Monday, October 7, 2013


The Church’s enemies, Communists and Freemasons, made an organized effort to infiltrate the Catholic Church and left Trojan horses within its gates.

John 6:71 Jesus answered them: Have not I chosen you twelve; and one of you is a devil? John 6:72 Now he meant Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon: for this same was about to betray him, whereas he was one of the twelve.

There are many Judases within the Vatican itself and in every religion and denominations. There will always be a black sheep as there will be always a devil lurking within.

 Pius XI: “The Church's worst enemy
her own traitors.”
Somewhere back in the 1930s, during the Spanish Civil War, and facing other issues in Germany and Italy, Pius XI asked this very question: “Who are the Church’s most dangerous enemies?” His answer was as follows:
  • The Church’s worst persecutors have been her own unfaithful bishops, priests, and religious. 
  • Opposition from outside is terrible; it gives us many martyrs. 
  • But the Church’s worst enemy is her own traitors.
Why is this, we wonder? The mission of the Church add extra has much to do with the witness to the truth by Christians themselves, especially those in high places, both clergy and laity.

In an analogous manner, John Paul II remarked to European bishops in 1982 that “the crises of European man and of Europe are crises and temptations of Christianity and of the Church in Europe.” We are wont to think that the drama of the world takes place outside of the redemptive plan of God. It doesn’t.

C. S. Lewis remarked, in Mere Christianity, I think, that the greatest evil we can do is to call what is evil good and what is good evil. It does not matter whether this calling is shrouded in the form of relativism, diversity theory, or the will to power. The effect is the same.

In the end, we now call, by various sophisticated names, what is evil good. We make laws to justify this reversal of good and evil, which, as such, do not change. We penalize those who hold that the “thou shalt not’s” are correct.

But the key point remains: the “enablers” who justify and make evil possible by their own disordered souls. Repentance remains the only way to stop this reversal, repentance and, as Benedict says, judgment.

James V. Schall, S.J., a professor at Georgetown University, is one of the most prolific Catholic writers in America. His most recent books are The Mind That Is Catholic and The Modern Age.

Sin is the real enemy of oneself  a
nd is the main reason why church exist. 

We should never be overly surprised that people of all sorts, including ourselves, sin. Saddened perhaps, but not surprised. The Church exists that sins be forgiven within her. It restores one’s direct relation to God that is broken when we sin.

Christ never said that somewhere down the line He or someone else would figure out a way to prevent sinning. He gave us free will. The only way to eradicate sin would be to eradicate free will. “There can be collapses and repeated ruptures,” Joseph Ratzinger said in Salt of the Earth, “because redemption is always entrusted to the freedom of man, and God will never annul this freedom” The denial of sin, whatever sophisticated form it takes, is simply a lie.

So sinners are not the most dangerous thing in the Church. They are why the Church exists in the form that it does. It is sometimes said that, because we know we can be forgiven, we can sin freely. Christ Himself was pretty generous in the number of times we should forgive, but He was not encouraging the sinning.

"The enemies of God entered into the houses of My Son many earth-years ago. Their plan has been insidious, and with much cunning they came forward, coming into the highest places in power within the houses of My Son. In this manner, My children, have they been able to mislead, misguide, and set many souls onto the road to destruction of their eternal souls."-Our Lady of the Roses, August 5, 1974

Were the Illuminati behind the former Soviet Union and their secret service KGB? This documentary has put forward some very interesting proof to suggest that that was the case. Was the Vatican on it as well? It is for you to research and decide for yourself.

This article (post #17) will provide insights on Communism and Freemasonry, the world's two largest enemies of the Church which Jesus Christ founded 2,000 years ago. 

But in the end Jesus Christ will win For He said: "that even the gates of hell will not prevail against it." Let's us all pray harder that the Pope will consecrate Russia destroy communism so peace will reign throughout the world.

"Bishops, cardinals in Rome, a plan is set afoot against you. Many have entered from the socialist the Union of Socialist Republic, Russia, have entered the Church to destroy you!"
Our Lady of the Roses, November 20, 1978

"My children, much of the evil now that is spreading in the United States and Canada was promoted by these men and women of satan, known as communists, who have been allowed to enter not only into your country and the countries of the world, but also into My Son's Church upon earth." 
- Our Lady of the Roses, May 17, 1986


Pope Leo XIII, Oct. 15, 1890: “It is needless now to put the Masonic sects upon their trial. They are already judged; their ends, their means, their doctrines, and their action, are all known with indisputable certainty. Possessed by the spirit of Satan, whose instrument they are, they burn like him with a deadly and implacable hatred of Jesus Christ and of His work; and they endeavor by every means to overthrow and fetter it.”

Pope Leo XIII, March 3, 1891: “Nevertheless, it grieves us to think that the enemies of the Church, joined in most wicked conspiracy, scheme to weaken and even, if possible, utterly wipe out that wondrous edifice which God Himself has erected as a refuge for the human race.”

It’s a well known fact that Communists and Freemasons made organized efforts to infiltrate the Catholic Church. They sent large numbers of their own men into the priesthood hoping to weaken and attack her by moving these men to high positions.
Mrs. Bella Dodd spent most of her life in the Communist Party of America and was Attorney General designate had the Party won the White House. After her defection, she revealed that one of her jobs as a Communist agent was to encourage young radicals (not always card-carrying Communists) to enter Catholic seminaries. She said that before she had left the Party in the U.S. she had encouraged almost 1,000 young radicals to infiltrate the seminaries and religious orders; she was only one Communist.

Brother Joseph Natale, the founder of Most Holy Family Monastery, was present at one of Bella Dodd’s lectures in the early 1950’s. He stated: “I listened to that woman for four hours and she had my hair standing on end. Everything she said has been fulfilled to the letter. You would think she was the world’s greatest prophet, but she was no prophet. She was merely exposing the step-by-step battle plan of Communist subversion of the Catholic Church. She explained that of all the world’s religions, the Catholic Church was the only one feared by the Communists, for it was its only effective opponent.”

Bella Dodd converted to Catholicism at the end of her life. Speaking as an ex-Communist, she said:

“In the 1930’s, we put eleven hundred men into the priesthood in order to destroy the Church from within.” 

The idea was for these men to be ordained, and then climb the ladder of influence and authority as monsignors and bishops. Back then, she said: “Right now they are in the highest places in the Church. They are working to bring about change in order that the Catholic Church would not be effective against Communism.” She also said that these changes would be so drastic that “you will not recognize the Catholic Church.” (This was 10 to 12 years before Vatican II.)

Brother Joseph went on relating what Bella Dodd had said: “The whole idea was to destroy, not the institution of the Church, but rather the Faith of the people, and even use the institution of the Church, if possible, to destroy the Faith through the promotion of a pseudo-religion: [The Catholic Church is now the favorite fishing ground of the anti-Catholic church for conversions into their own belief. Many had fallen by luring them through inter-church marriages and some through networking. Jesus once said: "Do not fish in my fish farm!" an oral tradition.]

Communists and Freemasons planned to infiltrate the Church something that resembled Catholicism but was not the real thing. Once the Faith was destroyed, she explained that there would be a guilt complex introduced into the Church… to label the ‘Church of the past’ as being oppressive, authoritarian, full of prejudices, arrogant in claiming to be the sole possessor of truth, and responsible for the divisions of religious bodies throughout the centuries. This would be necessary in order to shame Church leaders into an ‘openness to the world,’ and to a more flexible attitude toward all religions and philosophies. The Communists would then exploit this openness in order to undermine the Church.”

Fr Paul Kramer on the Freemasonic Infiltration of the Church (2013)

You will know a Freemason when you meet one. 
I did! So now you know! - Silent Crusader
Freemasons made similar attempts to infiltrate the Catholic Church and elevate their own to the highest levels. 

The Luciferian secret society, the Carbonari, known as the Alta Vendita, wrote a set of Permanent Instructions, or Code of Rules, which appeared in Italy in 1818. It stated:  “…It becomes the duty of the secret societies to make the first advance to the Church, and to the pope, with the object of conquering both. The work for which we gird ourselves is not the work of a day, nor of a month, nor a year. It may last for many years, perhaps a century… What we must ask for, what we should look for and wait for, as the Jews wait for the Messiah, is a pope according to our wants. We require a pope for ourselves, if such a pope were possible. With such a one we shall march more securely to the storming of the Church, than with all the little books of our French and English brothers.”
[islam & inc]
The same Freemasonic document made this striking prediction: In a hundred years time… bishops and priests will think they are marching behind the banner of the keys of Peter, when in fact they will be following our flag… The reforms will have to be brought about in the name of obedience. [islam & inc]

There will be more on how the freemasons are now working inside the corridors of the Vatican in my post #19 "The Consecration of Russia Requested By Our Lady Never Happened".   

These organizations and the individuals who belong to them are agents which the Devil uses to attack the true Church of Christ

Ephesians 6:12- “For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and powers, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in high places.”

If your church is not being attacked 
relentlessly by Communism and Freemasons, 
Your founder is a false one - believe it or not! 
Don't fool yourselves anymore.
But if you want to insist on your own
unbelief and arrogance then it is your own
souls and salvation you are playing with. 
Don't listen to your own reasoning anymore and 
unknowingly becomes the devil's advocates. 

2 Chronicles 36:19 And the enemies set fire to the house of God, and broke down the wall of Jerusalem, burnt all the towers, and whatsoever was precious they destroyed.

Joshua 23:10 One of you shall chase a thousand men of the enemies: because the Lord your God himself will fight for you, as he hath promised.

Esther 13:15 And now, O Lord, O king, O God of Abraham, have mercy on thy people, because our enemies resolve to destroy us, and extinguish thy inheritance.

