FIFTY-TWO: THE TWENTIETH CENTURY BEGINS
At the turn of our present century, the Roman system is continuing its diatribes against Protestants through men like "Pius" X . He refers to the leaders of the Reformation as "Enemies of the Cross of Christ."
The outright blasphemies and superstitions continue, as Babylon will always seek to confuse those who are of a gullible nature. Some of its fraudulent techniques are recorded by Eveline B. Mitford, writing in the Monthly Review of London, 1906 (vol. 22):
"In the present day there are twenty well-known gowns and seventy veils of the Virgin Mary, each pronounced to be the real one; twelve heads of St. John the Baptist, in tolerably perfect condition, besides numerous large fragments of his skull and seven extra jaws, each of great note, and held in much reverence in different parts of Europe. St. Julienne and St. Pancras each possess thirty bodies, and St. Peter has sixteen. St. Peter the Dominican only possesses two bodies, but he makes up for the deficiency in the number of his fingers, fifty-six of which are scattered throughout Europe."
Not a quote from the Dark Ages, but from the beginning of this [20th] century. Many Catholics will agree to the humorous reality of this calamity if not to the exact numbers suggested above. In fact, many Catholics are not implicated in most of the indictments of this book. I hope I have made myself clear that it is a system, and not a person, that God has exposed in His Word. That system needs exposing. Persons within it simply need to hear God saying "come out of her."
Have you heard that voice yet?
Keep reading. The twentieth century, past present and future, could be Rome's worst.
FIFTY-THREE: WORLD WAR I
More and more obvious it must be that this little manual will by no means exhaust the subject at hand. My intention to touch down on the most familiar items of church and world history, to see if church and world are somehow linked, leaves out tons of possible material.
Be that as it may, most of my readers know something about World War I. Is Babylon implicated? I think so.
It is most fascinating to discover, in perusing indeces of books on World War I, that you will not find "Catholic," "Pope," or words related. What the Roman Church did was behind the scenes, and was integrated into the mix long before the events of the early 1900's took place.
Take the Hapsburgs. As I mentioned before, and as Avro Manhattan points out in his Catholic Imperialism and World Freedom, the Hapsburgs had been the Church's sword in Europe. Nearly 1000 years of relating to them were at stake. The loss of this huge benefactor was viewed as a major disaster. The Hapsburgs and the Romanists needed each other.
When the acclaimed Archduke is murdered, Pius X uses the situation to punish Orthodox Serbia through (Hapsburg) Francis Joseph, the Emperor.
It is distressing to note here that the events taking place ('92-'93) in the former Yugoslavia have as their historical and spiritual ancestry the events which led up to World War I, not to mention episodes that date back to the Middle Ages, already chronicled.
The political divisions of the first World War: (Catholic) Germany, (Catholic) Austria-Hungary, Turkey on one side. Slowly forming an alliance against them are recently-alienated France, (Protestant) England, (Orthodox) Russia, (Orthodox) Serbia, and Belgium.
Serbia. Later to become a part of Yugoslavia. A stronghold of the Eastern Orthodox Church, she evolves slowly into the center of the conflict. Serbia, having just emerged from a conflict in the Balkans, begins to draw nationals from other countries, especially Austria, to her borders.
It is in October of 1913 that the reigning Pope, Pius X, makes a remark, now public record, to the effect that Austria -Hungary should have punished the Serbians for all their wrongs. (Austria-Hungary is Roman Catholic.)
The Hapsburgs are the intended tools of this punishment, and Rome, it seems, begins to dream of an all-out victory over the schismatic Serbs, which would send repercussions among all Orthodox, the sworn enemies of Rome's domination of the Church.
Into this mix comes a growing Germany (oddly like the present-day mix in Europe). There has been a struggle here from the 1800's. Protestant Prussia, with her leader Bismarck, are making laws unacceptable to Rome. Catholics are being arrested. Papal pronouncements are issued declaring German laws void. A full one-fourth of the Parliament is Catholic.
Pius IX, who cannot seem to get along with Bismarck, is replaced by Leo XIII, who makes some successful compromises. In fact, Bismarck and Leo begin to lean on each other for help, in a mini-beast relationship. Their common enemy : democracy, rule of the people. So the Pope, through the Bismarckian rule, through the hierarchy of the Church, and through the Catholic "Centre Party," has an ally in Germany.
