 'angel' of the bottomless pit?...

Rev 9:11
11 And they had a king over them, which is the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon, but in the Greek tongue hath his name Apollyon.
KJV

There is the future Antichrist that is coming, "the angel of the bottomless pit", that will be that "man of sin" Apostle Paul pointed to that is going to work supernatural signs and lying wonders, and that Jesus pointed to in Matt.24 that will works the signs and wonders that IF it were possible, would deceive even His very elect.

Don't want to believe Satan is coming to earth, in OUR earthly dimension, in plain sight, as the final Antichrist, to Jerusalem to rule over the whole earth as "king of the world"? If you rather not think about that, then stay deceived if that's what you want. Lord Jesus told showed us in His Word, believe Him.

Your whole point above is moot. The Pope is antichrsit, not the final antichrist who will be the devil himself. As the leader of BABYLON THE GREAT, he is of course antichrist.

1Jn 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. 19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. 20 But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things.21 I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth. 22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. 23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.

Apart from this, you are eaten up with Roman Catholic inspired futurist prophetic interpretation. Of course then, you would not consider the Pope to be antichrist, or the church of Rome to be Babylon.

Quote from: Amo on Sat Feb 24, 2024 - 14:03:03Your whole point above is moot. The Pope is antichrsit, not the final antichrist who will be the devil himself. As the leader of BABYLON THE GREAT, he is of course antichrist.

Brethren in Christ Jesus, don't listen to the above fanatic who cannot understand that the old doctrines of the 16th century European Reformers with their thinking the pope of 'their' era was the Antichrist, simply did not pan out per Bible Scripture. These NEW prognosticators who push their personal AGENDA have NO intention of staying with what God's Word actually reveals about the coming Antichrist at the end of this world. Even early Church fathers like Hippolytus below who lived in the 2nd century A.D. understood per the actual Bible Scripture that the Antichrist would come from the 'circumcision' (i.e., the Jews), and would be setup as a secular king... and proclaimed by the unbelieving Jews as their prophesied Messiah of Bible Scripture...


Hippolytus (circa 170-235 A.D.)

"Now as our Lord Jesus Christ, who is also God, was prophesied of under the figure of a lion, on account of his royalty and glory, in the same way have the scriptures also beforehand spoken of Antichrist as a lion, on account of his tyranny and violence. For the deceiver seeks to liken himself in all things to the Son of God. Christ is a lion, so Antichrist is also a lion. Christ is a king, so Antichrist is also a king. The Savior was manifested as a lamb, so he too in like manner will appear as a lamb without; within he is a wolf. The Savior came into the world in the circumcision [i.e., the Jewish race], and he will come in the same manner. . . . The Savior raised up and showed his holy flesh like a temple, and he will raise a temple of stone in Jerusalem" (The Antichrist 6 [A.D. 200]).

QuoteAmo said:
Apart from this, you are eaten up with Roman Catholic inspired futurist prophetic interpretation. Of course then, you would not consider the Pope to be antichrist, or the church of Rome to be Babylon.

You say this in the context of the SDA Church saying that the Trinity Doctrine is the wine of Babylon, Christ was formally Michael the archangel, the atonement on the cross is denied & that Father God has a body of flesh, bone members, parts and organs. There is other oddities but seriously this should be enough.

Just about every denomination today claiming to be Christian has their own pet 'leaven' doctrines which are not written in God's Word. SDA is no different in that, but what I see how they are different than many other Protestant denominations, and orthodox Judaism influence, like not believing God's Word about the triune (3 Persons) in The Godhead. Jesus of Nazareth is God also, having come in the flesh, and that is one the major denials of the orthodox Jews. So it's not really about the doctrine of the Trinity, because that's just a word that means '3', so it is valid just as the word 'triune' means 3, and just as The Godhead in Bible Scripture is shown to be God The Father, God The Son, and God The Holy Spirit. And anyone who denies those 3 Persons in The Godhead is not a Christian.