It is time to re-examine the church you are following. 

Follow God not your founder. You will find God in the deepest of your heart.
Romans 5:10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son; much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by his life.
The devil knows your church already belongs to him so that he does not seek to destroy what is already his. Instead he will support its growth. 

For why will Satan destroys his followers? Satan will not cast out himself neither his own people. But Satan will give his all-out supports to all his dominions so they can grow faster in the shortest time possible because he knows his time is running out. And he will make sure his churches will not be transparent but closed to the eyes and ears of the public so they can work silently in destroying the church that Jesus founded 2000 years ago. 

Satan knows that the Holy Spirit is guiding the Catholic Church and he wants to disprove Jesus when He said: "...even the gates of hell will not prevail." Satan hates this. So he wants the gates of hell to prevail. So he perverted the minds of many, hardened their hearts, offer them the world of pleasures as he knows the weaknesses of man - it is easier for him to lead them to greed - the love of money, power and lust. He made these idols for man to seek and live for and promote pride, ego and vanity. 

Satan is making it sure that man interprets God's teaching literally for he knows humans are full of vanity and very weak on spiritual matters that they will interpret the Word of God and His gospels according to human understanding which he can easily corrupt and pervert as he did to Adam and Eve. 

Satan knows man can fall easily this way yet he knows not all man can be corrupted. They will be so corrupted believing they are depending God against evil in such a way that they will continue to attack the Catholic Church relentlessly unabated and at will but in reality they are deceived by the father of all lies. 

These poor human beings (Satan's pawns) forgot their own mission of saving their own soul that they are being sacrificed by Satan to seduce and corrupt men of God. 

They have not realized they are obeying the wrong Master - the father of all lies. They were made to believe and transcribe prophecies for Satan's hidden agenda. Woe to this people who are full of vanity and pride.

The signs will be visible when these churches or religion is growing faster in haste as if time is running out, when it is supporting government officials, when it is seeking the media, when it is networking, and will be most highly visible when his churches are getting involve in big non-apostolic and non-religious projects where people from all over the world can gather to watch and engage into its non-religious activitiesand the devil's sign will also be known by the silent activities of its deadly murderous arms of well armed and well trained special forces to silence its enemies. 

What Satan is desperately seeking to destroy is the True Church of Jesus Christ - the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic The Catholic Church.
1 John 5:20 [explains the divinity of Jesus Christ] And we know that the Son of God is come: and he hath given us understanding that we may know the true God, and may be in his true Son. This is the true God and life eternal.

You will know that your church belongs to Satan when 
your church is one of those who relentlessly seeks to destroy the
Teachings and Works of the Catholic Church instead of uniting 
with them in its effort to save mankind from the 
clutches of the evil one. 

You will know whose side your church is when it continuous to 

constantly attack and accuse the Catholic Church of being the 
Apostatized Church of God instead of working together against the 
evils of communism and freemasonry and against effect of the 
wars that the Muslim Brotherhood is waging among its people 
and neighbors. 

It's the Catholic Church that is openly fighting 
against their evil works for the seek of mankind 
and to bring peace again to this world.
2 Peter 2:1 But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there shall be among you lying teachers, who shall bring in sects of perdition, and deny the Lord who bought them: bringing upon themselves swift destruction.
When you know that your church is not of God and that your founder actually belongs to Satan who seeketh to destroy the only One Holy Universal Apostolic Church which Jesus Christ founded 2,000years ago, then know what to do. Decide what is best for your soul.
4 Kings (2 Kings) 17:39 But fear the Lord your God, and he shall deliver you out of the hand of all your enemies.

Come back or join in into the fold and be united with the one sheep for you are the other sheep that is still lost out there but goats are goats and they will never be sheeps.
Be one with the Catholic Church and be part of its mission with God to fight the evils that Satan has planted and still doing so in all parts and every corners of the world. Now is the time as there will be no second chance in hell!  

2 Esdras (Nehemiah) 4:15 And it came to pass, when our enemies heard that the thing had been told us, that God defeated their counsel. And we returned all of us to the walls, every man to his work.

When planning to infiltrate, the Communists probe for an institutional weakness to exploit and, in the case of the Catholic Church, perhaps they perceived the weakness to reside in the all-male celibate priesthood. 

 Did Communists send their followers, particularly homosexuals, sexual deviants, and enablers, into seminaries to become priests in order to foster a homosexual culture within the church? 

Homosexuals, practicing their predilections in an overwhelmingly conservative Catholic community, while given protection by well placed minded superiors, could certainly contribute to the undermining of faith in Catholicism and could unquestionably shake the credibility and moral standing of the church itself down to its very foundations. 

Undermining Catholic authority has been a clear and often stated goal of the Communist left. Speculation regarding how the Communists attempted to implement their program is reasonable and necessary in order to better understand the present situation.

Two former Communists, Bella Dodd and Manning Johnson, spoke on Communist infiltration of the Catholic Church. Dodd, an important Communist party lawyer, teacher and activist, converted to Catholicism in April 1952 under the tutelage of Bishop Fulton J. Sheen. Stating that the Communist infiltration was so extensive that in the future "you will not recognize the Catholic Church,"

Manning Johnson, a former Communist Party official and author of "Color, Communism and Common Sense" testified in 1953 to the House un-American Activities Committee regarding the infiltration of the Catholic Church:
"Once the tactic of infiltration of religious organizations was set by the Kremlin ... the Communists discovered that the destruction of religion could proceed much faster through infiltration of the (Catholic) Church by Communists operating within the Church itself.
The Communist leadership in the United States realized that the infiltration tactic in this country would have to adapt itself to American conditions (Europe also had its cells) and the religious make-up peculiar to this country.
In the earliest stages it was determined that with only small forces available to them, it would be necessary to concentrate Communist agents in the seminaries.
The practical conclusion drawn by the Red leaders was that these institutions would make it possible for a small Communist minority to influence the ideology of future clergymen in the paths conducive to Communist purposes. 
This policy of infiltrating seminaries was successful beyond even our communist expectations."
A radio talk show host and avid listener to talk radio in Boston, have listened intently to comments by Catholics as the crisis has unfolded. Much has been said regarding the left dominance of the seminaries and a prevalence of the ideas of "liberation theology" which is a biblically contradictory Trojan horse within the Catholic gates

Establishment organs, such as the Boston Globe, continue to wring their hands over the homosexual activities of priests while supporting a homosexual agenda everywhere else. Hopefully, the Catholic flock will wake up and sweep the corruption out of their church in the same way that their founder, Jesus of Nazareth, swept the money changers out of the Temple.

click hereRussia, Communism, and the Future of the World
Click above title for better understanding of why communism (atheist) is not of God and what is not of God is of the devil and why it became one of the greatest enemy of the Catholic Church.

The plan of communism, instigated over a century ago, called for a violent overthrow of existing society and ridding the world of religion particularly its greatest adversary - the Catholic Church.

The Catholic Church — with its unchangeable, true faith through the centuries, since the days of Jesus Christ and the apostles — has existed through all the periods of the slave state, feudalism, and capitalism, and we know by divine faith that neither communism nor any other evil will ever destroy the Catholic Church

It has existed for over 2,000 years now and it shall be until the end of time. No one can prevail against it. Many churches will attempt to destroy it but the Holy Spirit will guide and protect it until his return.  
What does "communism" really mean?
In the literal sense, it means common ownership of all material property.  There is no private or individual ownership of wealth, property, or productive goods; everything is owned by the community.  As conceived by Karl Marx, communism is the most extreme form of socialism.  It is based on a "world view" called "dialectical materialism," which puts all emphasis on matter and denies the existence of God.  It is materialistic and deterministic. 
The social order, according to theories of Marx, "evolves" through economic struggles between the classes in the direction of a violent revolution, followed by a society which substitutes private ownership for ownership of all things in common. 

The Church's opposition to communism is not based on the true nature of communism, of "all things in common," for many religious order follow it.  

The Church opposes Marxism, which is atheistic communism, because it denies God, replacing the Almighty with material things held not in common, but by the government, and betrays human rights, including the right to own private property. 

On April 3, 1844, a leader of the AltaVendita named Nubius wrote a letter to another highly placed mason. 

The letter spoke again about the plan to infiltrate the Catholic Church, and the attempt to insert a masonic “pope,” who would promote the religion of Freemasonry. 

“Now then, in order to ensure a pope in the required proportions, we must first of all prepare a generation worthy of the kingdom of which we dream… Let the clergy move forward under your banner (the masonic banner) always believing they are advancing under the banner of the apostolic keys. Cast your net like Simon Bar Jonas; spread it to the bottom of sacristies, seminaries, and convents … You will have finished a revolution dressed in the pope’s triple crown and cape, carrying the cross and the flag, a revolution that will need only a small stimulus to set fire to the four corners of the earth.”
One Satan's World Religion 
( World Order) In The Making?

The enemy shall not prevail - Jesus Christ.

"I am the Way, the Truth and the Life."
Freemason Eliph Levi said in 1862
: “A day will come when the pope… will declare that all the excommunications are lifted and all the anathemas are retracted, when all the Christians will be united within the Church, when the Jews and Moslems will be blessed and called back to her . . . she will permit all sects to approach her by degrees and will embrace all mankind in the communion of her love and prayers. Then, Protestants will no longer exist. Against what will they be able to protest? The sovereign pontiff will then be truly king of the religious world, and he will do whatever he wishes with all the nations of the earth.”
An apostate priest and former canon-lawyer,9 named Fr. Roca (1830-1893), after being excommunicated said: “The papacy will fall; it will die under the hallowed knife which the fathers of the last council will forge.” Roca also said: “You must have a new dogma, a new religion, a new ministry, and new rituals that very closely resemble those of the surrendered Church. The divine cult directed by the liturgy, ceremonial, ritual and regulations of the Roman Catholic Church will shortly undergo transformation at an ecumenical Council.” 