This group then begins a campaign against the "anti-Christian, Jewish, liberal capitalism. A hatred for the democratic spirit is fostered, an attachment to authoritarianism is revived. The way for a dictator is being prepared.
One cannot forget also the hatred Rome feels for the Orthodox Church. Through the years she tries to do away with, punish, overcome, or unite with them. All to no avail. Orthodoxy keeps resurrecting. Now she rises in Tsarist Russia, from the days of Peter the Great (1721) until the Great War.
So the question in Germany becomes, should the Germans (and thus Catholicism) or the Russians (and thus the Orthodox) rule the world? We know Germany's answer.
So the Pontiff is deeply involved in the politics of the region. The first Reich, or reign or Kingdom, that is, the Hapsburg's intended domination of Europe, is on the wane. The second Reich now becomes the goal. Hitler will try for yet a third.
As stated, the Austrian Archduke Francois Ferdinand is murdered in Sarajevo (a city also of 1992-93 fame). This is June 28, 1914, the beginning of World War I. The crime is committed by a Macedonian student, not a Serb, but Austria now has its reason to begin a war, and to, in the process, reestablish Papal Power.
While outwardly detesting the growing conflict, there are other Papal comments heard behind the scenes from the Papal Secretary of State:
"It would have been impossible to detect any spirit of indulgence and conciliation in the words of His Eminence. It is true that he described the note to Serbia [from Austria, a threat to give in to all its demands, or else] as very harsh, but he nevertheless approved of it entirely and, at the same time and indirectly, expressed the wish that the Monarchy would finish the job. Indeed, added the cardinal, it was a pity that Serbia had not been humiliated much earlier..." (Paris, op.cit. , p.118)
The Bavarian charge d'Affaires to the Vatican had written:
"The Pope agrees with Austria dealing severely with Serbia. He doesn't think much of the Russian and French armies and is of the opinion that they could not do very much in a war against Germany..."(Paris, p. 118)
The Pope, Benedict XV (1914-1922) in Ad Beatissimi, November 1, 1914, tells us the
"...true source of the present deplorable conflict. Truly, as soon as the rules and dictates of Christian wisdom, which are the assured basis of stability and peace, came to be disregarded in the ordering of public life, the very structure of the State began to be shaken to its fall..."
Is he speaking of spiritual attitudes of individual Christians, or the lack of submission to Rome? There is a difference.
He goes on to pledge absolute impartiality. Publicly it would seem he kept this promise. But look again. Catholic Austria is beating up on Orthodox Serbia.
I ask you to consider, in the light of all I have shared so far, do you think it is possible that the Roman Pontiff, wishing to strike at "Orthodoxy," and other traditional enemies, might unleash the horror of a world war on the nations? Or is he merely riding the sure winner -or so he thinks -, the "beast" of the day, to victory and resultant expansion of power? The answer to such a question is academic and will be contested for some time. But what cannot be denied is the intricate binding of the War with the Holy See, as it maneuvers its will via Austria -Hungary and Germany.
Paris (op. cit.) documents what would seem to be contradictions of the Pope's "neutrality." He states that the Pope made public prayers for peace, just as Germany was about to be defeated (Jan. 1915), that the Pope hindered food supplies, dissuaded neutrals from joining the Allies, and was perhaps involved in the poisoning of the neutral Vatican Secretary of State.
My, there seems to be no light at the end of this Babylonian tunnel.
I must state that a perusal of a short history of World War I from a secular source gives a much different slant to things, not mentioning the Pope, and stressing Germany. Fair. And there are other factors that could be emphasized, depending on the author's world-view. Let me suggest that a careful blending of all these varied causes is legitimate, as long as one notes the following:
1. The Vatican has been world-power-conscious since it inherited the throne from Caesar. I believe I have documented this.
2. Austria-Hungary and the Hapsburg Rulers are the main ally of Rome in 1914.
3. Germany, though having its Lutheran element, still is strongly Catholic.
4. There is nothing Papal Rome would have enjoyed more than the re-empowerment of Central Europe, traditionally the stronghold from which Papa rules.
