Is Christianity a human invention to control people?If it was, the people who care only about power would not seek to destroy it. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and if the powerful are not God fearing, they are always the first to forsake God and His revelation. The reason for this is because the Catholic faith enjoins a fixed rule that applies to all, one made by God “Who accepts no person nor takes bribes” (Deut. 10: 17). When the little people refuse to do the wrong that the powerful enjoins, then that makes the going tough for the tyrant. In times of crisis, it is usually the little people who are faithful to God and seldom the powerful. Let’s face it, if the Catholic faith was a tool of powerbrokers, all the powerbrokers would defend it and impose it. But the powerbrokers are doing the exact opposite! “Provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God and in whom there is truth, and that hate avarice” (Exodus 18: 21). This is the opposite of powerbrokers. Mayer Amschell Rothschild, who could be said to be the founder of modern politics said: “Let me control the money, and I don’t care who makes your laws”. Because who pays the piper, calls the tune. But it’s not as if God was setting His people up to lose, because strength comes from Heaven to those who serve God faithfully. God only gives the wicked power over His people when they are unfaithful to God: “Wheresoever they went in without bow and arrow, and without shield and sword, their God fought for them and overcame. And there was no-one that triumphed over this people, but when they departed from the worship of the Lord, their God. But as often as besides their own God they worshipped any other, they were given to spoil, and to the sword, and to reproach. And as often as they were penitent for having revolted from the worship of their God, the God of Heaven gave them power to resist… As long as they sinned not in the sight of their God, it was well with them: for their God hates iniquity… Now my Lord, search if there be any iniquity of theirs in the sight of their God: let us go up to them, because their God will surely deliver them to thee, and they shall be brought under the yoke of thy power: But if there be no offence of this people in the sight of their God, we cannot resist them, because their God will defend them: and we will be a reproach to the whole earth” (Judith 5: 16-25).
Why do Catholics so honour the mother of Jesus Christ? Because He does! Jesus Christ said: "I have given you an example... so you do also" (Jn. 13:15). "When Jesus therefore had seen His mother and the disciple standing whom He loved, He said to His mother: Woman, behold thy son. After that, He said to the disciple: Behold thy mother. And from that hour, the disciple took her to his own" (Jn. 19: 26,27). The Church has always taught that St. John standing by the Cross represents us. Honor thy father and thy mother that you may be long lived upon the land which the Lord thy God will give thee" (Exodus 20: 12)
The Jews of the Old Testament believed in the Holy Trinity! The Holy Ghost was called “The Shekina” in the Old Testament. Eloi (Psalm 21) Whom Jesus called upon as He died on the Cross, is the Father. Eloi is also Elohim, which, like Adonai (Ex. 6: 3) signifies a plurality of persons. “Thus said The Lord the King of Israel, and His redeemer The Lord of Hosts; I Am the first and the last, and besides Me there is no God” (Isaias 44: 6).
The Name Jesus means "saviour": "Thou shalt call His name Jesus, for He shall save His people from their sins" (Luke 1: 31). "Jesus is the Greek form of the Hebrew Joshua, meaning "Jah saves", "Jehova saves", or "The God of mercy saves." ("How Christ Said The First Mass" P. 41, by Rev. J.L. Meagher, D.D., President of the Christian Press Association Publishing Company, from Tan Books). The author goes on to point out that Moses only led the Hebrews in sight of The Promised Land, which pre-figures The Catholic Church, and also Heaven (Apoc.21: 10). It was Joshua who pre-figured Jesus that led them into it. To save people from their sins, is better than a conqueror winning a military victory, since war, famine, pestilence, sickness, death, and misfortune, natural disasters, are punishments from God for sin, whereas peace, good fortune, and worldly power are blessings God bestows for abstaining from sin (Deuteronomy 11: 8-28). Although exceptions such as Job, Tobias, and St. Paul the Apostle show forth some higher purpose on Gods part.
Did Jesus learn Eastern Esotericism in his “hidden life” and mingle it with Judaism? They say that this was where he got His power of working miracles from! There is no trace of esotericism in the doctrine or in the life of Jesus Christ, or in the Church He founded. St. Ignatius of Antioch, Bishop and Doctor of the Church, and said to be that little Jewish child whom Jesus held up to his disciples (Matt. 18: 1) as the model of childlike simplicity that they should learn from, said that the doctrine of Jesus Christ was the doctrine of the Prophets whom the esoteric among the Jews also persecuted and put to death: “Why, the Prophets, those men so very near to God, lived in conformity with Jesus Christ. This, too, was the reason why they were persecuted, inspired as they were by His grace to bring full conviction to an unbelieving world that there is one God, who manifested Himself through Jesus Christ, His Son…” (St. Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Magnesians: 8, P. 71, Ancient Christian Writers, The Newman Bookshop, Maryland, 1946). From the time of Jeroboam and Roboam the sons of Solomon, a faction among the Jews rebellious to God arose to power. This was the element that persecuted the prophets and crucified Jesus Christ, as God said of Solomon in the Old Testament: “That thou should make the kingdom to be divided, and out of Ephraim a rebellious kingdom to rule.” (Ecclesiasticus 47: 23).
Jesus lived a quiet life as a student of Jewish teachers, especially of His Temple educated mother, and as a carpenter with St. Joseph, His foster father, until He reached the 30 years of age required for becoming a Rabbi. If they read the Bible they will see His enemies affirm: “We know that Thou art a true speaker and teach the way of God in truth without fearing any man” (Matt.22: 16). If Jesus was expressing foreign concepts in His doctrine He would have been stoned to death, and the Pharisees would have had a case against Him. The ordinary Jewish people who were free of the corrupting influences that infected the men of power of that day loved and acclaimed Jesus: “Do you see that we prevail nothing? Behold, the whole world is gone after Him” (Jn. 12: 19), said the Pharisees.
It was the enemies of Jesus Christ that mingled Pagan superstitions with Judaism, as Jesus Christ affirmed: “You have made void the Commandment of God for your tradition” (Matt. 15: 6). “Sodom and Egypt, where there Lord was crucified” (Apoc. 11: 8) says the Apocalypse signifying the character of the Pharisees responsible for the crucifixion of Christ, and not the place where Christ was crucified, which everyone knows and Scripture tells us was outside the walls of Jerusalem. In the Bible, God often uses names to judge or signify, even though the name is not what the people or places were commonly known as. For example, God told the prophet Osee to tell the Jews from Him: “Call her name, Without mercy: for I will not add any more to have mercy on the house of Israel, but I will utterly forget them.” (Osee 1: 6). Those who are faithful to God are Sion and Juda, “the city of God”, says St. Augustine in his work of that name. However, those who are unfaithful and sinful are referred to by God in Sacred Scripture as Sodom, Egypt, or Babylon, the city of the Devil, because they do the works those cities were infamous for, explained Pope Leo XIII in his encyclical, “On Freemasonry”. “The works of God are perfect, and all His ways are judgments: God is faithful and without any iniquity, He is just and right. They have sinned against Him, and are none of His children in their filth: they are a wicked and perverse generation.” (Deuteronomy 32: 4,5).