Freemasonry and the Subversion
of the Catholic Church

By John Vennari
Editor, Catholic Family News
Transcript of a Speech given at the Fatima Peace Conference in Rome, October, 2001

This talk will be a brief expose of the 19th Century Masonic document “The Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita”, which mapped out a blueprint, a plan, which will help us to understand what is the “diabolic disorientation of the upper hierarchy” of which Sister Lucy spoke. The Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita, I believe, explains the root of that diabolic disorientation.

Few Catholics know of the Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita, a secret document written in the early 1800s that mapped out a blueprint for the subversion of the Catholic Church.

The Alta Vendita was the highest lodge of the Carbonari, an Italian secret society with links to Freemasonry and which, along with Freemasonry, was condemned by the Catholic Church. Father E. Cahill, SJ, in his book Freemasonry and the Anti-Christian Movement states that the Alta Vendita was “commonly supposed to have been at the time the governing center of European Freemasonry” The Carbonari were most active in Italy and France.

In his book Athanasius and the Church of Our Time, Bishop Rudolph Graber quoted a Freemason who declared that “the goal (of Freemasonry) is no longer the destruction of the Church, but to make use of it by infiltrating it.”

In other words, since Freemasonry cannot completely obliterate Christ’s Church, it plans not only to eradicate the influence of Catholicism in society, but to use the Church’s structure as an instrument of “renewal,” “progress” and “enlightenment” - as means of furthering many of its own principles and goals.

An Outline

The strategy advanced in the Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita is astonishing in its audacity and cunning. From the start, the document tells of a process that will take decades to accomplish. Those who drew up the document knew that they would not see its fulfillment. They were inaugurating a work that would be carried on by succeeding generations of the initiated. The Permanent Instruction says, “In our ranks the soldier dies and the struggle goes on.”

The Instruction called for the dissemination of liberal ideas and axioms throughout society and within the institutions of the Catholic Church so that laity, seminarians, clerics and prelates would, over the years, gradually be imbued with progressive principles.

In time, this mind-set would be so pervasive that priests would be ordained, bishops would be consecrated, and cardinals would be nominated whose thinking was in step with the modern thought rooted in the “Principles of 1789” (pluralism, equality of religions, separation of Church and State, etc.)

Eventually, a Pope would be elected from these ranks who would lead the Church on the path of “enlightenment and renewal”. It must be stressed that it was not their aim to place a Freemason on the Chair of Peter. Their goal was to effect an environment that would eventually produce a Pope and a hierarchy won over to the ideas of liberal Catholicism, all the while believing themselves to be faithful Catholics.

These Catholic leaders, then, would no longer oppose the modern ideas of the revolution (as had been the consistent practice of the Popes from 1789 until 1958 who condemned these liberal principles) but would amalgamate them into the Church. The end result would be a Catholic clergy and laity marching under the banner of the enlightenment all the while thinking they are marching under the banner of the Apostolic keys.

Is it Possible?

For those who may believe this scheme to be too far- fetched, a goal too hopeless for the enemy to attain, it should be noted that both Pope Pius IX and Pope Leo XIII asked that the Permanent Instruction be published, no doubt, in order to prevent such a tragedy from taking place. These great Pontiffs knew that such a calamity was not impossible.

However, if such a dark state of affairs would come to pass, that there would be three unmistakable means of recognizing it:

1) It would produce an upheaval of such magnitude that the entire world would realize that the Catholic Church had undergone a major revolution in line with modern ideas. It would be clear to all that an “updating” had taken place.
2) A new theology would be introduced that would be in contradiction to previous teachings.
3) The Freemasons themselves would voice their cockle-doodle of triumph believing that the Catholic Church had finally “seen the light” on such points as pluralism, the secular state, equality of religions, and whatever other compromises had been achieved.

The Authenticity of the Alta Vendita Documents

The secret papers of the Alta Vendita, highest lodge of the Carbonari (an Italian secret society) that fell into the hands of Pope Gregory XVI embrace a period that goes from 1820 to 1846. They were published at the request of Blessed Pope Pius IX by Cretineau-Joly in his work The Roman Church and Revolution.

With the brief of approbation of February 25, 1861 which he addressed to the author, Pope Pius IX guaranteed the authenticity of these documents, but he did not allow anyone to divulge the true members of the Alta Vendita implicated in this correspondence.

The full text of the Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita is also contained in Msgr. George E. Dillon’s book, Grand Orient Freemasonry Unmasked. When Pope Leo XIII was presented with a copy of Msgr. Dillon’s book, he was so impressed that he ordered an Italian version to be completed and published at his own expense.

In the encyclical Humanum Genus, Leo XIII called upon Catholic leaders to “tear off the mask from Freemasonry and make plain to all what it really is”. The publication of these documents is a means of “tearing off the mask”. And if the Popes asked that these letters be published, it is because they want all Catholics to know the secret societies’ plans to subvert the Church from within so that Catholics would be on their guard and hopefully, prevent such a catastrophe from taking place.

The Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita

What follows is not the entire Instruction, but the section that is most pertinent to our discussion.

The document reads:

“The Pope, whoever he is, will never come to the secret societies; it is up to the secret societies to take the first step toward the Church, with the aim of conquering both of them.

“The task that we are going to undertake is not the work of a day, or of a month, or of a year; it may last several years, perhaps a century; but in our ranks the soldier dies and the struggle goes on.

“We do not intend to win the Popes to our cause, to make them neophytes of our principles, propagators of our ideas. That would be a ridiculous dream; and if events turn out in some way, if Cardinals or prelates, for example, of their own free will or by surprise, should enter into a part of our secrets, this is not at all an incentive for desiring their elevation to the See of Peter. That elevation would ruin us. Ambition alone would have led them to apostasy, the requirements of power would force them to sacrifice us. What we must ask for, what we should look for and wait for, as the Jews wait for the Messiah, is a Pope according to our needs ...

“With that we shall march more securely towards the assault on the Church than with the pamphlets of our brethren in France and even the gold of England. Do you want to know the reason for this? It is that with this, in order to shatter the high rock on which God has built His Church, we no longer need Hannibalian vinegar, or need gunpowder, or even need our arms. We have the little finger of the successor of Peter engaged in the ploy, and this little finger is as good, for this crusade, as all the Urban II’s and all the Saint Bernards in Christendom.

“We have no doubt that we will arrive at this supreme end of our efforts. But when? But how? The unknown is not yet revealed. Nevertheless, as nothing should turn us aside from the plan drawn up, and on the contrary everything should tend to this, as if as early as tomorrow success were going to crown the work that is barely sketched, we wish, in this instruction, which will remain secret for the mere initiates, to give the officials in the charge of the supreme Vente some advice that they should instill in all the brethren, in the form of instruction or of a memorandum ...

“Now then, to assure ourselves a Pope of the required dimensions, it is a question first of shaping him ... for this Pope, a generation worthy of the reign we are dreaming of. Leave old people and those of a mature age aside; go to the youth, and if it is possible, even to the children ... You will contrive for yourselves, at little cost, a reputation as good Catholics and pure patriots.

“This reputation will put access to our doctrines into the midst of the young clergy, as well as deeply into the monasteries. In a few years, by the force of things, this young clergy will have overrun all the functions; they will form the sovereign’s council, they will be called to choose a Pontiff who should reign. And this Pontiff, like most of his contemporaries, will be necessarily more or less imbued with the Italian and humanitarian principles that we are going to begin to put into circulation. It is a small grain of black mustard that we are entrusting to the ground; but the sunshine of justice will develop it up to the highest power, and you will see one day what a rich harvest this small seed will produce.

“In the path that we are laying out for our brethren, there are found great obstacles to conquer, difficulties of more than one kind to master. They will triumph over them by experience and by clearsightedness; but the goal is so splendid that it is important to put all the sails to the wind in order to reach it. You want to revolutionize Italy, look for the Pope whose portrait we have just drawn. You wish to establish the reign of the chosen ones on the throne of the prostitute of Babylon, let the Clergy march under your standard, always believing that they are marching under the banner of the apostolic keys. You intend to make the last vestige of tyrants and the oppressors disappear; lay your snares like Simon Bar-Jona; lay them in the sacristies, the seminaries, and the monasteries rather than at the bottom of the sea: and if you do not hurry, we promise you a catch more miraculous than his. The fisher of fish became the fisher of men; you will bring friends around the apostolic Chair. You will have preached a revolution in tiara and in cope, marching with the cross and the banner, a revolution that will need to be only a little bit urged on to set fire to the four corners of the world.”

It now remains for us to examine how successful this design has been.

The Enlightenment, My Friend, is Blowin’ in the Wind

Throughout the 19th Century, society had become increasingly permeated with the liberal principles of the French Revolution to the great detriment of the Catholic Faith and the Catholic State. The supposedly “kinder and gentler” notions of pluralism, religious indifferentism, a democracy which believes all authority comes from the people, false notions of liberty, interfaith gatherings, separation of Church and State and other novelties were gripping the minds of post-enlightenment Europe infecting Statesmen and Churchmen alike.

The Popes of the 19th Century and early 20th Century waged war against these dangerous trends in full battle-dress. With clearsighted presence of mind rooted in an uncompromised certitude of Faith, these Popes were not taken in. They knew that evil principles, no matter how honorable they may appear, cannot bear good fruit, and these were evil principles at their worst, since they were rooted not only in heresy, but apostasy.