5. Both pro- and anti-war sentiments of the Popes can be documented.
Knowing these things, readers can work the rest out with the historians. And while working, it will be interesting to weave in yet another thread: Fatima.
FIFTY-FOUR: "OUR LADY"
In every part of this story so far we have run across what Ken Samples calls, The Cult of the Virgin. In 1992, Ken wrote a book by this title which summarizes well the issue before us. I want to share that summary before I introduce the apparition of Fatima. I weave Ken's writings with my own comments in the following paragraphs.
It is no longer appropriate, I believe, to say that Catholics over- exalt Mary, and Protestants under-exalt her. In fact we are never told to exalt or honor her in Scripture! She certainly knew that all nations would call her blessed, and so she was, but no express command comes from God to venerate her! What we see in the world today is the same worship of the "lady" as has been common since the days immediately following Nimrod.
Though there was a lull in lady-worship shortly after Vatican II, to help draw in Protestants , we are now experiencing a revival of the cult that is alarming, and should be!
Whence the doctrines of Mary in the Church?
In 451 A.D., Mary is defined as the Theotokos, the "God-bearer," later "Mother of God." Though at first a shocking title, this one is at least logically defensible, since Jesus is God! Elizabeth calls Mary "the Mother of my Lord" in Luke 1:43.
Seldom mentioned, though, is Jesus' own response to her as an equal among all the believers! Absolutely no prominence is given her by any Bible author! Not one word about her after the Book of Acts!
Now, in A.D. 553, at the Second Council of Constantinople, she is called "ever virgin." Here Rome is clearly in error, and comes against the Scriptures she claims to be passing on...
The Greek word adelphos , "brother" , is always used when referring to the male relatives of Christ. Though footnotes in Catholic translations have changed the word to "cousin," it is necessary to point out that there is a Greek word for "cousin," namely anepsios, as in Colossians 4:10.
This is deceit. Call it nothing else. Mary was a virgin until Jesus was born. After that Joseph took unto himself his lovely bride and with her had children, the brothers and sisters of Jesus!
Each deception builds on the past ones. Mother of God, ever virgin, she must have had an immaculate conception, that is , she must have been spared original sin. At least that's what we're told now. Aquinas, Bonaventure, and Peter Lombard, to name a few, opposed this heresy on Biblical grounds.
Biblical grounds were buried by John Duns Scotus (1264-1308), but even he did not convince the entire church of his day. Finally, in 1854, the doctrine was defined by Pope Pius IX. So, officially, the church taught nothing about this doctrine for its first 1800 years.
Mary was indeed highly favored, "graced", if you will, and was chosen to be so for God's special purpose. She was a willing, obedient servant, who like John the Baptist, was full of the Holy Ghost, equipped for the task. But like John, and all others before the cross, and all of us after the cross, she was made of flesh, was imperfect before a Holy God, and needed a Saviour. (Romans 3:23,6:23,Luke 1:47) We, like her, are filled with God's grace!
If she was conceived without sin, certainly death cannot hold her, reasons the Roman Catholic mind. In the 5th century, to help this reasoning along, a document written by a supposed apostle begins to circulate. It has no historical validity, but people begin to believe it. It talks of Mary's assumption into heaven. (Remarkably like the original "ladies" of paganism.)
The teaching lays among the Catholic nations for over 1000 years, until in the latter 19th and early 20th centuries a campaign begins to have this teaching accepted as from God. Interesting way of doing business, don't you think? From among the people there is a stirring which the hierarchy must decide upon! Is this humanism or what?
Eight million "lay" and one million "religious" vote the assumption in, so Pope Pius XII in 1950, knowing his political base is solid, says, yes, God really wants us to believe that Mary ascended to Heaven like Jesus, body, soul, and spirit.
Through the years, building on these falsehoods, Rome has termed Mary the co-redemptrix (since she assented to the birth of Jesus who died for us), the mediatrix (who makes her son more open to our prayers), the dispensatrix (who gives to us what Jesus gives to her for us), and the intercessatrix (who goes to Christ on our behalf.)
In other words, everything Jesus is, Mary is. My heart hurts to write these words.
How far can this go? Jerome's Vulgate translation renders Genesis 3:15 in the feminine gender (she shall bruise your head). Mary is called the neck through which everything from Christ to the body of Christ flows. And on and on and on.