Quote from: dpr on Sun Feb 25, 2024 - 11:27:17Just about every denomination today claiming to be Christian has their own pet 'leaven' doctrines which are not written in God's Word. SDA is no different in that, but what I see how they are different than many other Protestant denominations, and orthodox Judaism influence, like not believing God's Word about the triune (3 Persons) in The Godhead. Jesus of Nazareth is God also, having come in the flesh, and that is one the major denials of the orthodox Jews. So it's not really about the doctrine of the Trinity, because that's just a word that means '3', so it is valid just as the word 'triune' means 3, and just as The Godhead in Bible Scripture is shown to be God The Father, God The Son, and God The Holy Spirit. And anyone who denies those 3 Persons in The Godhead is not a Christian.

Agreed, the SDA concept is 3 who's which are independently 3 what's whereas the Trinity Doctrine affirms ONE WHAT and 3 WHO's.

Below is how the SDA's see it.

Charles S Longacre, Deity of Christ, paper presented to the Bible Research Fellowship Angwin, California January 1947, page 13 & 14)
IF it were impossible for the Son of God to make a mistake or commit a sin, then His coming into this world and subjecting Himself to temptations were all a farce AND mere mockery. IF it were possible for Him to yield to temptation and fall into sin, then He MUST have risked heaven and His very existence, and EVEN all eternity. That is exactly what the Scriptures AND the Spirit of Prophecy say Christ, the Son of God did do when He came to work out for us a plan of salvation from the curse of sin.

IF Christ "risked all," EVEN His ETERNAL EXISTENCE in heaven, then there was a possibility of His being overcome by sin, and IF overcome by sin, He would have gone into Joseph's tomb and neither THAT tomb nor any other tomb would EVER have been opened. All would have been lost and HE would have suffered "eternal loss," the loss of ALL He ever possessed &; His DIVINITY AND His humanity and heaven itself would have been "lost & eternally lost

It was possible for one of the God-head to be lost, and eternally lost - and IF that had happened, and it WAS possible to happen, "God, the Father", would still have remained as the One and only absolute and living God, reigning supreme over all the unfallen worlds, but with all the human race blotted out of existence on this earth. The Deity of Christ'

This reasoning exists because the SDA's believe Father God to be "ultimate God", a flesh bound hominid with all the members organs and parts of a perfect man. Thus if creature Christ failed in its mission Father would still remain as ultimate God.

Sabbath Herald, September 7, 1869
'And as to the Son of God, he could be excluded also, for he had God for His Father, and did, at some point in the eternity of the past, have beginning of days. So that if we use Paul's language in an absolute sense, it would be impossible to find but one being in the universe, and that is God the Father, who is without father, or mother, or descent, or beginning of days, or end of life. Yet probably no one for a moment contends that Melchizedek was God the Father.''


"But although Christ's glory was for a time veiled and eclipsed by His assuming humanity, yet He did not cease to be God when He became man...The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty, yet Christ and the Father are one." SDA Bible Commentary, vol.5 p.1129

Ellen White, Sabbath Herald, January 14, 1909
We are to be partakers of knowledge. As I have seen pictures representing Satan coming to Christ in the wilderness of temptation in the form of a hideous monster, I have thought, How little the artists knew of the Bible! Before his fall, Satan WAS, next to CHRIST, the highest angel in heaven".

Sabbath Herald, September 24, 1863, "HOW SHALL WE EXPLAIN IT: "In Rev 1:8 occurs a passage which has presented some difficulty to those who REJECT THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY. The text, with its forgoing connection, reads as following: "Behold, He cometh with clouds, and every eye shall see Him, and they also who pierced Him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him. Even so, Amen. I am the alpha and the omega, the beginning and the ending thus saith the Lord, which is, which was, and which is to come, the Almighty." Verses 7 & 8. The question has often arisen here, IN WHAT SENSE IS JESUS CHRIST THE ALMIGHTY".  TO US THIS QUESTION IS EASILY ANSWERED. WE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT CHRIST IS AT ALL MEANT BY THE PHRASE "THE ALMIGHTY",  AND FOR THIS BELIEF WE WILL GIVE A FEW SHORT REASONS. 1. WE THINK THERE ARE TWO PERSONS brought to view in these texts – the Savior in the 7th verse and; the Father in the eighth. There is another most august title in verse 8 which NEVER REFERRS TO THE SON – IT IS THE PHRASE "WHICH IS, AND WHICH WAS, AND WHICH IS TO COME". This title points out THE ETERNITY OF THE BEING TO WHOM IT REFERS...............Here are the two personages pointed out – THE EVERLASTING GOD UNDER THE FITTING TITLE, "WHICH IS, AND WHICH WAS AND WHICH IS TO COME, the Almighty AND Jesus Christ by the no less appropriate titles of "the faithful witness", "the first begotten of the dead" and, "the prince of the kings of the earth".....We will now present three other texts where this phrase is found, and which all readily admit speak of the IMMORTAL FATHER – Rev 4:8,  Rev 11: 16-17 and Rev 16: 5-7..... with these passages we DISMISS the point, as it can serve no purpose to the Trinitarians, and to us seems to plain that the wayfaring man need not err therein".