Like commanding generals who recognize the duty to hold their ground at all cost, these Popes aimed powerful cannons at the errors of the modern world and fired incessantly. The encyclicals were their cannonballs and they never missed their target.

The most devastating blast came in the form of Blessed Pope Pius IX’s monumental 1864 Syllabus of Errors, and when the smoke cleared, all involved in the battle were in no doubt as to who was on what side. The line of demarcation had been drawn clearly. In this great Syllabus, Pius IX condemned the principle errors of the modern world, not because they were modern, but because these new ideas were rooted in pantheistic naturalism and therefore, incompatible with Catholic doctrine, as well as being destructive to society.

The teachings in the Syllabus were counter-liberalism, and the principles of liberalism were counter-syllabus. This was unquestionably recognized by all parties. Father Denis Fahey referred to this showdown as “Pius IX vs. the Pantheistic Deification of Man.” Speaking for the other side, the French Freemason Ferdinand Buissont declared likewise, “A school cannot remain neutral between the Syllabus and the Declaration of the Rights of Man.”

Yet the 19th Century saw a new breed of Catholic who utopianly sought a compromise between the two. These men looked for what they believed to be “good” in the principles of 1789 and tried to introduce them into the Church. Many clergymen, infected by the spirit of the age, were caught into this net that had been “cast into the sacristies and into the seminaries”. These men came to be known as liberal Catholics. Blessed Pope Pius IX regarded them with absolute horror. He said these “liberal-Catholics” were the “worst enemies of the Church”.

In a letter to the French deputation headed by the Bishop of Nevers on June 18, 1871, Blessed Pius IX said:

“That which I fear is not the Commune of Paris - no - that which I fear is liberal Catholicism ... I have said so more than forty times, and I repeat it to you now, through the love that I bear you. The real scourge of France is Liberal Catholicism, which endeavors to unite two principles as repugnant to each other as fire and water.”

Yet in spite of this, the numbers of liberal Catholics steadily increased.

Pope Pius X and Modernism

This crisis reached a peak around the turn of the century when the liberalism of 1789 that had been “blowin’ in the wind” swirled into the tornado of modernism. Fr. Vincent Miceli identified this heresy as such by describing modernism’s “trinity of parents”. He wrote:

“1) Its religious ancestor is the Protestant Reformation
“2) its philosophical parent is the Enlightenment
“3) its political pedigree comes from the French Revolution.”

Pope St. Pius X, who ascended to the Papal chair in 1903, recognized modernism as a most deadly plague that must be arrested. He wrote that the most important obligation of the Pope is to insure the purity and integrity of Catholic doctrine, and further stated that if he did nothing, then he would have failed in his essential duty.

St. Pius X waged war on modernism, issued an encyclical (Pascendi) and Syllabus (Lamentabili) against it, instituted the Anti-Modernist Oath to be sworn by all priests and teachers, purged the seminaries and universities of modernists and excommunicated the stubborn and unrepentant.

Pius X effectively halted the spread of modernism in his day. It is reported, however, that when he was congratulated for eradicating this grave error, Pius X immediately responded that despite all his efforts, he had not succeeded in killing this beast, but had only driven it underground. He warned that if Church leaders were not vigilant, it would return in the future more virulent than ever.

Curia on the Alert

A little-known drama that unfolded during the reign of Pope Pius XI demonstrates that the underground current of modernist though was alive and well in the immediate post-Pius X period.

Father Raymond Dulac relates that at the secret consistory of May 23, 1923, Pope Pius XI questioned the thirty Cardinals of the Curia on the timeliness of summoning an ecumenical council. In attendance were illustrious prelates such as Merry del Val, De Lai, Gasparri, Boggiani and Billot.

The Cardinals advised against it.

Cardinal Billot warned, “The existence of profound differences in the midst of the episcopacy itself cannot be concealed ... [They] run the risk of giving place to discussions that will be prolonged indefinitely.”

Boggiani recalled the Modernist theories from which, he said, a part of the clergy and of the bishops are not exempt. “This mentality can incline certain Fathers to present motions, to introduce methods incompatible with Catholic traditions.”

Billot was even more precise. He expresses his fear of seeing the council “maneuvered” by “the worst enemies of the Church, the Modernists, who are already getting ready, as certain indications show, to bring forth the revolution in the Church, a new 1789.”

In discouraging the idea of a Council for such reasons, these Cardinals showed themselves more apt at recognizing the “signs of the times” then all the post-Vatican II theologians combined. Yet their caution may have been rooted in something deeper. They may also have been haunted by the writings of the infamous, illuminĂ©, the excommunicated Canon Roca (1830-1893) who preached revolution and Church “reform”, and who predicted the subversion of the Church that would be brought about by a Council.

Roca’s Revolutionary Ravings

In his book Athanasius and the Church of Our Time, Bishop Graber quotes Roca’s prediction of a “newly illuminated Church” which would be influenced by the socialism of Jesus".

In the mid-19th Century, Roca (excommunicated) predicted “The new church, which might not be able to retain anything of Scholastic doctrine and the original form of the former Church, will nevertheless receive consecration and canonical jurisdiction from Rome.”

Roca also predicted a liturgical reform. With reference to the future liturgy, he believed “that the divine cult in the form directed by the liturgy, ceremonial, ritual and regulations of the Roman Church will shortly undergo a transformation at an ecumenical council, which will restore to it the venerable simplicity of the golden age of the Apostles in accordance with the dictates of conscience and modern civilization.”

He foretold that through this council will come “a perfect accord between the ideals of modern civilization and the ideal of Christ and His Gospel. This will be the consecration of the New Social Order and the solemn baptism of modern civilization.”

Roca also spoke of the future of the Papacy. He wrote “There is a sacrifice in the offing which represents a solemn act of expiation ... The Papacy will fall; it will die under the hallowed knife which the fathers of the last council will forge. The papal caesar is a host [victim] crowned for the sacrifice.”

Roca enthusiastically predicted a “new religion, new dogma, new ritual, new priesthood.” He called the new priests “progressists” and speaks of the “suppression” of the soutane [cassock] and the “marriage of priests.”

Chilling echos of Roca and The Alta Vendita are to be found in the words of the Rosicrucian, Dr. Rudolph Steiner who declared in 1910 “We need a council and a Pope to proclaim it.” Bishop Graber, commenting on these predictions remarks “A few years ago this was still inconceivable to us, but today ... ”

The Great Council that Never Was

Around 1948, Pope Pius XII, at the request of the staunchly orthodox Cardinal Ruffini, considered calling a general Council and even spent a few years making the necessary preparations. There is evidence that progressive elements in Rome eventually dissuaded Pius XII from bringing it to realization since this Council showed definite signs of being in sync with Humani Generis. Like this great 1950 encyclical, the new Council would combat “false opinions which threaten to undermine the foundations of Catholic doctrine.”

Tragically, Pope Pius XII became convinced that he was too advanced in years to shoulder such a momentous task, and resigned that “this will be for my successor.”

“Roncalli Will Canonize Ecumenism”

Throughout the Pontificate of Pope Pius XII, the Holy Office under the able leadership of Cardinal Ottaviani maintained a safe Catholic landscape by keeping the wild horses of modernism firmly corralled. Many of today’s modernist theologians disdainfully recount how they and their friends had been “muzzled” during this period.

Yet even Ottaviani could not prevent what was to happen in 1958. A new type of Pope “whom the progressives believed to favor their cause” would ascend to the Pontifical Chair and would force a reluctant Ottaviani to remove the latch, open the corral and brace himself for the stampede.

However, such a state of affairs was not unforeseen. At the news of the death of Pius XII, the old Dom Lambert Beauduin, a friend of Roncalli’s (the future John XXIII) confided to Father Bouyer: “If they elect Roncalli, everything would be saved; he would be capable of calling a council and of consecrating ecumenism.”

And so it happened just as Dom Lambert foretold. Roncalli was elected, called a Council and consecrated ecumenism. The “revolution in tiara and cope” was underway.

Pope John’s Revolution

It is well known and superbly documented that a clique of liberal theologians (periti) and bishops hijacked Vatican II with an agenda to remake the Church into their own image through the implementation of a “new theology”. Critics and defenders of Vatican II are in agreement on this point.

In his book Vatican II Revisited, Bishop Aloysius J. Wycislo (a rhapsodic advocate of the Vatican II revolution) declares with giddy enthusiasm that “theologians and biblical scholars who had been ‘under a cloud’ for years surfaced as periti (theological experts advising the bishops at the Council), and their post-Vatican II books and commentaries became popular reading.”

He noted that “Pope Pius XII’s encyclical Humani Generis had ... a devastating effect on the work of a number of pre-conciliar theologians”, and explains that “During the early preparation of the Council, those theologians (mainly French, with some Germans) whose activities had been restricted by Pope Pius XII, were still under a cloud. Pope John quietly lifted the ban affecting some of the most influential ones. Yet a number remained suspect to the officials of the Holy Office.”

Wycislo sings the praises of triumphant progressives such as Hans Kung, Karl Rahner, John Courtney Murray, Yves Congar, Henri Delubac, Edward Schillebeeckx and Gregory Baum, who had been considered suspect before the Council (for good reason), that are now the leading lights of post-Vatican II theology.

In effect, those whom Pope Pius XII considered unfit to be walking the streets of Catholicism were now in control of the town. And as if to crown their achievements, the Oath Against Modernism was quietly suppressed shortly after the close of the Council. St. Pius X had predicted correctly. Lack of vigilance in authority had provoked modernism to return with a vengeance.