The Old Testament is replete with incidents of God sending the Prophets, whom they also persecuted and killed, against the leaders of His people who were leading His people astray with Paganism: “And 70 men of the ancients of the House of Israel and Jezonias the son of Saasphan stood in the midst of them that stood before the pictures: and everyone had a censer in his hand… And He said to me, surely you see, O son of man what the ancients of the House of Israel do in the dark, everyone in private in his chamber: for they say: The Lord sees us not, the Lord has forsaken the earth. And if you turn again you will see greater abominations which these commit… at the door of the temple of the Lord, between the porch and the altar were about 25 men having their backs towards the Temple of the Lord, and their faces to the East: and they adored towards the rising of the sun” (Ezechiel 8: 11-13, 16).
The Pharisees were hand in glove with the Sadducees who were Gnostics, “the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both.” (Acts 23: 8) and the Herodians, who were the proponents of Herod, the Edomite puppet king appointed by the Romans, and they were all against Jesus. Birds of a feather flock together! They did not and could not reproach Jesus with any doctrinal or moral errors or idolatry. If they could reproach Jesus with doctrinal errors or idolatry, in truth, He would not have even been allowed into the Temple, let alone teach in it, and Jesus taught in the Temple every day.
The Pharisees were inveterate hypocrites, exhibiting an exterior of ultra conservatism and religious punctiliousness before the people. Jesus called them “whited sepulchers, which outwardly appear to men beautiful, but within are full of dead men’s bones, and of all filthiness. So you also outwardly appear to men just; but inwardly you are full of hypocrisy and iniquity” (Matt. 23: 27). If Jesus was not of God and unfaithful like they were, perhaps He would have fit right in with them, and He would have been one of them! But as it was, His integrity and uprightness were a reproach to them. “Let us therefore lie in wait for the just, because He is not of our turn, and He is contrary to our doings, and upbraids us with the transgressions of the law, and divulges against us the sins of our way of life. He boasts that He has the knowledge of God and calls Himself the Son of God. He is become a censurer of our thoughts. He is grievous unto us even to behold: for His life is not like other men’s, and His ways are very different. We are esteemed by Him as triflers, and He abstains from our ways as from filthiness, and He prefers the latter end of the just, and glories that He has God for His Father. Let us see then if His words be true, and let us prove what shall happen to Him, and we shall know what His end shall be. For if He be the true Son of God, He will defend Him, and will defend Him from the hands of His enemies. Let us examine Him by outrages and tortures, that we may know His meekness and try His patience. Let us condemn Him to a most shameful death… These things they thought and were deceived: for their own malice had blinded them. And they know not the secrets of God, nor hoped for the wages of justice, nor esteemed the honor of holy souls. For God created man incorruptible, to the image of His own likeness He made him. But by the envy of the Devil death came into the world: and they follow him that are of his side.” (Wisdom 2: 12-25).
Jesus taught daily in the Temple and was called “The Son of David” (Matt. 21: 9). “I have always taught in the Synagogue, and in the Temple whither all the Jews resort; and in secret I have spoken nothing.” (Jn. 18: 20). “And early in the morning He came again into the Temple, and all the people came to Him, and sitting down He taught them” (Jn. 8: 2). The efforts of the Pharisees to suborn false witnesses against Jesus (Mark 14: 55-60), and against Stephen later (Acts 6: 11), shows that they had nothing true to reproach Him with. Their accusation was: “Thou, being a man makest Thyself God” (Jn. 10: 33), even though the Jews expected the Messiah to be God incarnate: “Art thou the Christ the Son of the Blessed God. And Jesus said to him, I Am.” (Mark 14: 61). And Jesus worked miracles to prove it. “What do we, for this man does many miracles”? (Jn. 11: 47), said those men of bad faith. Also, when Judas regretted his betrayal of Jesus, saying to the Pharisees: “I have sinned in betraying innocent blood.” (Matt. 27: 4) Their answer to him was: “What is that to us?” (Ibid.) In other words, they didn’t care that Jesus was innocent, and had the testimony of God in miracles, they just wanted to put Him to death, because like witches and sorcerers they were against God. Miracles combined with the irreproachable life and doctrine of Jesus Christ, and their own admission, leaves the Pharisees and the Sanhedrin without excuse or justification. “Rabbi, we know that Thou art a teacher come from God; for no man could do these signs which Thou dost unless God be with Him” (Jn. 3: 2).
Real Miracles: In the following quote, St. Francis DeSales sets forth the difference between Diabolic phenomena and Divine miracles, and natural causes, he says: “For when people see what they think impossible, they take it for a miracle, as they consider many things in nature impossible which are really not so… “, but as regards the difference between what nature and human ingenuity are capable of, and diabolic power and Divine power, he says: “Whereas the diabolic exceeds the human by a great degree, the Divine surpasses the diabolic by an infinity… In order that Moses might be believed God gave him the power to work miracles (Ex. 4); Our Lord, says St. Mark, confirmed in the same manner the Apostolic preaching; if Our Lord had not done such miracles men would not have sinned in not believing Him, says the Lord (Jn. 15: 24) … Therefore a miracle is a sound proof of faith… when God speaks by works everybody understands – this is a language common to all nations.” (The Catholic Controversy, Pt. 2, Ch. 1, Art. 7, P. 312-317, by St. Francis DeSales, Doctor of the Church, from Tan Books).
It is certain that when Jesus multiplied five loaves and two fishes among a crowd of 5,000 people on several occasions, and walked on water, rebuked the storm and it was instantly calm, raised Lazarus from the dead four days after his death when the body smelled of decomposition, that such things cannot be attributed to natural causes, to charlatanism, or to diabolic phenomena. The ever watchful and always accusing Pharisees, at that time, never accused Jesus of fraud, or lying, or of any sin or corruption. “Which of you will convince Me of sin. If I say the truth to you, why will you not believe Me? He that is of God, hears the words of God, you hear them not because you are not of God.” (Jn. 8: 46, 47). What they did accuse Jesus of cynically and in bad faith, was of casting out Devils by the power of the Devil, which Jesus easily refuted: “And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself: how then shall his kingdom stand? And if I by Beelzebub cast out Devils, then by whom do your children cast them out? Therefore, they shall be your judges. But if I by the Spirit of God cast out devils, then is the kingdom of God come upon you.” (Matt. 12: 26-28). From the time of Christ, the Jewish priests no longer had powers of exorcism, only the Catholic priests who succeeded the Apostles had (Acts 19: 13-16). Jesus condemned the Pharisees for saying that His doctrine, which was manifestly of God, backed up by miracles: “that no other man has done” (Jn. 15: 24), which were obviously the work of God, and His own person Whose personal integrity and holiness was impeccable and indisputable, was of the Devil. Jesus called this a sin against the Holy Spirit which will not be forgiven either in this life or in the next (Matt. 12: 24-32). “St. Thomas insists (IIIa P.Q. 47, a 6 ad 1), that the excusing words of Our Lord: ‘Father, forgive them for they know not what they do’ (Luke 22: 34) were uttered on behalf of the common people, but not on behalf of the leaders of the Jews.” (The Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jewish Nation, Ch. 4, P. 55,56, by Fr. Denis Fahey, C.S.Sp., D.D., Ph.D., B.A., Professor of Philosophy and History, Holy Ghost Missionary College, Dublin, Ireland, Imprimatur (Church approval) 1953).