James White ( Ellen's husband )SABBATH Herald, June 13, 1871
"We invite all to compare THE TESTIMONIES of the Holy Spirit THROUGH Mrs. White with the word of God. And in this we do not invite you to compare them with your creed. That is quite another thing. The TRINITARIAN may compare them with his creed, and because THEY DO NOT AGREE WITH IT, CONDEMN them [ the testimonies of Mrs. White ].

There you have it, the Spirit of Prophecy CONDEMNS the Trinity Doctrine.

Quote from: dpr on Sun Feb 25, 2024 - 10:16:44Brethren in Christ Jesus, don't listen to the above fanatic who cannot understand that the old doctrines of the 16th century European Reformers with their thinking the pope of 'their' era was the Antichrist, simply did not pan out per Bible Scripture. These NEW prognosticators who push their personal AGENDA have NO intention of staying with what God's Word actually reveals about the coming Antichrist at the end of this world. Even early Church fathers like Hippolytus below who lived in the 2nd century A.D. understood per the actual Bible Scripture that the Antichrist would come from the 'circumcision' (i.e., the Jews), and would be setup as a secular king... and proclaimed by the unbelieving Jews as their prophesied Messiah of Bible Scripture...


Hippolytus (circa 170-235 A.D.)

"Now as our Lord Jesus Christ, who is also God, was prophesied of under the figure of a lion, on account of his royalty and glory, in the same way have the scriptures also beforehand spoken of Antichrist as a lion, on account of his tyranny and violence. For the deceiver seeks to liken himself in all things to the Son of God. Christ is a lion, so Antichrist is also a lion. Christ is a king, so Antichrist is also a king. The Savior was manifested as a lamb, so he too in like manner will appear as a lamb without; within he is a wolf. The Savior came into the world in the circumcision [i.e., the Jewish race], and he will come in the same manner. . . . The Savior raised up and showed his holy flesh like a temple, and he will raise a temple of stone in Jerusalem" (The Antichrist 6 [A.D. 200]).

I'll find your quote from Hippolytus, and check it out. Meanwhile the following testimony from H. Grattan Guiness, an Irish Protestant, refutes your above claims. Even citing Hippolytus as supporting historicist interpretation over futurist interpretation. Therefore will it be necessary to go to Hippolytus' writings themselves to determine the truth of the matter.

Your continued false claim that the Roman church being identified as Babylon the Great and a system of antichrist by Protestants didn't pan out, is just that. Protestants didn't have to wait for these truths to pan out, they lived under the persecutions and abuses which were the evidences themselves. They Protested these abuses they were suffering, hence their name. Lest any forget, they were all originally Catholic's, excommunicated from that church for daring to complain about her abuses. Being named Protestants later, for refusing to stop their protest against her abuses and eventually found out false teachings.

In any case, the following is testimony which refutes your own. According to it, the "Fathers", looked for antichrist to be established after the fall of the Roman Empire. Which history testifies was succeeded by the Holy Roman Empire.