“Marching Under a New Banner”

There were countless battles at Vatican II between the International Group of Fathers who fought to maintain Tradition, and the progressive Rhine group. Tragically, in the end, it was the liberal and modernist element that prevailed.

It was obvious to anyone who had eyes to see was that the Second Vatican Council promulgated many ideas that had formerly been anathema to Church teaching, but that were in-step with modern thought. This did not happen by accident, but by design.

The progressivists at Vatican II avoided condemnations of Modernist errors. They also deliberately planted ambiguities in the Council texts which they intended to exploit after the Council. The liberal Council peritus, Father Edward Schillebeeckx admitted “we have used ambiguous phrases during the Council and we know how we will interpret them afterwards.” 

By utilizing deliberate ambiguities, the Council documents promoted an ecumenism that had been condemned by Pope Pius XI, a religious liberty that had been condemned by the 19th Century Popes (especially Blessed Pope Pius IX), a new liturgy along the lines of Protestantism and ecumenism that Bugnini called “a major conquest of the Catholic Church”, a collegiality that strikes at the heart of the Papal primacy, and a “new attitude toward the world” - especially in one of the most radical of all the Council documents, Gaudium et Spes. (Even Cardinal Ratzinger admitted that Gaudium et Spes is permeated by the spirit of Teilhard de Chardin)

As the Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita had hoped, the notions of liberal culture had finally won adherence among the major players in the Catholic hierarchy and was thus spread throughout the entire Church. The result has been an unprecedented crisis of Faith which continues to worsen. While at the same time, countless highly placed Churchmen, obviously inebriated by the “spirit of Vatican II”, continuously praise those Council reforms that have brought this calamity to pass.

Cheers from the Masonic Bleachers

Yet, not only many of our Church leaders, but Freemasons also celebrate the turn of events wrought by the Council. They rejoice that Catholics have finally “seen the light,” and that many of their Masonic principles have been sanctioned by the Church.

Yves Marsaudon of the Scottish Rite, in his book Ecumenism Viewed by a Traditional Freemason praised the ecumenism nurtured at Vatican II. He said:

“Catholics ... must not forget that all roads lead to God. And they will have to accept that this courageous idea of freethinking, which we can really call a revolution, pouring forth from our Masonic lodges, has spread magnificently over the dome of St. Peter’s.”

Yves Marsaudon said further, “One can say that ecumenism is the legitimate son of Freemasonry” 

The post-Vatican II spirit of doubt and revolution obviously warmed the heart of French Freemason Jacques Mitterrand, who wrote approvingly:

“Something has changed within the Church, and replies given by the Pope to the most urgent questions such as priestly celibacy and birth control, are hotly debated within the Church itself; the word of the Sovereign Pontiff is questioned by bishops, by priests, by the faithful. For a Freemason, a man who questions dogma is already a Freemason without an apron.”

Marcel Prelot, a senator for the Doubs region in France, is probably the most accurate in describing what has really taken place. He writes:

“We had struggled for a century and a half to bring our opinions to prevail with the Church and had not succeeded. Finally, there came Vatican II and we triumphed. From then on the propositions and principles of liberal Catholicism have been definitively and officially accepted by Holy Church.” {The triumph of the Freemason in the Vatican II}{A priest at 

A Break with the Past

Those “conservatives” who deny that Vatican II constitutes a break with tradition, and that it contradicts previous magisterium have failed to listen to the very movers and shakers of the Council who shamelessly acknowledge it.

Yves Congar, one of the artisans of the reform remarked with quiet satisfaction that “The Church has had, peacefully, its October revolution.”

Congar also admitted, as if its something to be proud of, that Vatican II’s Declaration on Religious Liberty is contrary to the Syllabus of Pope Pius IX. He said:

“It cannot be denied that the affirmation of religious liberty by Vatican II says materially something other than what the Syllabus of 1864 said, and even just about the opposite of propositions 16, 17 and 19 of this document.”

Lastly, a few years ago, Cardinal Ratzinger, apparently unruffled by the admission, wrote that he sees the Vatican II text Gaudium et Spes as a “counter-Syllabus”. He said:

“If it is desirable to offer a diagnosis of the text (Guadium et Spes) as a whole, we might say that (in conjunction with the texts on religious liberty, and world religions,) it is a revision of the Syllabus of Pius IX, a kind of counter-syllabus ... Let us be content to say here that the text serves as a counter-syllabus and, as such, represent on the part of the Church, an attempt at an official reconciliation with the new era inaugurated in 1789".

In other words, the French Revolution and the Enlightenment.

This comment by Cardinal Ratzinger is disturbing, especially since it came from the man who, as the head of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, is supposedly in charge of guarding the purity of Catholic doctrine.

Yet we can also cite a similar statement by the progressivist Cardinal Suenens, one of the most liberal prelates of this century, himself a Council father, spoke glowing of the old regimes that have come crashing down. The words he used in praise of the Council are the most telling, the most chilling and the most damning. Suenens declared “Vatican II is the French Revolution of the Church.”

The Status of the Vatican II documents

Of course, Catholics have the right, even the duty, to resist those teachings coming from the Council that conflict with the perennial Magisterium.

For years, Catholics have labored under the misconception that they must accept the pastoral Council, Vatican II, with the same assent of faith that they owed to dogmatic Councils. This, however, is not the case.

The Council Fathers repeatedly referred to Vatican II as a pastoral Council - that is, it was a Council that dealt with not defining the Faith, but with implementing it.

The fact that Vatican II is inferior to a Dogmatic council is confirmed by the testimony of the Council Father, Bishop Thomas Morris. Now at his own request, this testimony was not unsealed until after his death:

“I was relieved when we were told that this Council was not aiming at defining or giving final statements on doctrine, because a statement on doctrine has to be very carefully formulated and I would have regarded the Council documents as tentative and liable to be reformed.”

Then there is the important testimony from the Council’s Secretary, Archbishop (later Cardinal) Pericle Felici. At the close of Vatican II, the bishops asked Archbishop Felici for that which the theologians call the “theological note” of the Council . That is, the doctrinal “weight” of Vatican II’s teachings. Felici replied:

“We have to distinguish according to the schemas and the chapters those which have already been the subject of dogmatic definitions in the past; as for the decelerations which have a novel character, we have to make reservations.”

Pope Paul VI himself also made similar comments that “Given the Council’s pastoral character, it avoided pronouncing in an extraordinary manner, dogmas endowed with the note of infallibility.”

Thus, unlike a dogmatic Council, Vatican II does not demand an unqualified assent of faith. The verbose and ambiguous statement of Vatican II are not on a par with dogmatic pronouncements. Vatican II’s novelties are not unconditionally binding on the faithful. Catholics may “make reservations” and even resist any teaching from the Council that would conflict with the perennial Magisterium.

“A Revolution in Tiara and Cope”

The post-Vatican II revolution bears all the hallmarks of the fulfilling of the designs of the Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita as well as the prophecies of Canon Roca:

1) The entire world has witnessed a profound change in the Catholic Church on an international scale that is in step with the modern world.
2) Vatican II’s defenders and detractors both demonstrate that certain teachings of the Council constitute a break with the past .
3) The Freemasons themselves rejoice that thanks to the Council, their ideas “have spread magnificently over the dome of Saint Peter’s”.

Thus, the passion that our Holy Church is presently suffering is really no great mystery. By recklessly ignoring the Popes of the past, our present Church leaders have erected a compromised structure that is collapsing upon itself. Though Pope Paul VI lamented that “the Church is in a state of auto-demolition”, he, as does the present Pontificate, insisted that the disastrous aggiornamento responsible for this auto-demolition be continued full-steam.

There is one final point I wish to make. I am not claiming that every churchman who promotes novel practices, such as ecumenism, are deliberately acting as enemies of the Church. The renowned priest of the 19th Century, Father Frederick Faber, was a true prophet when he said in a remarkable sermon preached at Pentecost, 1861 in the London Oratory:

“We must remember that if all the manifestly good men were on one side and all the manifestly bad men were on the other, there would be no danger of anyone, least of all the elect, being deceived by lying wonders. It is the good men, once good, we must hope good still, who are to do the work of anti-christ and so sadly to crucify the Lord afresh .. . Bear in mind this feature of the last days, that this deceitfulness arises from good men being on the wrong side.”

Thus, I believe that many (not all) Churchmen who have succumb to the spirit of the age, and promote the Council’s new agenda, are good men on the wrong side.

The Need for Resistance

As I said when I opened this presentation, I believe that the Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita and its effects helps to explain what Sister Lucy was talking about when she warned of the diabolic disorientation of the upper hierarchy, a term she used numerous times.

In the face of such diabolic disorientation the only response for all Catholics concerned are:

1) to pray much, especially the Rosary.
2) to learn and live the Traditional Doctrine and morals of the Catholic Church as it is found in pre-Vatican II Catholic writings,
3) to adhere to the Latin Tridentine Mass where the Catholic faith and devotion are found in their fullness uninfected by today’s novus ordo of ecumenism,
4) to resist with all one’s soul the liberal post-Vatican II trends wreaking such havoc on the Mystical Body of Christ,
5) to charitably instruct others in the traditions of the Faith and warn them of the errors of the times.
6) to pray that a contagious return to sanity may sweep through a sufficient number of the hierarchy.
7) never to compromise,
8) And lastly, the reason we are here: to practice, and to make known to the best of our abilities the requests of Our Lady of Fatima.