Miracles which prove the Divinity and truth of Jesus Christ and His Catholic faith continued throughout history, and many of them are on public display for anyone who wants to go there and see them. Such miracles include the Holy Shroud of Turin, which secular science has never been able to explain, the Tilma of Our Lady of Guadalupe. Both of these are the only two of their kind in history. The numerous Eucharistic miracles, such as the miracle of Lanciano in Italy which is still on public display. The Incorrupt bodies of many saints, such as that of St. Cecelia, a virgin martyr who died in 177 A.D., whose body is still in the reliquary of the Church in Rome dedicated to her name.
“Woe to thee, Corozain, woe to thee Bethsaida. For if in Tyre and Sidon had been wrought the mighty works that have been wrought in you, they would have done penance long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes. But it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the judgment, than for you.” (Luke 10: 13,14).
Did Jesus survive the crucifixion, marry Mary Magdalene and moved to France? There are always new fables cropping up among Antichristian’s, and some old ones recycled. This one is as recent as the 19th century, even though it involves a fabulous tale about the alleged offspring of Jesus and Mary Magdalene marrying into French Monarchy in the 5th century. Its proponents claim that the French Monarchy was in competition with the Catholic Church about the Merovingian Dynasty and the fabled bloodline of holy blood from the alleged union of Jesus and Mary Magdalene. The tale originates with the Rosicrucian’s, a powerful international secret society who are the successors of the Templar’s, an occult society that is associated with the worship of Baphomet – another name for the Devil, “the father of lies” (Jn. 8: 44).
The truth is that the French monarchy was the left hand of the Church until it was wiped out at the French revolution in 1789, because of its loyalty to the Church. The Templar’s began at the time of the Crusades and were condemned and disbanded by the Church at the time of King Phillipe le Bel in the 13th century for sorcery, murder and sexual deviancy. The modern purveyors of this legend allege them to be the custodians of these deep secrets, when in fact they were enemies of the French monarchy and the Church since the time of the Crusades. The worshippers of Baphomet who have an agenda of destroy Christianity and who believe that “the end justifies the means” can hardly be considered credible! The historic Catholic Church, on the other hand, teaches a doctrine that allows no iniquity or wrong to be done for any reason, and although there were a few bad Popes and churchmen throughout history, they were the exception rather than the rule. The majority were good and upright men. However that may be, the story behind the pop novels The Davinci Code and Holy Blood, Holy Grail, is a modern invention having no historical basis!
If something like that had any real basis in reality or history, the enemies of the Church who have shown themselves ferocious and vindictive, would have played that card to the max, and the Church authorities would have had some explaining to do. But there was no such thing! One of the pundits of this nutbar mythology said that the story behind the popular novels “The DaVinci Code” could destroy the Church. Obviously, that’s what it was invented to do! The plea will be made that “The DaVinci Code” is only fiction. But the disclaimer on the DaVinci Code that it is fiction, is in small print inside the cover where few would ever read it, but emblazoned in large print on the cover of the book after “an astonishing truth concealed for centuries…”, is “read the book and be enlightened”. It was at least, a trial balloon, if not an attempt to inculcate lies under the cover of a storybook.
The Gospels – the eye-witnesses, state quite clearly that Jesus was dead when the lance pierced His heart on the Cross. “But after they were come to Jesus, when they saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs. But one of the soldiers with a spear opened His side, and immediately there came out blood and water” (Jn. 19: 33,34).
The blood and water are scientific evidence that the heart was pierced. Even if it was the lungs that the lance pierced, as gainsayers contend, it would still have been fatal. But science proves that it was the heart. See: “More proof About The Death of Jesus Christ”, P. 19.
Jesus Christ was never married, He was a virgin all His life: “unspotted and undefiled” (1 Pet. 1: 19). Mary Magdalene lived with her brother and her sister, and Jesus only visited their house once, with His Apostles and plenty of followers (Jn. 12: 1-9). St. Paul said that He was “like as we are, without sin” (Heb. 4: 15). It is not possible that He could have committed fornication with Mary Magdalene, because such things were punished with death in the Old Testament, and the Pharisees would have pursued the matter rigorously, if there was even a basis for suspicion. “Which of you shall convince Me of sin?” (Jn. 8: 46), said Jesus to the Pharisees to underscore His credibility. But such a thing was never alleged against Jesus in His lifetime or for hundreds of years after.
As God communicated with His people in the Old Testament, He continues to do so in the New Testament. Jesus Christ Himself told St. Margaret Mary in 1689 A.D. that He has such hatred for the vice of fornication that He did not allow Himself to be even tempted by it. (Autobiography of St. Margaret Mary, Ch. 68, P. 79, 80, with Imprimatur, from Tan Books).
Jesus advocated celibacy: “For the Kingdom of Heaven” (Matt. 19: 12), which He Himself was the example of. Even in these days, people who are homosexuals advocate homosexuality and scoff at celibacy, and many married people scoff at it too! In reality, the only people who are for virginity and celibacy are those who practice it, or other pious Catholics who have great reverence for priests and nuns, and who are living up to their religion! “A tree is known by its fruits. Do men gather figs from thistles? (Matt. 7: 16). Jesus had no earthly motive for His legacy of Holy Virginity, only a Heavenly one - the sanctity of the Lord. After all, other founders of religions, such as Muhammad and the Martin Luther were married men, and their religions grew and remained. Therefore, virginity in either Jesus or in His followers was not necessary to the furtherance of an ambitious scheme.
The evidence existing from the time is conclusive, complete and pure, and in that case, it cannot be gainsaid in good faith. In science, the fresher the scene of events is, the easier it is to find out the truth. Those who gainsay the evidence existing from the time, 2,000 years after the fact, are going beyond the evidence, and into the realm of conjecture and wishful thinking, and probably fraud. The stories about other founders of other religions are never questioned, even when their lives were of dubious credibility and the facts about them were obscure. The life and doctrine of Jesus Christ, however, is well documented and held up to His followers as an example of His teaching for all to follow. But the children of the Devil cannot leave it as it is, but must forever try to undo the facts. We Catholics have no problem with science, but only with fraud and with those who would fix things the way they want them to be, and disguise it as science. They are the same crowd as when the Irish people overwhelmingly voted “no” to abortion in a so-called democratic election, they would not accept that democratic verdict, so they held election after election until they forced the “result” they wanted by who knows what devices behind the scenes. Similarly, with the Shroud of Turin, the burial cloth on which Jesus Christ left His image. Their scientists examined it in the 1970s and said that their tests showed that it originated in the middle ages. However, photography did not exist in the middle ages. The picture on the image was only discovered to be a photographic negative when it was photographed for the first time in the 1800s. More recent science has discovered that the burst of light that produced the image is a form of light unknown to modern science. The only other thing like it that the world has ever seen is the Tilma of Guadalupe on which the mother of Jesus left her image in 1531 before the eyes of Juan Diego. Similar scientific results fail to explain how the image got on the Tilma. Furthermore, other scientific data shows dust and pollen grains on the Shroud of Turin fabric that put it in the area of Jerusalem at the time of Christ. So does the fabric itself. Its unique herringbone weave was that used by the Hebrews during the life of Christ. A forensic examination of the shroud show a racially Hebrew man that was crucified, lashed, badly beaten, and crowned with thorns. Dr. Pierre Barbet called it a fifth Gospel. The caption on his book says: “What the Gospels don’t tell us, the shroud does.”