QuoteROMANISM AND THE REFORMATION
by H. Grattan Guiness

LECTURE 5
INTERPRETATION AND USE OF THESE PROPHECIES IN PRE-REFORMATION TIMES

5. The Fathers held that the Roman empire was the "let," or hindrance, referred to by Paul in 2 Thessalonians, which kept back the manifestation of the "man of sin." This point is of great importance. Paul distinctly tells us that he knew, and that the Thessalonians knew, what that hindrance was, and that it was then in existence. The early Church, through the writings of the Fathers, tells us what it knew upon the subject, and with remarkable unanimity affirms that this "let," or hindrance, was the Roman empire as governed by the Caesars; that while the Caesars held imperial power, it was impossible for the predicted antichrist to arise, and that on the fall of the Caesars he would arise. Here we have a point on which Paul affirms the existence of knowledge in the Christian Church. The early Church knew, he says, what this hindrance was. The early Church tells us what it did know upon the subject, and no one in these days can be in a position to contradict its testimony as to what Paul had, by word of mouth only, told the Thessalonians. It is a point on which ancient
tradition alone can have any authority. Modern speculation is positively impertinent on such a subject.

What then was the view of the early Church? Look at the words of Tertullian. Quoting Thessalonians, he says: "Now ye know what detaineth that he might be revealed in his time, for the mystery of iniquity doth already work; only he who now hinders must hinder until he be taken out of the way. What obstacle is there but the Roman state; the falling away of which, by being scattered into ten kingdoms, shall introduce antichrist ..that the beast antichrist, with his false prophet, may wage war on the Church of God?" (Tertullian: "On the Resurrection," chaps, 24,25) In his magnificent "Apology," addressed to the rulers of the Roman empire, Tertullian says that the Christian Church — not himself, mark, but the Christian Church — prayed for the emperors, and for the stability of the empire of Rome, because they knew "that a mighty shock impending over the whole earth — in fact, the very end of all things, threatening dreadful woes — was ONLY RETARDED by the continued existence of the Roman empire. " (Apology, Section 32)

Read the words of Chrysostom in his "Commentary on 2 Thessalonians": "One may first naturally inquire what is that which withholdeth, and after that would know why Paul expresses this so obscurely. . 'he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.' That is, when the Roman empire is taken out of the way, then he shall come; and naturally, for as long as the fear of this empire lasts, no one will readily exalt himself; but when that is dissolved, he will attack the anarchy, and endeavor to seize upon the government both of men and of God. For as the kingdoms before this were destroyed, that of the Medes by the Babylonians, that of the Babylonians by the Persians, that of the Persians by the Macedonians, that of the Macedonians by the Romans, so will this be by antichrist, and he by Christ."

Then, accounting for Paul's reserve in alluding to this point he adds: "Because he says this of the Roman empire, he naturally only glanced at it and spoke covertly, for he did not wish to bring upon himself superfluous enmities and useless dangers. For if he had said that, after a little while, the Roman empire would be dissolved, they would now immediately have even overwhelmed him as a pestilent person, and all the faithful as living and warring to this end." (Chrysostom: Homily 4., "On 2 Thessalonians 2.)

From Irenaeus, who lived close to apostolic times, down to Chrysostom and Jerome, the Fathers taught that the power withholding the manifestation of the "man of sin" was the Roman empire as governed by the Caesars. The Fathers therefore belong to the historic, and not to the futurist school of interpretation; for futurists imagine that the hindrance to the manifestation of the man of sin is still in existence, though the Caesars have long since passed away.

6. The Fathers held that the fall of the Roman empire was imminent, and therefore the manifestation of antichrist close at hand Justin Martyr, for example, one of the earliest of the Fathers, in his "Dialogue with Trypho," chapter 22, says: "He whom Daniel foretells would have dominion for 'time and times and a half ' is already even at the door, about to speak his blasphemous and daring things against the Most High." Cyprian, in his "Exhortation to Martyrdom," says: "Since..the hateful time of antichrist is already beginning to draw near, I would collect from the sacred Scriptures some exhortations for preparing and strengthening the minds of the brethren, whereby I might animate the soldiers of Christ for the heavenly and spiritual contest." (Treatise 11.)