Why is Catholic Church the only target of so much hatred and the object for destruction not only by the Freemasonry and Communism but other churches as well - by the staunched anti-Catholic Churches? 
  What is the hidden force that is behind all the attacks and hatred? Is it possible that Jesus Christ is the one trying to destroy the very church He founded 2000 years ago (which anti-Catholics churches claimed had apostatized in the 1st Century) and himself is behind all these hatred and accusations? Is Jesus Christ the author of these destructions or is it Satan himself? 
  Why the Catholic Church? 
  It is very clear that only Satan has this sinister purpose to unite all to fight against God and to bring them all to eternal damnation in hell.
  Is it really hard to see which one is the true church or the false one? 

Masonry - Behind Closed Doors

  Signs Of What? 
Are They Just Self Expression?

The Lost Symbol is not lost but are seen and even being displayed at the Front of Chapels around the World!

                                             3 fingers showing 6 6 6




Be the Judge of Your Own Destiny!
Choose the right one!

"The evil that men do lives after them;
The good is oft interrèd with their bones
So let it be with Satan."

 Anton Szandor Lavey
Originally published in Italian in the 19th century, the Alta Vendita or, in full: The permanent instruction of the Alta Vendita is a document purportedly produced by the highest lodge of the Italian Carbonari. The document details an alleged Masonic plan to infiltrate the Roman Catholic Church and spread liberal ideas within it. 

The Carbonari had strong similarities to Freemasonry, and so the document is seen by some as a Masonic document. In the nineteenth century Pope Pius 9th and Pope Leo 13th both asked for it to be published. It was popularized in the English speaking world by Monsignor George Dillon in 1885 with his book The War of Anti-Christ with the Church and Christian Civilization.It is still propagated by many traditionalist and Catholics, who believe it accurately describes the evolution of the church. It was actually a very clever piece of dis-information.

Ever heard the story that Freemasons worship Lucifer? The Funny thing is a Freemason won’t deny it. However like all other Masonic beliefs it is coded. To many, Lucifer is Satan, the devil, the evilest of evils. However the bible clearly states that Lucifer came from the Heavens to bring light to mankind…and of course all the brainyacks thought light referred to knowledge. 

According to the bible mankind was not ever meant to have the knowledge of the gods, because it would grow to be problematic. Again this was just the Church throwing people off track… why would god not want mankind to have knowledge? Possibly this version of god didn’t want mankind to have knowledge because it would destroy his reign over mankind.

Lucifer is the light-bearer as they say and the key to this code is etymology once again. Lucifer becomes two Latin words.Lucis meaning light and ferre meaning to bear or bring, which is in direct reference to what the Romans first called the light-bearer, which was Venus, because Venus appears in the sky before the sun rises as a morning star, and appears before the moon appears as an evening star…and hence Venus is the light bringer or light-bearer.

Even the word Hell comes from the older Hebrew word Helel, which means “bright one”.In 1966 Anton Szandor Lavey founded the church of Satan and wrote the Satanic bible from scriptures he had gathered previous to the founding of his church.He had been born in 1930 and claims to have had a brief affair with Marilyn Monroe. 

He was initiated into the elite Masonic society the Hellfire club in San Francisco in the 1950s and met his second wife Diane Hegarty later on and began his church with her as co-founder. What many people do not know is Levey’s bloodline can be traced back to the Roman Empire era and his entire doctrine is modeled after a specific 4th century doctrine that can be credited to Luciferianism. 

The term Luciferians comes from a man named Lucifer Calaritanus, who was the bishop of Cagliari in the late 4th century. His movement was linked to the complex political issues involving Emperor Constantius 2nd and Pope Liberius. He had been exiled because his views conflicted with the Council of Nicaea who first put together the Christian doctrine. 

Lucifer argued that Jesus, a great man was the son of god but was not God or a God. That conflicted with the church’s Trinitarian system of the father, son and Holy Ghost, and the council concluded that God was in the heavens and was also incarnate as Jesus on Earth as well as being the Holy Spirit.

Arianism is the idea that Jesus Christ is not equal to the Father by nature, but He is the first creation of God. The founder of Arianism was Arius who died in 336. His ideas would have a tremendous impact on the early Church by causing it to define orthodoxy with a number of creeds. However, his impact continues to this present day with such groups as the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Iglesia Ni Cristo. As a result of their convictions, these modern day Arians produce a number of Biblical arguments to support their contention that Jesus is not God. Though Arianism is false Biblically, its doctrines force the Church throughout all generations to define what she believes regarding the person and nature of Christ.

The Historical Background of Arianism

[Was this the First Attempt to Destroy the Catholic Church?]
The founder of Arianism was no other than Arius. He studied under Lucian of Antioch who saw Jesus as a semi divine intermediate being. In fact, Lucian thought the Logos was not fully God or man. Therefore, Jesus has a high status among the creatures even being called “the firstborn of all creation (Col. 1).” Jesus is supernatural, but He is not equal to the Father. Brown states, “Arianism developed the idea that the Son is a semi divine being created, not begotten, by the Father and having an origin in time, or at least a definite beginning before the creation of the material world.” Arius would later receive his ordination as a presbyter in Alexandria in 311. He had many friends in high places including quite a few Asian bishops who tolerated his ideas.
[Arius - the apostatized christian that developed the heretic idea that Jesus is supernatural but not equal to God being called only “the firstborn of all creation. The Ancient and Modern Arian followers are actually the apostatized christians]
As a result of the spread of his teachings, Arius received opposition from some of his opponents. One of these opponents was Bishop Alexander. He argued that Jesus was the same substance with the Father (homoousios). The contrasting party was known as the homoousios group. They believed that Jesus was of similar substance with the Father. As a result of this disagreement, there was great controversy among the various local churches. This arguing would convince Constantine to call the Council of Nicea.

Council of Nicea

318 bishops from the East and a few from the West came to the Council in Nicea. They debated the matters for quite a while, but no agreement was reached. Eventually, the Arians made the mistake of presenting a statement of their faith from Eusebius of Nicomedia. Brown comments, “It frankly and flatly denied the deity of Christ, stunning even the least acute of the uncommitted majority.” As a result, “It was roundly rejected.” The Arians appealed to Eusebius of Caesarea who drew up a creed that would become the blueprint for the Nicene Creed. Constantine himself acted and advocated the addition of homoousios (consubstantial). Most of the Arian bishops gave in and the emperor commanded that the writings of Arius be burned.
Despite the efforts of the emperor, the Nicene Creed did not completely settle the issue. The emperor soon began to listen to Arian sympathizers. He even reinstated Eusebius of Nicomedia. He also removed some pro-Nicene bishops. After Constantine’s death, his three sons allowed many of the pro-Nicene bishops to return to their positions.

The Conflict of 340-380

[The break-up of the christians leads to Arians becoming apostatized christians for their unbelief of the divinity and deity of Jesus Christ]
The period of 340-380 marks a period of turmoil in the Empire. There was a great struggle between Orthodoxy and Arianism. The short restoration by some of Constantine’s sons would not last long. In 356 Constantius condemned Athanasius who was forced to flee to the desert. Constantius favored Arianism to such an extent that Brown remarks, “By 361, a generation after Nicea, the victory of the Arians seemed complete.” However, the battle was not over yet. Soon Julian came to the throne. He was the last of the pagan monarchs. He favored religious toleration and restored many of the Orthodox bishops. Under his rule, Arianism never solidified and Orthodoxy gained strong ground. In 362, there was a Synod in Alexandria which stressed the deity of the Son and Holy Spirit. It would become the forerunner for Constantinople. In 363 there was more turmoil, but it was short lived. Around 370 Valens came to the throne. He was the last of the pro-Arian emperors. In 378 he died and this left the East with a lack of Arian political support.
Gratian eventually became co-emperor with Theodosius (379-95 – co-emperor, 394-95 – sole emperor). Shortly after his inauguration, he became baptized and issued an edict promoting Trinitarian Orthodoxy. Brown comments, “The Nicene Creed itself placed the emphasis on the incarnation, passion, resurrection, and Second Coming of Christ, and was thus historical rather than theological in its orientation. In contrast, the decree of Theodosius emphasizes the deity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and the doctrine of the Trinity and does not mention the work of Christ as such.” He then summoned the Second Ecumenical Council in Constantinople. Theodosius took all the bishoprics from the Arians and gave them to the Orthodox.  Brown comments, “This Second Ecumenical Council really marks the beginning of ecumenical orthodoxy, for unlike Nicea, it represented the conclusion rather than the beginning of the conflict with Arianism.” With Constantinople and the efforts of Theodosius, Arianism had clearly run its course and Orthodoxy was triumphant in Christendom.

The Modern Day Arians

Despite the best efforts of the Orthodox Church to stamp out Arianism, there are branches of the belief that continue to this present day. One of them is the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Founded in the mid to late nineteenth century by Charles Taze Russell, this group contains several million adherents in numerous countries.

Another church which copied the Jehova's Witnesses' arian doctrine when one of their apostatized ex Pastor Felix Manalo, an apostatized catholic himself born and raised as catholic (parents were purely catholic until their deaths) and since then joined several protestant churches before coming into Jehova's Witnesses, founded his own church the Iglesia Ni Cristo (Church of Christ) in 1914. Later on Felix Manalo claimed the Iglesia Ni Cristo was the original church whom Jesus Christ founded 2,000 years ago that re-emerged in 1914 - that he received a message based on the bible prophecy as the 5th angel from Jesus Christ to continue the 1st century apostatized catholic church under a new name Iglesia Ni Cristo as registered with the Philippine government in July 1914.