“If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater” (1 Jn. 5: 9). Sin is of the Devil and chastity and justice are of God. God does not work miracles to credit lies or sinners, as Jesus Christ worked miracles. God did not work miracles for Muhammad, Buddah, or Shiva.
“St. Mary Magdalen having for a space of thirty years lived in a cave which is yet to be seen in Provence, having seven times each day had raptures and been borne up in the air by angels, as though she went to sing the 7 Canonical hours in their choir; in the end, upon a Sunday, she came to Church, where her dear Bishop St. Maximin, finding her in contemplation, her eyes full of tears, and her arms stretched out, gave her Holy Communion, and soon after she delivered up her blessed soul, which once again, for good and all, went to her Saviour’s feet, to enjoy the better part, which she had already made choice of here below” (St. Francis DeSales, Bishop, Doctor of the Church, “Treatise On The Love Of God”, Bk. 7: Ch. 11: P. 313, from Tan Books). So much for Mary Magdalene being a dispised and vilified woman, as the DaVinci Code depicts her! In the “Litany of the Saints” recited at major feasts and at the ordination of priests and the consecration of Bishops, her name is ranked ahead of the virgin martyrs, who, next to the Apostles, are the greatest of the saints! The Litany of the Saints is recited at the ordination of priests and at major feasts of the Church. Mary Magdalene was not a prostitute. Mary Magdalene “married a strict Pharisee, Papus, who divorced her because of adultery with a soldier Pandira, and with the latter she took up her residence in the neighboring city Herod had built on the site of an ancient cemetery on the shores of that Lake, 700 ft. below the ocean level, which he called Tiberias… There she lived in sin with soldiers of the garrison, till as the woman taken in adultery, she was brought before Christ who drove seven demons out of her and told her to sin no more (Jn. 8: 3-11). Healed and repentant she went back home to live with her brother and sister.” (How Christ Said The First Mass, Pt. 1, Ch. 3, P. 111, by Fr. James L. Meagher, D.D., Congregation for Higher Studies, President of the Christian Press Association Publishing Company, 1906.) From Tan Books.
The French Monarchy became Catholic in 496 when King Clovis married Clotilda, daughter of the Roman Catholic King of Burgundy. Clotilda’s outstanding virtue caught his eye and captured his heart. Some time after the marriage, the King set out for war, and during the battle of Tolbiac against the Alemanni, he invoked “the God of Clotilda”, saying if I win this war, I will be converted to Roman Catholicism! He won the war. During his solemn royal baptism by St. Remy, Bishop, the chrism bearer could not get through the crowds with the holy oils. Suddenly, a shaft of light pierced the vault of the Cathedral, and a dove fluttered down to the sanctuary with a vial of oil in its beak. The King was baptized with that oil, and it was kept as a precious relic, and as a token of the special Covenant established by God with the French Monarchy. It was called “The Covenant of Rheims”. This continued from 496 until the French revolution in 1789 which signified the end of it. The breaking of this vial during the revolution was considered to be a sign somewhat like the tearing of the veil of the Temple of Jerusalem during the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ, which signified the voiding of the Old Covenant.
Exactly 100 years before in 1689, The Sacred Heart of Jesus spoke to St. Margaret Mary, a nun in France, committing to her a message for the King, telling him that if the King made the solemn public consecration of France to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, that King Louis XIV would be reborn into grace, and be given victory over the enemies of France and of the Church (Letters of St. Margaret Mary, # 100, P. 146, 147, 1997 printing from Tan Books). The adulterous King never did this, and so 100 years later, the French monarchy fell, and its bloodline was wiped out.
The French revolution marked the beginning of the reign of Satan, and the eclipse of the reign of God. The Duke of Orleans who was given the French throne by Freemasons who had no rights over it whatsoever, after the murder of the rightful King and Queen, was one of the prime movers behind the French revolution. By his own admission, he was illegitimate, the result of adultery between the Duchess of Orleans and her coachman, he declared to the Commune, as reported by Prudhomme, the Dukes fellow Freemason. (The French Revolution, Ch. “The Reign of Terror”, P. 358, by Nesta Webster). Therefore this cannot be said to be a calumny invented by the enemies of the Duke of Orleans. Tactics such as calumny and blatant lying are not typical of the enemies of the Revolution, whereas they are typical of revolutionaries. The Catholic thrones were the left hand of the Theocracy. Therefore, only legitimate successors or those anointed by the legitimate Pope have a right to them. Freemasons may have had the power to pretend. But they had no power Catholics would be obliged in conscience to respect or acknowledge.
Incidentally, it was the Duke of Orleans and Freemasonry who embezzled the grain by force and by highway robbery to create a shortage, hoping thereby to blame the King for it, and to stir up the people to revolt. King Louis offered the Duke of Orleans a general pardon and an honorable discharge sending him to exile in England, instead of the death penalty for treason, as he deserved, if only he would open his granaries full of stolen goods, to the people. The King and Queen were not rich themselves, for monarchs, but they personally doled out food to the poor. The revolutionary platitudes about “liberty” were only for pushing the emotional buttons of the masses. There was no lack of liberty in France, which was a prosperous country going into decline since the late 1600s. The revolution brought no good to the French people, only unspeakable misery and horror: “The people were no longer merely paralyzed, but absolutely crushed. Every vestige of liberty accorded by the first two Assemblies under King Louis XVI, - personal liberty, liberty of the Press, religious liberty, the sacredness of property – were utterly destroyed. Even speech was no longer free – a word sufficed to send one to the scaffold. ‘The worst thing under the rule of Robespierre’ old men used to say long afterwards, was that in the morning one could never be sure of sleeping in one’s bed that night “. The French Revolution”, P. 452, Ch. “The Reign of Terror”, by Nesta Webster, from Omni Books, Ph. 661-274-2240.
The true King of France at the time, King Louis XVI, his Queen Marie Antoinette and their daughter were guillotined, along with many of their people who loved King Louis and his queen for their goodness. Malsherbes broke the news to the King that he was sentenced to death: “As the old man entered, the King rose and, looking him in the eyes, said solemnly: ‘Monsieur Malsherbes, for two hours I have been trying to discover whether in the course of my reign I have deserved the least reproach of my subjects. Well, I swear to you in all truth as a man about to appear before God that I have always wished for the happiness of my people, that I have never formed a wish opposed to them’... Thomas Paine represented the ‘universal affliction’ the execution of Louis XVI would create in America, where he was regarded by the people as ‘their best friend, the one who had procured them their liberty’.” (Ibid. P. 373). Their little prince died in revolutionary prison of cold, neglect and starvation at the age of ten. Their daughter, the princess, followed her parents to the guillotine.