7. The Fathers held that the "man of sin" or antichrist, would be a ruler or head of the Roman empire. A striking illustration of this is the interpretation by Irenaeus and Hippolytus of the mysterious number 666, the number of the revived beast, or antichrist. Irenaeus gives as its interpretation the word Latinos. He says: "Latinos is the number 666, and it is a very probable (solution), this being the name of the last kingdom, for the LATINS are they who at present bear rule. " (Irenoeus: "AgainstHeresies," book 5, chapter 30.)

Hippolytus gives the same solution in his treatise on "Christ and Antichrist."

8. The Fathers held that the Babylon of the Apocalypse means Rome. On this point they were all agreed and their unanimity is an important seal on the correctness of this interpretation. Tertullian, for example, in his answer to the Jews, says:
"Babylon, in our own John, is a figure of the city Rome, as being equally great and proud of her sway, and triumphant over the saints" (chapter 9.). Victorinus, who wrote the earliest commentary on the Apocalypse extant, says, on Revelation 17: "The seven heads are the seven hills on which the woman sitteth — that is, the city of Rome."

Hippolytus says: "Tell me, blessed John, apostle and disciple of the Lord, what didst thou see and hear concerning Babylon? Arise and speak, for it sent thee also into banishment."(Treatise "On Christ and Antichrist,"Section 36.) You notice here the view that Rome which banished the Apostle John is the Babylon of the Apocalypse. Augustine says, "Rome, the second Babylon, and the daughter of the first, to which it pleased God to subject the whole world, and bring it all under one sovereignty, was now founded." (City of God," book 18, chapter 22.)

In chapter 28, he calls Rome "the western Babylon." In chapter 41 he says: "It has not been in vain that this
city has received the mysterious name of Babylon; for Babylon is interpreted confusion, as we have said elsewhere." It is clear from these quotations that the Fathers did not interpret the Babylon of the Apocalypse as meaning either the literal Babylon on the Euphrates, or some great city in France or England, but as meaning Rome. And this is still the interpretation of the historic school, though for the last 800 years events have proved Babylon to represent Rome, not in its pagan, but in its Papal form.

LECTURE 5

As to the "let" or hindrance to the manifestation of the "man of sin" referred to in 2 Thessalonians 2, Mr. Elliott says: "We have the consenting testimony of the early Fathers, from Irenoeus, the disciple of the disciple of St. John, down to Chrysostom and Jerome, to the effect that it was understood to be the imperial power ruling and residing at Rome." — Horae Apocalypticae, vol. 3., p. 92.

Irenaeus held that the division of the Roman empire into ten kingdoms would immediately precede the manifestation of antichrist. In his work, "Against Heresies," book 5, chapter 30, he says, "Let them await, in the first place, the division of the kingdom into ten; then, in the next place, when these kings are reigning, and beginning to set their affairs in order and advance their kingdom, (let them learn) to acknowledge that he who shall come claiming the kingdom for himself and shall terrify those sons of men of whom we have been speaking, having a name containing the aforesaid number (666), is truly the abomination of desolation." Thus, according to Irenaeus, the manifestation of antichrist required the previous overthrow of the then existing Roman empire.

"Tertullian's Apology" thus describes the habit of the Christian Church of the second century to pray for the security of the Roman empire, in the knowledge that its downfall would bring the catastrophe of the reign of antichrist and the ruin of the world. Addressing the "rulers of the Roman empire," he says: "We offer prayer for the safety of our princes to the eternal, the true, the living God, whose favor, beyond all others, they must themselves desire..Thither we lift our eyes, with hands outstretched, because free from sin; with head uncovered, for we have nothing whereof to be ashamed; finally, without a monitor, because it is from the heart we supplicate. And without ceasing for all our emperors we offer prayer. We pray for life prolonged; for security to the empire.. With our hands thus stretched out and up to God, rend us with your iron claws, hang us up on crosses, wrap us in flames, take our heads from us with the sword, let loose the wild beasts upon us — the very attitude of a Christian praying is the preparation for all punishment. Let this, good rulers, be your work, wring from us the soul, beseeching God on the emperor's behalf. Upon the truth of God and devotion to His name put the brand of crime ..There is also another and a greater necessity for our offering prayer in behalf of the emperors, nay, for the complete stability of the empire, and for Roman interests in general. For we know that a mighty shock impending over the whole earth — in fact, the very end of all things, threatening dreadful woes — is only retarded by the continued existence of the Roman empire. We have no desire then to be overtaken by these dire events; and in praying that their coming may be delayed, we are lending our aid to Rome's duration." — "Apology," Sections 30-32.