Iglesia Ni Cristo
Like the ancient Arians, these modern day Witnesses and Manalistas or Iglesians (they claimed they are neither Christians nor Protestants) believed that Jesus is a created being who is therefore not eternal and not God. Jehova's Witnesses specifically argue that Jesus was Michael the Archangel while Felix Manalo claimed he was the 5th angel a messenger of God and later on also claimed he was Jesus Christ himself as well perhaps to prove and solidify his claim that the Iglesia Ni Cristo was the apostatized Catholic Church that was founded by the special man-Jesus Christ (and not him the man-angel Felix Manalo). However, by examining a number of Scriptures, both their contentions do not hold up.

How Felix Manalo claimed himself as:
Isaias (Isaiah) 41:4 Who hath wrought and done these things, calling the generations from the beginning? I the Lord, I am the first and the last.

Click for more of this article about:
  • The True Nature of Jesus
  • Erroneous 
  • Objections to Jesus' Divinity and responses

Conclusion – The Significance and Effect of Arianism

Arianism did not simply influence several theologians in the early centuries of Christianity; its impact affected the emergence of Orthodoxy. Brown comments that Arianism gave “the church the first standard by which orthodoxy could be reliably measured.”36 The Arian controversy was the first controversy to be decided by an ecumenical council. This impact continues today with groups such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Iglesia Ni Cristo who both deny the deity of Christ. 
The Iglesia Ni Cristo went further declaring that their church is the only true church of Christ which re-emerged in 1914 when the former Catholic Church founded by Jesus Christ 2,000 years ago apostatized in the 1st century on the account of its belief in the doctrine of the Holy Trinity that became inactive immediately for many centuries until it re-emerged in July of 1914 in the Philippines. 

On account of a prophecy he found in the bible, he believed he was the 5th angel and sent by God as a messenger to re-established the lost church of Christ. Felix Manalo, thru the then Iglesia Ni Cristo (the re-emerged church of Jesus Christ) declared that outside the Iglesia Ni Cristo there is no salvation. It was not clear whether he announced his arrival as an angel so the whole world may know that there is no salvation and that everyone must join the re-emerged church. But it was only announced within his church as published in their own regular publication "Pasugo" (meaning 'message'). If he was truly the 5th angel and messenger of God's plan of Salvation, he should have announced the messages to the whole world to all and every churches to give everyone a chance to be saved. But to this day, a day will not end without literally attacking the Catholic Church during their worship of God. 

Can someone be a Freemason advocate 
without realizing it? Yes! If you are born again 
not of holy water and the holy spirit and 
if you are promoting heresy continuously by 
denying the Divinity of Jesus Christ, 
then you are as you are covered by 
the mantle of lies by the spawn of the devil.

“The suffering victim soul, your Holy Father, Pope Paul—he accepts his suffering with good heart. And there are many Judases about him who parade themselves as angels of light, but they have ravenous hearts of wolves. In disobedience they have used their rank to destroy from within. It was not in vain that Our Vicar cried out to you, ‘There must be cracks within, for the smoke of satan has seeped in.’” Jesus, May 20, 1978

Felix Manalo, founder of Iglesia Ni Cristo, claimed he is a ravenous bird in the Far East....

Consider the ravens, for they sow not, neither do they reap, neither have they storehouse nor barn, and God feedeth them. How much are you more valuable than they? Luke 12:13

Felix Manalo adamantly denied the doctrine of the Holy Spirit and declared un-biblical disregarding the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles on the day of the Pentecost. The Day of Pentecost marked the turning point in the early Christian church where the Holy Spirit have since guided the Catholic Church for 2,000 years. Perhaps this could be Felix Manalo's basis that the Catholic Church of Jesus Christ have seized to exist that day and that the present Catholic Church is an apostasy. However, even Felix Manalo himself, the founder of the Iglesia Ni Cristo was not able to pinpoint until his death when the Catholic Church apostasy happened during the 1st century. 

One Iglesia Ni Cristo Minister in his effort to answer the question in one of his comments on a blog post claimed the apostasy occurred when the church that Jesus Christ built through St. Peter became the Catholic Church. He claimed that the word 'catholic' is not in the bible and therefore un-biblical. It appears he did not know the history of the Catholic Church as he is he did not realize that the word Catholic or universal or Katholikos (Greek) started to appear when the word was first used to describe the Christian Church in the early 2nd century to emphasize its universal scope. The use of the term Catholic Church happened after the first century during which Felix Manalo the founder of Iglesia Ni Cristo claimed the church of Jesus Christ apostatized during the first century when the Mystery of The Holy Trinity became a dogma of the church. This was an obvious disagreement among themselves for truly their claim is simply an assertion to establish the Iglesia Ni Cristo connection to the church of Jesus Christ and that they really do not have an answer. This lie is one of the biggest hoax in the annals of Christianity. They just plainly say apostasy happened during the 1st century without any historical facts to back their claim up. 

The truth of the matter is because the founder of the Iglesia Ni Cristo had been using the protestant bible and his two favorite arian based bible translations namely the Moffatt and Lamsa versions considered by many bible scholars as perverted or otherwise corrupted.

For sure there was no apostasy during the Day of Pentecost as this was only the beginning of the Jesus Christ's universal church. There were apostates that happened along during the 2000 years but surely not the whole church which Jesus Christ established with St. Peter. Otherwise, they will be calling Jesus Christ as a liar.

The Catholic never apostatized itself only some members did for Jesus will never make a mistake. He is the source of everything but not source of mistake. The mistakes were committed by those who believe in the wrong gospels.  

Matthew 16:18 
And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 
These words and gospel of Jesus Christ was never a mistake.
The term Catholic has been incorporated into the name of the largest Christian communion, the Catholic Church. However, many other Christians use the term "Catholic" (sometimes with a lower-case letter "c") to refer more broadly to the whole Christian Church or to all believers in Jesus Christ regardless of denominational affiliation.

Theologians writing in English will sometimes use the term "Church Catholic" or "Church catholic" to avoid confusion between this concept and the Catholic Church.

The Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Anglicans, Lutherans, and some Methodists believe that their churches are "Catholic" in the sense that they are in continuity with the original universal church founded by the Apostles. However, each church defines the scope of the "Catholic Church" differently. For instance, the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodox churches each maintain that their own denomination is identical with the original universal church, from which all other denominations broke away.

Almost all Christians who call themselves "Catholic" believe that bishops are considered the highest order of ministers within the Christian religion. Along with unity, sanctity, and apostolicity, catholicity is considered one of Four Marks of the Church, in line with the Nicene Creed of 381: "I believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church."

Since the early Christians first described themselves as katholikos only during the 2nd century, therefore the Iglesia Ni Cristo's claim that the Catholic Church apostatized in the first century is totally misleading. They themselves are in confused state when they have two conflicting claims on the apostasy of the Catholic Church such as: 
(1) the belief in the Holy Trinity 
(2) the christians called themselves catholics

The only reason they claimed either one of  the above is for them, the Iglesia Ni Cristo to validly solidify their claim that their church is the continuation of the lost church of Jesus Christ from the first century. The church totally disappeared and vanished in the 1st century to re-emerged in 1914. This alone is a false claim and blatantly heretical. Their claim of continuity is neither biblical nor prophesied. Amazingly however, there were so many that were made to believed this lies and still going on.   

Another blatant error is when they claimed Iglesia Ni Cristo has re-emerged as the lost church of Jesus Christ in 1914 when it was registered as a legal corporation in the Philippines on July 27, 1914 when in fact the founder Felix Manalo has already started his church and started been preaching and spreading his gospels as early as in 1913. First he officially registered his church originally as Iglesia Ni Kristo then later became Iglesia Ni Cristo. So it should be 1913 not 1914. Neither one is angelic nor biblical.  

Not even his successor, Erano Manalo (rip) or Erano Manalo's successor, Eduardo Manalo or any of the ministers of the Iglesia Ni Cristo have no definite answer to their own claim. 

One of the point of interest here is their use of many bible versions to show their audience and members the correct bible verses to prove their claim as the one and only true church of Christ. 

The Iglesia Ni Cristo based their belief that there is no Holy Trinity and that Jesus is not God not even the begotten 'Son of God' but a mere human especially created and sent by God the Father not to save mankind but to build a church wherein he is the head and the body are the members of this church which eventually apostatized itself after Jesus died according to Iglesia Ni Cristo sometime during the first century then thru Felix Manalo this missing church was to re-establish in July 1914 him as the first administrator then as their biblical 5th angel. It was also well recorded that he claimed he was also the Christ himself. Later the church downplayed and try to erase this from the history of their church. At one time Felix Manalo also claimed as Worm Jacob Isaiah 41:14

Due to so much uncertainties on their teachings, so many questions arose on the basis of their doctrines, gospels and beliefs, un-biblical total obedience to the rules instituted on members among others, Iglesia Ni Cristo became notoriously well known for attacking the Catholic Church from first 6 months of indoctrination of their new recruits before they are baptized into their sect to the sect's twice-a-week worship rites. Other protestant churches are also known to attack Iglesia Ni Cristo as a false church as well. 
One of the Iglesia Ni Cristo's Minister I met in another blog just recently claimed that all biblical verses about the Divinity of Christ and the doctrine of the Holy Trinity that are not part of their teachings and doctrines are mere assertions and dismissed as normal catholic church doctrinal errors. 

Believing their church is the true church of God these false teachers continue to select bible verses only to translate them to what they want their followers to know only. Worst some of these false teachers will go further by declaring Jesus as just a special man without divinity using 'Sola Scriptura'. Jehova's Witnesses (read here) had went this route and so Iglesia Ni Cristo (in a nut shell). 