Occult proponents of that myth about Jesus and Mary Magdalene think that from an alleged fusion of bloodlines in the Merovingian dynasty, that the decendants blood contains a magic property called vril, and that such blood is thereby holy, even though they are occultists and sinners. This is particularly believed by European royalty from the Victorian era, when this myth began. It doesn’t matter if you and I think it’s daft, these people believe it! It is all based on an invention calculated to promote a mystiqe and a perverse elitism.
The definition of “holiness”, is: “consecrated, sacred, morally & spiritually perfect, belonging to, commissioned by, or devoted to, God” (Oxford Dictionary, 1952). People involved with Luciferian societies such as Freemasonry, and who live according to this world, and contrary to the law of God, can in no way have anything holy about them, until they are converted and bring forth fruits worthy of penance (Luke 3: 8). The truly holy St. John Vianney said: “What a man is in Gods eyes, that he is and nothing more”. God said in the Bible: “But to whom shall I have respect, but to him that is poor and little, and of a contrite spirit, and that trembles at My words” (Isaias 66: 2). “There is none greater than he that fears God” (Ecclusus. 10: 27).
“He changes the heart of the princes of the people of the earth, and deceives them that they walk in vain where there is no way” (Job 12: 24).
St. Francis De Sales said: “A Christian is to love (respect) his body as a living image of Our Savior incarnate, as having issued from the same stock, and consequently belonging to Him in parentage and consanguinity; especially after we have renewed the alliance, by the real reception of the Divine body of our Redeemer, in the most adorable sacrament of the Eucharist, and when by Baptism, Confirmation and other sacraments we have dedicated and consecrated ourselves to the sovereign goodness.” (Treatise On The Love of God, Bk. 3, Ch. 8, P. 148, by St. Francis DeSales, Doctor of the Church), both from Tan Books, Ph. 1-800-437-5876.
“Hear me, ye Divine offspring, and bud forth as the rose planted by the brooks of waters. Give ye a sweet odor as frankincense. Send forth flowers as a lily, and yield a smell, and bring forth leaves in grace, and praise with canticles, and bless the Lord in His works” (Ecclesiasticus 39: 17,19).
St. Louis XVI, King Of France?: Jesus Christ spoke to St. Margaret Mary Alacoque in well authenticated visions in 1689, commanding her to tell the King of France to do as Constantine did in the 4th century when he defeated his enemies, and became the first Christian monarch, thereby decriminalizing Christianity and ending the policy of search and destroy carried on by pagan Rome against the Church since the time of Christ. Constantine was shown a great vision in the sky of the Chi-Rho, that is, a combination of the letter X over P, which refers to Jesus Christ, with the words: “In this sign conquer”. He immediately emblazoned it on all his armaments, and won.
The Lord wanted to humble the enemies of the King of France and make his realms secure. All He asked him to do was to consecrate France to His Sacred Heart, emblazon the image of His Divine and human Heart on the kings armaments, and render public homage to Jesus Christ under that title. But the Monarch could not do even that much. “For obedience is better than sacrifices: and to hearken rather than to offer the fat of rams. Because it is like the sin of witchcraft to rebel: and like the crime of idolatry to refuse to obey, Forasmuch therefore as thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, the Lord has also rejected you from being King” (1 Kings 15: 22-24).
100 years to the day, the French Revolution that toppled the French monarchy broke out.
Queen Marie-Antoinette and King Louis XVI had not heeded the warnings of Popes Clement XII in 1738, and Benedict XIV in 1751, forbidding Catholics to associate, abet, facilitate, or approve Freemasonry anywhere, or under any form, “under pain of excommunication ispo facto without any declaration needing to be incurred” (Benedict XIV in Providas, 1751). It was the facade of charity and merriment that enabled Freemasonry to deceive the king and queen, as Queen Marie Antoinette wrote to her sister: “This has elicited from the king the remark that people who drink and sing can hardly be, with justice, suspected of conspiring. Neither is it atheistical, for we learn that God is on everyone’s lips therein. The members are very charitable... Recently, the Princess De Lamballe was named Grand Mistress of a lodge. She gave me an account of all the nice things that were said to her on that occasion... we must allow liberty of action to all, especially when all the results are good’... The Princess DeLamballe was amongst those murdered in the massacres of September 1792, and her head was carried on a pike under the windows of the temple, the prison in which the Queen was confined”. (Secret Societies & The Kingship of Christ, P. 91,92, by Fr. D. Fahey). From Omni CBC Books 661-274-2240.
“We must allow liberty of action to all, especially when all the results are good” said Queen Marie Antoinette. If, as the words of the Queen indicate, there was no lack of liberty in pre-revolutionary France, as there was in the despotic mess after 1789, what did Freemasons mean by “liberty, fraternity, and equality”? This provides a good example of the Masonic use of inverse language to conceal their real nature, after all, who’d join them if they declared they wanted to make the world a racist totalitarian oligarchy under Satan? The opposite of what they say is true. “The promises of Freemasonry, like the promises of its real author, are but apples of ashes, given to lure, to deceive, and to destroy” (“Grand Orient Freemasonry Unmasked, The Hidden Power Behind Communism”, Ch. 20, P.136, by Msgr. Dhillon). This book was approved by Pope Leo XIII and published at his expense.
Louis XVI and Queen Marie-Antoinette realized their mistake too late, and we have the testimony of Pope Pius VI and that of a Heavenly communiqué given to a saintly nun who foretold the death of the king and queen, that the King and Queen amended their mistake and died fully reconciled with God and with the Church: “Rejoice, daughter”, said Jesus Christ, I have afflicted you with the death of your King, but I come to console you with this good news. He is in glory, triumphant, and a king in My kingdom. He is crowned. I have given him a sceptre and a crown which will be eternal. His sceptre and his crown will never be taken from him...”.