Quote from: Cathlodox on Sun Feb 25, 2024 - 11:17:47You say this in the context of the SDA Church saying that the Trinity Doctrine is the wine of Babylon, Christ was formally Michael the archangel, the atonement on the cross is denied & that Father God has a body of flesh, bone members, parts and organs. There is other oddities but seriously this should be enough.

I don't believe anything you just wrote above, neither does anyone I know. Repeating lies over and over, never makes them true. Though you and the media seem to think this is so. But there will come a day.

Quote from: Amo on Sun Feb 25, 2024 - 21:42:54I don't believe anything you just wrote above, neither does anyone I know. Repeating lies over and over, never makes them true. Though you and the media seem to think this is so. But there will come a day.

look at the article "HOW SHALL WE EXPLAIN IT"



I'm calling your dishonesty out Amo, I'm providing valid quotes from your Church.

Quote from: Cathlodox on Sun Feb 25, 2024 - 21:54:00look at the article "HOW SHALL WE EXPLAIN IT"



I'm calling your dishonesty out Amo, I'm providing valid quotes from your Church.

You can't be trusted enough to be taken seriously, having been caught lying to many times. There are certainly more important things to do, than follow your endless trails to nowhere, based upon nothing but twisted gobbledegook.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/pope-francis-ukraine-courage-of-the-white-flag/

Quoted article below from link above.

QuotePope Francis says Ukraine should have "courage of the white flag" against Russia

Pope Francis said in an interview that Ukraine, facing a possible defeat, should have the courage to negotiate an end to the war with Russia and not be ashamed to sit at the same table to carry out peace talks.

The pope made his appeal during an interview recorded last month with Swiss broadcaster RSI, which was partially released on Saturday.

"I think that the strongest one is the one who looks at the situation, thinks about the people and has the courage of the white flag, and negotiates," Francis said, adding that talks should take place with the help of international powers.

Ukraine remains firm on not engaging directly with Russia on peace talks, and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said multiple times the initiative in peace negotiations must belong to the country which has been invaded.

Russia is gaining momentum on the battlefield in the war now in its third year and Ukraine is running low on ammunition. Meanwhile, some of Ukraine's allies in the West are delicately raising the prospect of sending troops.

Vatican spokesman Matteo Bruni said Saturday that Francis picked up the "white flag" term that had been used by the interviewer. He issued a statement of clarification after the pope's "white flag" comments sparked criticism that he was siding with Russia in the conflict. 

Throughout the war, Francis has tried to maintain the Vatican's traditional diplomatic neutrality, but that has often been accompanied by apparent sympathy with the Russian rationale for invading Ukraine, such as when he noted that NATO was "barking at Russia's door" with its eastward expansion.

Francis said in the RSI interview that "the word negotiate is a courageous word."

"When you see that you are defeated, that things are not going well, you have to have the courage to negotiate," he said. "Negotiations are never a surrender."

The pope also reminded people that some countries have offered to act as mediators in the conflict.

"Today, for example, in the war in Ukraine, there are many who want to mediate," he said. "Turkey has offered itself for this. And others. Do not be ashamed to negotiate before things get worse."

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan — whose NATO-member country has sought to balance its close relations with both Ukraine and Russia — has offered during a visit Friday from Zelenskyy to host a peace summit between the two countries.

Now let's see how good a Catholic Joe really is, or not.

https://apnews.com/article/lgbtq-catholics-outreach-jesuits-pope-francis-8756a79c5fd0323cd019990f6655b749

Quoted article below from link above.

QuoteJesuits in US bolster outreach initiative aimed at encouraging LGBTQ+ Catholics

NEW YORK (AP) — Even as Catholic dogma continues to repudiate same-sex marriage and gender transition, one of the most prominent religious orders in the United States — the Jesuits — is strengthening a unique outreach program for LGBTQ+ Catholics.