Iglesia Ni Cristo had been using several bible versions particularly Moffatt and Lamsa corrupted versions according to several bible scholars to suit what they want to teach and will declare true verses that belie their claims as purely Catholic scriptural errors. Therefore the only true verses in the bible to them will be those which they want to believe are true denying that all original verses were written by the Holy Spirit inspired ancient writers and those writings were deeply and carefully studied, analyzed, weighed, discussed and proven true in centuries with the guidance of the Holy Spirit as promised by Jesus. 

Another bible version that Iglesia Ni Cristo uses is the (NASV) New American Standard Version. Amazingly though, they will only use every and all bible versions which contain 66 books only and never the original bible with the complete 73 books of the old and new testaments. One logical reason, they cannot use the original bible with the 73 books for fear their false doctrines will not hold waters anymore and their false teachings will be exposed to their memberships. Members of their church are instructed to avoid reading bibles though they are not totally restricted for fear the members will read wrong verses from the many bibles they use that would be contradictory to what they teach their people besides trying to avoid them getting hold of the original 73 books bible.

Why does the Catholic bible have more books than King James?

The New Testament canon of the Catholic Bible and the Protestant Bible are the same with 27 Books.

The difference in the Old Testaments actually goes back to the time before and during Christ’s life. At this time, there was no official Jewish canon of scripture.

The Jews in Egypt translated their choices of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek in the second century before Christ. This translation of 46 books, called the Septuagint, had wide use in the Roman world because most Jews lived far from Palestine in Greek cities. Many of these Jews spoke only Greek.

The early Christian Church was born into this world. The Church, with its bilingual Jews and more and more Greek-speaking Gentiles, used the books of the Septuagint as its Bible. Remember the early Christians were just writing the documents what would become the New Testament.

After the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, with increasing persecution from the Romans and competition from the fledgling Christian Church, the Jewish leaders came together and declared its official canon of Scripture, eliminating seven books from the Septuagint.

The books removed were Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Wisdom (of Solomon), Sirach, and Baruch. Parts of existing books were also removed including Psalm 151 (from Psalms), parts of the Book of Esther, Susanna (from Daniel as chapter 13), and Bel and the Dragon (from Daniel as chapter 14).

The Christian Church filled with the Holy Spirit did not follow suit but kept all the books in the Septuagint. 46 + 27 = 73 Books total.

1500 years later, Protestants decided to keep the Catholic New Testament but change its Old Testament from the Catholic canon to the Jewish canon.

The books that were removed supported such things as
• Prayers for the dead (Tobit 12:12; 2 Maccabees 12:39-45)
• Purgatory (Wisdom 3:1-7)
• Intercession of saints in heaven (2 Maccabees 15:14)
• Intercession of angels (Tobit 12:12-15)

The original King James Version had all those books in, but they were removed when it was pointed out that they did not support the reforms of the Church of England. 

Protestants now call these books the apocrypha, and permit them to be read, but no longer consider them to be divinely inspired. 

They are all books from the Old Testament. Originally, they were part of the Jewish Tanakh, but they were rejected by the same Jewish counsel who voted to reject the divinity of Christ. 

Some Protestants will say that they are respecting the authority of this counsel when they removed these books, but clearly this can not be the case, since the main purpose of the counsel meeting was to decide on the official position regarding Jesus. The removal was mainly politically motivated. 

Except for the original version of the Holy Scriptures written and put together by the ancient fathers of the Catholic Church which was founded by Jesus Christ himself 2000 years ago, the Iglesia Ni Cristo had been using bible translations with 66 books only. 

Nevertheless, the real threat to the Catholic Church is not from the outside but from within the walls of the Vatican. The sins committed from within and among the hierarchy of the Catholic Church within the  its wall in Rome is the greatest enemy of the church. The Freemasons and its communist allies are now well entrenched in the Vatican and they are  not far from the Pope - the Holy Father - the Vicar of Jesus Christ. 
However, despite their best efforts, the Jehova's Witnesses, Iglesia Ni Cristo and other proponents of Jesus is just a man arguments do not square with the Biblical evidence. Instead, their Jesus lacks the power to save. Metzger rightly points out the effects of the Witnesses view, “While he was on earth he was nothing more than a man, and therefore the atoning effect of his death can have no more significance than that of a perfect human being.” Further, “. . . if a sect’s basic orientation regarding Jesus Christ be errant, it must be seriously doubted whether the name ‘Christian’ can rightly be applied to such a system. However, despite the negative evaluation the Christian “has the joyous confidence that his divine Lord’s mediatorial work is sufficient to bring into heaven itself not only 144,000, but a great multitude which no man can number.”

It is really quite important to know how Arianism had started and how it gained momentum in the mid-3rd century until it faded away around early 4th century only to be revived again by the Jehova's Witnesses late 1800 years and picked up by 
Iglesia Ni Cristo founder in 1914. 

Illuminati & Freemasons -The Difference Between the Secret Societies

The Illuminati and the Freemason Societies were founded centuries ago and have quite a long history. In some ways they are quite similar, but there are also distinct differences between the two groups. Both are made up of highly intelligent people, but due to the secret nature of the societies, very few people know who these members are. It is common knowledge though, that both the Freemasons and the Illuminati had played a role in science and politics through the ages.
Founded in Europe in the eighteenth century when the Age of Enlightenment was rampant in all countries, the Illuminati is a term used to describe the secret society groups that developed during this time. The meaning of the word is “enlightened” and the majority of the members of these societies were intellectuals with an active interest in scientific methods and in the government of their countries. Rumors still abound about the Illuminati that it still exists and is working to change the politics of the world.
About the Freemasons
The Freemasonry brotherhood is older than the illuminati having been formed in the seventeenth century. Each group is independent of the other and hold their meetings in locations they call Grand Lodges. Even though they believe that there is a Supreme Being and in the society’s motto of “Brotherly Love, Relief and Faith”, the members of the Freemason society are not required to follow any particular religion.
How are the two groups different?
There are several similarities in the Freemason and the Illuminati societies. Both had secrecy as the reason for their creation and both include members who are freethinkers and highly intellectual. The goal of the creation of the two is different. The Illuminati was born in order to create a New World Order than would change the world, but the goal of the Freemasons was to create a society in which chivalry and honor would be evident among the members. This group is well known for its many charitable works all over the world.
They are similar because they were both the result of societies in which people were afraid to speak openly about their thoughts of the government and the church. They did not want their members to be afraid of any consequences because they did what they felt was right. It is the fact that there are so many secrets surrounding these groups that makes them very mysterious to this very day.
  1. The Illuminati was formed as a secret society in the eighteenth century, but the Freemasons was formed as a brotherhood a century before.
  2. The goal of the Illuminati is to change the world, but the goal of the Freemasons is to create a society of chivalry, honor, brotherly love, relief and morality as well as believing in a Supreme Being.
  3. Both groups are highly secretive.
Which secret society is more powerful?

Regardless of who is more powerful, their aim is not aligned with God's Plan of Salvation. Therefore, what is not of God is of the devil. Any church that seeks to destroy other church is not of God but of the devil.

The Oct 19, 2013 posting below I copied from a blog trend as one example of what Illuminati can do to anyone who seeks fame and fortune after I answered this trend:

I want to join illuminati in Philippine

Posted in the Philippines Forum

Sunday Oct 13
pls don't sell your soul to the devil. there is no way out once you are in...and there is no second chance in hell. Money is not everything God is. Loving money is idolatry.

Saturday Oct 19
Hello I am Mr perry I am from toronto ontario, I am one of the agents sent by the high priest to bring as many of those who are interested in becoming a member of the illuminati to the great illuminati temple, am a business man I own construction companies all over the world but I was ones like you I could not even feed my family what kind of life was that to live I lived in poverty until I saw an opportunity to be a member of the great illuminati brotherhood and I took my chances and I have been a member for close to three years now and the higher you get the richer you become. Illuminati pays money to your account illuminati makes your business grow these and many more other benefits so if you are interested contact that great temple at............. 

Excommunicated Priest.. Exposes New World Order 1/3 Must see!

Listen to this riveting 1986 speech given by now deceased Priest John O'Conner exposing Benjamin Creme, Maitreya, Freemasonry, Antichrist communist movement, new age occult practices, church infiltration of the homosexual movement, the Federal Reserve more. After this speech O'Conner was ORDERED to under go a psychological evaluation and then later dismissed from the church!

Excommunicated Priest Exposes New World Order.. 2/3 Must see!


Excommunicated Priest Exposes the New World Order.. 3/3 Must see!

"The Only WAY, the TRUTH and the LIFE
No one can go to the Father but through Him"
There is so much hatred out there especially when it comes to judging and accusing the Catholic Church. It seems easy to judge or accuse or brand the Catholic Church. Pictures are easily converted. Enemies use photoshop to change pictures to mislead viewers. 

The Holy Spirit spoke about the mind as the favorite playground of the devil.

On the way to Jerusalem where Jesus was to be condemned on the account of Judas' betrayal, while resting, Jesus spoke to Judas and said: "Use your heart not your mind but open up your heart and your mind." Jesus knew what was in Judas heart and mind. Judas was so blinded that he did not understand what Jesus meant by those words. 

This profound statement changed my life. When it comes to God, we cannot rationalize him. Humans love to use mind while God has been telling us to use our heart. When you want to express love, you cannot do so by using your mind. Try saying that to your wife and she would not even feel the love at all. But express that love with your heart, and with a little kiss she will feel your love.

You can say whatever you want to say about the Pope or the Catholic Church so quickly and fast that you won't realize that God is watching and mindful of what you say and do. And everything are written so that when judgment comes, God would judge whether you deserve heaven or not.

You can only find and feel God in your heart, never in your mind. So be careful not to offend God in any way.  

No comments:

Post a Comment