The following words were uttered by Pope Pius VI after the death of Louis XVI: “The most savage part of this people... desired him to be judged by his very accusers, who had declared themselves openly his most implacable enemies. Already from the opening of the trial there were called from the judges in turn some representatives especially noted for their evil dispositions, to make certain that votes for condemnation would prevail... Even so, the number could not be sufficiently increased to immolate the king on the strength of a legal majority... We shall pass over in silence a host of other injustices, nullities and invalidities... Nor shall we recall everything the king was made to suffer... it is impossible not to be struck with horror by it without repressing all human feeling... this Princes character was universally acknowledged to be gentle and beneficent: that his clemency, his patience, his love for his people never faltered: that incapable of harshness, he always proved himself good-natured and indulgent towards all, and that his excellent natural disposition inspired him with the courage to accede to the public wishes... But what above all we cannot pass over in silence is the universal impression of his virtues given by his Testament, written in his own hand, springing from the depth of his soul and published and distributed throughout Europe. What a high opinion do we not form of his virtue! What zeal for the Catholic faith! What marks of true piety as regards God! What sorrow, what repentance at having set his name despite himself to decrees contrary to the discipline and orthodox faith of the Church (for the deportation of loyal priests who refused the revolutionary constitution of the clergy –ed.) ... he could say like James I, King of England, that they calumniated him in the assembly of the people, not for having committed a crime, but for being a king, which was regarded as the greatest of crimes. Citing the opinion of Pope Benedict XIV, who held that the execution of Mary, Queen of Scots constituted martyrdom in the true sense of the word. Why should we not judge likewise and apply his teaching to the martyrdom of King Louis XVI?... Who could ever doubt, continues Pope Pius VI, that this Monarch was sacrificed principally in hatred for the faith, and through a spirit of fury against Catholic dogmas?... It is true that they tried to charge this prince with several derelictions of a purely political order. But the principal accusation leveled against him was the unshakeable firmness with which he refused to approve or sanction the decree for the deportation of priests (his earlier lapse was a wavering due to the treacherous advice of the two temporizing Archbishops sent by the Pope to advise the King. One of them recanted publicly. Once King Louis rallied, he stood firm to the end. –ed.) and the letter he wrote to the Bishop of Clermont to let him know that he was entirely resolved to re-establish Catholic worship in France. Isn’t all this sufficient to warrant us to believe and maintain, without temerity that Louis is a martyr?” (Louis XVI: The Royal Lamb, by Solange Hertz, The Remnant Catholic newspaper, 1994).
In the 1930s the Lord gave a dire message to the leaders of His Church through Sister Lucy, the last of the 3 child seers at Fatima in 1917, because they too failed to deliver the required consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, He said: “Given that My ministers follow the King of France in delaying the execution of my request, that they will follow him into misfortune. It will never be too late to have recourse to Jesus and Mary”.
Our Lady of Fatima told Lucia, the only remaining seer, to make “the third secret” public in 1960: “because then it will be clearer”. In 1960 John XXIII was in Rome, busy ushering in Vatican II. John XXIII and the Popes since 1958, and Vatican II imposed heresy on the Church institutions and on millions of Catholics, severing them from the Church (heresy automatically severs from the Church. This is a dogma of the Faith. Dogmas of the Faith come from the deposit of Faith given by Divine ordinance to the Apostles and their successors to hand on the successive generations intact and undefiled. Even the Pope has no power from God to tamper with a Divine ordinance. The Pope like you and I, is a servant of God and His revelation) a situation of almost universal apostasy. This is why learned priests say that the Popes since 1958 are invalid Antipopes. Some also say that we are living through the great apostasy predicted by St. Paul in his second letter to the Thessalonians, chapter 2: 1-14: “Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.” (Ibid. 14). But faithful and knowledgeable Catholics take heart in the other words of the Blessed Virgin from prophecies that have also come true which also said that God would intervene and a wonderful restoration would come, as happened several times in history when Catholicism seemed to be on the point of annihilation, and suddenly came back to life.
Jews and Freemasons say that Jesus was illegitimate. They base this on the contention that the miraculous conception of Jesus by the power of the Holy Ghost occurred while Mary was “espoused” to Joseph, which they interpret as “engaged”. However, word “espoused” in the Bible means “married”, not “engaged”! “His mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child” (Matt. 1: 18). The espousal ceremony among the Hebrews, in the Temple, was a solemn exchange of “Matrimonial consent”, not like an engagement typical of these times. “The betrothal, called by the Romans the espousal, was celebrated with a great feast, where groom placed the wedding ring on her finger, as a sign of fidelity and of adoption into his family. She was now regarded as a wife… The essence of marriage was in the removal of the bride to her future home. This was a great public ceremony… The festivities lasted for 7 days sometimes for a fortnight…” (Fr. J.L. Meagher D.D., Congregation of Higher Studies, President of the Christian Press Association under Pope Leo XIII, in “How Christ Said The First Mass”, Pt.3, Ch. 8, P. 278). From Tan Books: 1-800-437-5876. In Hebrew culture, there were many notable and charming differences. For example, the queen was not the Kings wife, but His mother! Similarly, God provided for the fitting fulfillment of His promise of the Redeemer, through the Prophet Isaias to King Achaz when he said: “Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and shall bear a son, and His name shall be called Emmanuel”(Isaias 7: 14), “which being interpreted is ‘God with us’.” (Matt.1: 23). The name is a prediction about the child, not a prediction of what the child will be called, as the words, “which being interpreted” indicates. As I have already explained, in the Bible God often uses names to judge and to signify, even though the actual name of the person or place is something different. How else could “a virgin conceive”, except by a miracle, because virginity is lost before conception can occur, by nature? Also, every new bride who isn’t a widow ought to be a virgin, according to the law of God, and so a honeymoon baby from a virgin bride would be no supernatural prodigy and nothing unusual in those days, as the prophecy indicated that it was something unique.
The apparently contradictory conditions of the matrimonial state of the Blessed Virgin and her virginity are reconciled by the lapse of time between the marriage (betrothal or espousal at a private ceremony), and its consummation some time later after the removal of the bride during a public ceremony to her future home, in Hebrew law and custom at the time. The Book of Tobias perhaps shows the origin of this: “Then Tobias exhorted the virgin, and said to her: Sara, arise, and let us pray to God today, and tomorrow, and the next day: because for these three nights we are joined to God: and when the third night is over, we will be in our own wedlock. For we are children of the Saints, and we must not be joined together like the heathens who know not God” (Tobias 8: 4,5). But that is not the only explanation. Sacred Tradition (what the Apostles are said to have related on these matters) holds that the Blessed Virgin had consecrated herself to God in the state of virginity from an early age, and that being compelled to marry by culture and custom, she obtained from St. Joseph an agreement that her virginity would not be violated in the marriage. Even so, it would have been made clear to both of them after the intervention of the angel Gabriel that it was to be so, in view of the dignity of the Divine maternity of Mary. The same God who sent St. Raphael the archangel to conduct Tobias on his journey, and who sent the angel into the furnace with the three children in the Book of Daniel, and which was also seen by the heathen, could also send St. Gabriel the archangel to be His minister in His work with the Blessed Virgin Mary and the incarnation of the only begotten Son of God.
But Jesus Christ was conceived by the Holy Ghost, and Mary was married to Joseph. Doesn’t that present a problem? Not at all: Firstly, because her marriage to Joseph constitutes the fulfillment of the law with regard to the child. God is the master of His Own law and the sole source of legitimacy. God was not married when He breathed life into the face of Adam! God made man before He made woman and marriage! That is why, to Catholics before 1958, people married by a secular court judge are not married at all, but are still free to marry, and are living in sin. Secondly, the blessed virgin had a vow of virginity, and a woman with a vow of virginity: “is a virgin who is married to God” (Pope Pius XII in “Holy Virginity”). It is from the Hebrews and Jesus Christ, that the Roman Catholic tradition of consecrated virginity stems (Pope Pius XII, “On Holy Virginity”): for example, Nazarites were male or female virgins consecrated to God (Num. 6: 1-21). Likewise, “And chastity was joined to her virtue, so that she knew no man all the days of her life” (Judith 16: 26).”No price is worthy of a continent soul.” (Ecclesiasticus 26: 20). The conception of the Son of God, Jesus Christ, was not wrought by bodily union, but by spiritual fusion, perhaps somewhat the way God breathed life into the face of Adam after He formed him from the slime of the earth (Gen. 2: 7) without a woman and before God created females for the propagation of species. Matrimony, in this case, was in order to fulfill all justice for the outward forum, and to provide for the child and His Mother, and because God the Son, Jesus Christ, chose to become like us in all things, except sin (Heb. 4: 15).