Refresh yourself in the Scripture a moment before you read on. Rome notwithstanding, there still is only one God and one Mediator between God and man, the Man Christ Jesus.(I Timothy 2:5).
Mary is blessed? Those who hear and keep the Word of God are blessed more! said Jesus. Yet make no statue of me, please. When I die, I'll be with Jesus, but my body won't meet my spirit until yours does. And I'll not be visiting you in ghost-fashion. Necromancy is forbidden by my God.
Do you realize that this one called "Queen of Heaven" ,as were the Assyrian and Babylonian goddesses, would have to be omniscient and omnipresent to hear all the prayers addressed to her? These are attributes of Deity.
You've heard of the weeping statues of Mary? If Mary really is weeping right now, the real Mary, it must be because of all that is being claimed in her name.
She has supposedly appeared over 200 times since the 30's, in 32 different countries [per the 1990's]. Some say there have been over 20,000 sightings throughout history.
In 1531, Guadalupe, Mexico, she told Juan Diego to tell the bishop to build her a "sanctuary", which he did in 1533. Why the bishop was not informed directly we aren't told. In 1709 and 1976, basilicas were built to honor the event.
In 1858, Lourdes, France, one Bernadette Soubirous receives 18 apparitions which instruct her to pray (especially the rosary), walk on her knees, eat grass, and of course, get the message to someone that a chapel is to be built in her honor.
Remember Peter after the mount of transfiguration? "Let's build three tabernacles." Jesus ignores him! The holy temple Jesus wants built in His honor is you.
In Bernadette's 16th revelation, the apparition identifies itself: "I am the Immaculate Conception." Here was a convenient confirmation of the heretical dogma defined by the Church only four years earlier!
And that brings us to 1916. The world is made to focus once more on Mystery Babylon, via some occurrences in Portugal.
The subjects: several young children.
The preview: three visits by an angel calling itself "the angel of peace." The angel proceeds to announce that Mary, the mother of Jesus, will be making several appearances.
The schedule: on the 13th day of the following months, for six months, Mary is to deliver special messages for these special children.
The messages:
May 13. A preliminary introductory greeting, encouraging the children to say the rosary.
June 13. I quote:
"He wants to establish the devotion to my Immaculate Heart...(say the rosary every day) to earn peace for the world...my immaculate heart will be your refuge and the way that will lead you to God."
[What saith the Word of God? Again I quote. "The Eternal God is your refuge." Deuteronomy 33:27 "Jesus says to him, ' I am the way...NO ONE comes to the Father, except by Me.' " John 14:6 Regarding the rosary there simply is no Scripture to quote!
July 13. "Mary" says: "In October, I will perform a miracle so that all may believe..."
[The Bible: "These are written so that you may believe."
"Faith comes by hearing the Word of God."]
She goes on: "Sacrifice yourself for sinners [but Jesus loved us and gave Himself for us.] and say often, ' My Jesus, it is for love of you, for the conversion of sinners, and in reparation for sins committed against the Immaculate Heart of Mary.' "
[So it is against Mary we have sinned? How utterly blasphemous!]
On this same July day, the children are treated to a vision of Hell and demons. To save people from Hell,
"God wishes to establish in the world the devotion to the Immaculate Heart [ so much for the plan of salvation]. If they do what I tell you, many souls will be saved, and there will be peace. [ But Mary, the Bible's Mary, said, "Whatever He says to you, do it!"]
"The war is going to end. But if they don't stop offending God, another and worse one will begin in the reign of Pius XI. [sure enough, WW II begins at the end of his reign. Where does Babylon get its information? And what does this tell you about the value of the prophetic gift? Can false teachers give true prophecies? Check your Bible dictionary for the name "Balaam."]
"When you shall see a night illuminated by an unknown light, know that this is the great sign that God will give you, that He is going to punish the world by means of war, hunger, and persecutions of the church, and of the Holy Father [a Roman Catholic term meaning the Pope. Also a Biblical phrase meaning God Almighty. Oh beware! Rome, you have gone too far!]
"To prevent this, I shall come to ask for the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart...If they listen to my requests, Russia will be converted, and there will be peace. If not she will scatter her errors throughout the world, provoking wars and persecutions of the Church...various nations will be annihilated. In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me, and she will be converted, and a certain period of peace will be granted to the world."