The initiative — fittingly called Outreach — was founded two years ago by the Rev. James Martin, a Jesuit who is one of the country's most prominent advocates for greater LGBTQ+ inclusion in the Catholic Church.

Outreach, a ministry of the Jesuit magazine America, sponsored conferences in New York City in 2022 and 2023, and last year launched a multifaceted website with news, essays and information about Catholic LGBTQ+ resources and events.

On Tuesday, there was another milestone for Outreach — the appointment of journalist and author Michael O'Loughlin as its first executive director.

O'Loughlin, a former staff writer at online newspaper Crux, has been the national correspondent at America. He is the author of a book recounting the varied ways that Catholics in the U.S. responded to the AIDS crisis of the 1980s and '90s — "Hidden Mercy: AIDS, Catholics, and the Untold Stories of Compassion in the Face of Fear."

O'Loughlin told The Associated Press he's excited by his new job, viewing it as a chance to expand the range of Outreach's programs and the national scope of its community.

"It's an opportunity to highlight the ways LGBT people can be Catholic and active in parishes, ministries and charities," he said. "There's a lot of fear about to being too public about it. ... I want them to realize they're not alone."

O'Loughlin says his current outlook evolved as he traveled to scores of places around the U.S. to promote his book, talking to groups of LGBTQ+ Catholics, and their families and friends, about how to make the church more welcoming to them.

Those conversations made O'Loughlin increasingly comfortable publicly identifying as a gay Catholic after years of wondering whether he should remain in the church. Its doctrine still condemns any sexual relations between gay or lesbian partners as "intrinsically disordered."

The latest expansion of Outreach occurs amid a time of division within the global Catholic Church as it grapples with LGBTQ+ issues.

Pope Francis, a Jesuit who has met with Martin and sent letters of support to Outreach, has made clear he favors a more welcoming approach to LGBTQ+ people. At his direction, the Vatican recently gave priests greater leeway to bless same-sex couples and asserted that transgender people, in some circumstances, can be baptized.

However, there has been some resistance to the pope's approach. Many conservative bishops in Africa, Europe and elsewhere said they would not implement the new policy regarding blessings. In the U.S., some bishops have issued directives effectively ordering diocesan personnel not to recognize transgender people's gender identity.

Amid those conflicting developments, Martin and other Jesuit leaders are proud of Outreach's accomplishments and optimistic about its future.

"There seems to be deep hunger for the kind of ministry that we're doing, not only among LGBTQ Catholics, but also their families and friends," Martin said by email from Ireland, where he was meeting last week with the the country's Catholic bishops.

"Pope Francis has been very encouraging, allowing himself to be interviewed by Outreach and sending personal greetings to our conference last year," Martin added. "Perhaps the most surprising support has been from several bishops who have written for our website, as well as some top-notch Catholic theologians who see the need for serious theological reflection on LGBTQ topics."

Martin will remain engaged in Outreach's oversight, holding the title of founder.

The Rev. Brian Paulson, president of the Jesuit Conference of Canada and the United States, evoked both Jesus and the pope when asked why his order had embraced the mission of Outreach.

"Pope Francis has repeatedly called leaders in the Catholic church to emulate the way Jesus spent his ministry on the peripheries, accompanying those who had experienced exclusion," Paulson said email. "I think the work of Outreach is a response to this invitation."

Paulson also said he was impressed by Martin's "grace and patience" in responding to the often harsh criticism directed at him by some conservative Catholics.

There was ample evidence of Outreach's stature at its conference last June at a branch of Fordham University in New York City. The event was preceded by a handwritten letter of support sent to Martin by Pope Francis, extending "prayers and good wishes" to the participants.

"It's a special grace for LGBTQ Catholics to know that the pope is praying for them," Martin said.

Another welcoming letter came from Cardinal Timothy Dolan, the archbishop of New York.

"It is the sacred duty of the Church and Her ministers to reach out to those on the periphery," he wrote to the conference attendees.

The keynote speakers included Fordham's president, Tania Tetlow, and the closing Mass was celebrated by Archbishop John Wester of Santa Fe, New Mexico.