If they leave out of account the possibility of the supernatural, they are ignoring a mountain of evidence in order to maintain their humanist opinion. The following shows how quickly they believe the supernatural when it is a question of a personage who will look the other way when they want to commit adultery!
The Jewish Talmud is the source of the aspersions that are cast on the more than angelic virtue and integrity of the Mother of Jesus. The Kallah legend of the Talmud says of Jesus Christ: “Once when the Elders were seated at the Gate, two young men passed by, one of when had his head covered, the other with his head bare. Rabbi Eliezar remarked that the one with his head bare was illegitimate, a manzer. Rabbi Jehoschua said that he was conceived during menstruation, ben niddah. Rabbi Akibah, however, said that he was both… He went therefore to the boy’s mother whom he saw sitting in the market place selling vegetables and said to her: ‘My daughter, if you will answer truthfully what I am going to ask you, I promise that you will be saved in the next life.’ She demanded that he would swear to keep his promise, and Rabbi Akibah did so – but with his lips only, for his heart invalidated his oath. Then he said: ‘Tell me, what kind of son is this of yours’? To which she replied: ‘The day I was married I was having menstruation, and because of this my husband left me. But an evil spirit came and slept with me and from this intercourse my son was born to me.’ Thus it was proved that the young man was not only illegitimate but also conceived during menstruation with his mother. And when his questioners heard this they declared great indeed was Rabbi Akibah’.” (Kallah 1b (18b) quoted by Fr. I.B Pranitis, in The Talmud Unmasked, Ch. 1, P. 30, Art. 2: The Life of Jesus). This book has the imprimatur of the highest Church authorities in Russia 1898. The “Toldoth Jeshua” makes Jesus the son of Mary Magdalene, and his father to be, not St. Joseph, but a Roman soldier called Pandira. That wouldn’t work out at all for those who say that Jesus Christ married Mary Magdalene and fled to France!
This Toldoth Jeshua of the Talmud also tries to explain away the Divine powers of Jesus by – get a load of this! … saying that Jesus wrote the Divine Name on a piece of paper and buried it in His thigh, and the wound healed over, and every time He spoke the Divine Name, like a magic word, he could float around in the air. But alas, Judas also learned this trick, and one day, this Talmud fable goes, Jesus and Judas got in a shouting match floating around in the air, and both uttered the Divine Name, then Judas got angry with Jesus, and the Talmud says, urinated on him, and they both became unclean and fell to the ground”. (Ibid, P. 34). They believe the supernatural when it suits them! At least the things Catholics believe are reasonable, sane, and decent.
Such aspersions on the background of Jesus did not exist during the Biblical events in question.
“The Talmud (more correctly Thalmud) is a Hebrew word used by the Rabbis to signify ‘doctrine’ or ‘teaching.’ It designates more particularly the great body of doctrine of the Jews, to which the greatest doctors in Israel have successively contributed at different epochs. It is the complete civil and religious code of the Synagogue… The judicious reader of the Talmud is often saddened by the presence of many of those strange aberrations into which the human mind falls when bereft of the true faith, and very frequently the baseness of rabbinical cynicism makes him blush for shame. The Christian is also horrified by the insane and atrocious calumnies which the impious hatred of the Pharisees hurls at everything he holds sacred. Nevertheless, the Christian theologian discovers useful data and precious traditions for the explanation of many difficult texts of the New Testament as well as convincing our religious opponents of the antiquity no less than of the holiness of Catholic teaching.” (The Kingship of Christ and The Conversion of the Jewish Nation, Ch. 7, P. 88, by Fr. Denis Fahey, C.S.Sp., D.D., Ph. D., B.A., Professor of Philosophy and History, Holy Ghost Missionary College, Dublin, Ireland, Imprimatur (Church approval)1953), from Omni Publications, Phone: (661) 274-2240.
Jesus was known to all as the heir of King David (Luke 19: 12-15, 27 & 20: 14), being the undisputed son of the marriage of Joseph and Mary, who sat in the place of honor reserved in the Temple of Jerusalem for the family of the descendants of King David: “Princes in Israel, and rulers of the ancient world wore a purple garment coming down to their knees… It gave rise to the bishop’s rochet and the surplice of our clergy. Being a Prince of the House of David, Christ wore this garment as Daniel saw Him in vision, for all members of royalty wore purple in that day, even if their family did not sit on the throne. David’s sons were highly honored in Christ’s day. The Talmud tells us that they only had a right to sit in the Priests Court, and that when they came into the sanctuary, heralds cried out: ‘give honor to the family of David’.” (Fr. J.L. Meagher D.D., Congregation of Higher Studies, President of the Christian Press Association under Pope Leo XIII, in “How Christ Said The First Mass”, P. 307).
The prophecy of Daniel Fr. Meagher refers to, is as follows: “From the going forth of the word, to build up Jerusalem again, unto Christ the Prince, there shall be 7 weeks, and 62 weeks: and the streets shall be built again, and the walls in the straitness of times. After 62 weeks Christ will be slain: and the people that shall deny Him shall not be His. And a people with their leader that shall come and destroy the city and the sanctuary: and the end thereof shall be waste, and after the end of the war, the appointed desolation”. (Dan. 9: 25,26).
It is clearly to Jesus Christ that this prophecy refers, because it predicts the events of 70 A.D., and 131 A.D. when Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed, and when the entire population of Judea were wiped out, leaving very few Jews of the lower castes living in other regions. Bar Cochba declared that he was the Messiah, and Rabbi Akibah affirmed that he was. It was Bar Cochba who incited the rebellion of the Jews against the Roman authorities that brought on them the siege of Hadrian in 131-135 A.D., that almost wiped out the Jews as a race (The Book of Destiny, Bk. 1, Ch. 6, P. 153, by Fr. Kramer, Imprimatur: 1956), from Tan Books. Therefore, it is hardly possible that the conversation quoted above from the Talmud with the mother of Jesus could have taken place. Mary Magdalene would have been dead in 131 A.D.
As indicated above, Mary Magdalene had moved to France, and died there 30 years later. It is reasonable to assume that the exodus of Christians from Jerusalem was not long after the ascension of Jesus into Heaven. An official biography of Pope Pius IX says the St. Peter left Jerusalem for Italy on April 23, 42 A.D., that is, 9 years after the Lords ascension (Life of Pope Pius IX, Ch. 29, P. 278, by Fr. Richard Brennan, A.M., Imprimatur. From: Benzinger Bros. Printers to the Apostolic See, 1878). If Mary Magdalene was the same age as Jesus (just guessing) when He was crucified (33 years of age), and fled Judea to France in 42 A.D., and died there 30 years later, she would have been 72 years old when she died, in the year 72 A.D. If she was old enough to be the mother of Jesus, taking into account that she had been married some time, she would have been at least 20 years old when she ran away with the soldier, Pandira, who the Talmud says was the father of Jesus. A 92 year old woman could hardly live in a cave and walk a considerable distance to Church, as the above account of the life of Mary Magdalene in France by St. Francis De Sales says. Therefore, it follows that Mary Magdalene was not old enough to be the mother of Jesus, or to have had that conversation with Rabbi Akibah, if something so absurd could be taken seriously.