Still think we're dealing with a lightweight here? These prophecies are documented facts. Their fulfillments are obvious. Their messenger, however, asks you to follow her, to trust her. No mention is made of a revival of the Spirit of God, or of people being born into the Kingdom. In the Satanic context of which she speaks, Russia and the Pope getting it together, "she" is right on. Or mostly so. And through the years many, like Jeanne Dixon for example, have been able to see into the future, but never with 100% accuracy.
A true prophet is right all the time, and speaks God's words in their fullness. He is not a fortune-teller, but a messenger of God. If he misses once, or denies revelation already given, he is a false prophet. But false prophets are right much of the time. Church, awake!
August 13. Announcing....Joseph and the Child Jesus will be appearing in October. Don't miss it!
September 13. An "eyewitness" account of the events of that day:
"At midday there was complete silence. One only heard the murmur of prayers. Suddenly there were sounds of jubilation and voices praising the Blessed Virgin. [ official Roman line: "We don't worship her, we only honor her." Not!]
"Arms were raised pointing to something in the sky. 'Look, don't you see? ' 'Yes, yes I do...' There had not been a cloud in the deep blue of the sky, and I too (Msgr. John Quaresma) raised my eyes and scrutinized it in case I should be able to distinguish what the others, more fortunate than I, had already claimed to have seen.
"With great astonishment I saw, clearly and distinctly, a luminous globe, which moved from the east to the west, gliding slowly and majestically through space. My friend also looked, and had the good fortune to enjoy the same unexpected and delightful vision. Suddenly the globe, with its extraordinary light disappeared. Near us was a little girl dressed like Lucia [ one of the recipients of the visions] and more or less the same age. She continued to cry out happily: ' I still see it! Now it's coming down...!' "
An old lady on that day cried bitterly because she had seen nothing.
Well, what do you think you would have seen? Was this mass hysteria? The Emperor's New Clothes syndrome? Deceiving Spirits? An Angel of Light? Signs and wonders meant to deceive - if it were possible- the very elect? One thing we can rule out: a revelation from God. God never contradicts Himself! The teachings surrounding this whole series of events are so blasphemous as to let true believers know that God is not a part of it.
October 13. I quote, as in all the above passages from the book by Christopher Rengers, written in 1986, published by Alba House in New York, The Youngest Prophet.
"Many newspapers in Portugal sent reporters to cover the events of October 13. Descriptions of how the throng of 70,000 converged on the Cova da Iria are colorful and graphic. O DIA of Lisbon reported: 'For days prior to the thirteenth, groups of pilgrims traveled toward Fatima. They came on foot...food bags on their heads, across the pine groves...people from everywhere whom the voice of the miracle had reached, left their homes and fields, and came on foot, by horse or by carriage...over the plateau, over a hill, or filling a valley, there was a wide and shuffling mass of thousands upon thousands of souls in prayer...' "
To Lucia, Mary is reported to have said:
" 'I want to tell you to have them build a chapel here in my honor. I am the Lady of the Rosary. Let them continue to say the rosary every day. The war is going to end, and the soldiers will soon return to their homes...Let them offend Our Lord no more, for He is already much offended.'" Then she opened her hands, from which light emerged, and ascended to "where the sun ought to be. And while she was arising, her own radiance continued shining towards the sun. This the children saw. It was the moment of the miracle of the sun the people saw in the Cova and in a radius of 30 miles...When our Lady disappeared in the immense distance of the sky, next to the sun we saw St. Joseph holding the child Jesus and Our Lady dressed in white with a blue mantle..."
Those readers who know God and His Word are immediately aware of the false suppositions thus bound on a spiritually illiterate people. They will recall that the founders of Islam, Mormonism, and other false religions all have their miracles. No one denies that the supernatural has occurred for any of these false prophets. But discerning Christians understand that the demonic is also supernatural.
So, in the midst of a world gone mad with war and fear, Babylon, whether by its human or superhuman agents one cannot be sure, attempts to manipulate the minds of men with a well-timed sign. How many suffer the torments of Hell in this hour because they believed the lie rather than hear the truth which saves?
In the final historical section of this work, I will return to the documentation of the Mary phenomenon.