In that “Kallah” quote above, Rabbi Akibah convicts himself out of his own mouth of being a liar and a cheat: ‘My daughter, if you will answer truthfully what I am going to ask you, I promise that you will be saved in the next life.’ She demanded that he would swear to keep his promise, and Rabbi Akibah did so – but with his lips only, for his heart invalidated his oath. That Talmudic tale that the conception of Jesus was conceived during menstruation, is a biological impossibility.
Tradition has it that the Blessed Virgin Mother of Jesus Christ died in Ephesus in Greece at the age of 72, that is, approximately 56 A.D., where she fled with other Christians to escape persecution, heeding the prophecy of Jesus in Luke 19: 41-46, foretelling the sack of Jerusalem. The accounts of the Crucifixion of Jesus in Sacred Scripture show that Mary Magdalene was standing by the Cross with Mary the mother of Jesus. Other parts of the Scriptures also make it clear that Mary Magdalene and the Blessed Virgin mother of Jesus were not the same person. The Gospels were written before the Talmud, by men who were obviously of upright morals and sound mind, and so the writers of the Gospels could not have known about the later Talmudic inanities regarding Jesus. In 66 A.D. St. Paul wrote this to Titus, a newly consecrated bishop, he tells him: “not giving heed to Jewish fables and Commandments of men who turn themselves away from the truth.” (Titus 1: 14).
“All had been burned at the destruction of the Temple by Titus in 70 A.D. It was no longer possible to follow the royal line of David. In anguish, according to the Fathers Lemann, their ancestors began to go over and over again the prophecy of the 70 weeks of years mentioned in Chapter 9 of the Book of Daniel concerning the coming of the Messiah, and subjected the weeks of years to a different calculation, even having recourse to the Kabbala in their efforts. Little wonder that in the course of time, they have been deceived by no less than 25 false messiahs… All power was concentrated in the hands of the Rabbi’s, and these determined to forbid all discussion concerning the date of the coming of the Messiah… The Rabbi’s had recourse to secret and open measures ... The secret measures were the changes made in the Messianic prophecies in the Bible… The Fathers of the Church reproach the Rabbi’s with this, as do also several ex-Rabbi’s who became Catholics. Then to make matters worse for one seeking the truth, these alterations were secretly introduced into the work of Massoretes of Tiberias, which appeared only after the alterations had been made”. (The Kingship of Christ & The Conversion of the Jewish Nation, Ch. 7, P. 92-94, by Fr. D. Fahey, C.S.Sp., D.D., Ph.D., B.A., Professor of Philosophy and History, Holy Ghost Missionary College, Dublin, Ireland. Imprimatur, 1953).
Some contend that Jesus was not a Jew. Apart from the Hebrew geneology of Jesus Christ, Who was of the House of David, of the tribe of Juda (Matt. I & Luke 3), He taught every day in the Temple. If Jesus was not Jewish, or if He was thought to be “a mamzer”, (i.e. illegitimate) or of infamous background at the time, such a thing would not have been possible. That Jesus was accorded the full rights of the legitimate and undisputed son of Mary and Joseph, and of a full blooded Hebrew, and of the heir of King David, as shown in the fact that he taught every day in the Temple or in the Synagogues, in the reverence shown Him by prominent men among the Jews, with whom He often dined, and by the ordinary people, and that He attended Passover ceremonies in the Temple, and ate Passover in the Cenacle, as His birthright, which was some of the prime real estate in Jerusalem belonging to the family of King David, leaves no doubt about his Hebrew and Jewish racial purity.
The Gentiles who sought to worship the true God in Jerusalem at the time of Christ, had to make do with an outer court at the Temple (see Temple map at the back of the Douay-Rheims Bible – older edition). “You know how abominable it is for a man that is a Jew, to keep company or to come unto one of another nation” (Acts 10: 28). The Jews falsely accused St. Paul of having “… brought in Gentiles into the Temple, and hath violated this holy place. For they had seen Trophimus the Ephesian in the city with him, whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the Temple. And the whole city was in an uproar, and the people ran together. And they drew him out of the Temple, and immediately the doors were shut. And they went about to kill him… and when they saw the tribune and the soldiers they left off beating Paul” (Acts 21: 28-32). That was what happened at the mere suspicion that a Gentile had been brought into the Temple where Jesus taught daily, and all resorted to Him (Jn. 8: 1,2). Jesus Christ was obviously a Jew among Jews. He dined with the principle men of the Synagogue (Luke 11: 37-53), and healed the daughter of Jairus, the leader of the Synagogue, who, “came up and adored Him, saying, Lord…” (Matt. 9: 18), and “There cometh one of the rulers of the Synagogue, named Jairus: and seeing Him, falleth down at His feet…” (Mark 5: 22).
No-where in the Old Testament does anyone fall down before even the Prophets of God “adoring them”, except where Jacob adored the top of Josephs rod (Heb. 11: 21 & Gen. 47: 31), without falling down before it. He did so because it was a symbol of the authority of God. If the ruler of the Synagogue, “falleth down at His feet”, : “adored Him”, and called Him: ”Lord”. Jesus could only have been a Jew of extraordinary caliber – the Son of David, God incarnate, the Messiah.
Jesus was recognized as being a Jew by non-Jews, even by the Samaritans whom the Pharisees slandered Jesus as being: “Do we not say well that Thou art a Samaritan, and hast a Devil” (Jn. 8: 48): said the Pharisees to Jesus. But that this was nothing more than name calling, is evident throughout the Scriptures, especially: “Then the Samaritan woman said to Him: How dost Thou, being a Jew, ask of me to drink, who am a Samaritan woman? For the Jews do not communicate with the Samaritans” (Jn. 4: 9). The Pharisees were certainly communicating and communing with Jesus, as with one of themselves, albeit with an unpopular one amongst the ruling caste, through their fault, not His. “Son of man, I send thee to the children of Israel, to a rebellious people, that hath revolted from Me, they, and their fathers, have transgressed My Covenant even to this day. And they to whom I send thee are children of a hard face, and of an obstinate heart: and thou shalt say to them: Thus saith the Lord God. If so be that they at least will hear, and if so be that they will forbear, for they are a provoking house: and they shall know that a prophet hath been in the midst of them. And thou, O son of man, fear not, neither be thou afraid of their words: for thou art among unbelievers and destroyers, and thou dwellest with scorpions. Fear not their words, neither be thou dismayed at their looks, for they are a provoking house. And thou shalt speak My words to them, if perhaps they will hear, and forbear: for they provoke Me to anger” (Ezechiel 2: 3-7).
The Truth About The Jesuits This organization, in spite of perpetual vilification and slander, had proved immune from outward corruption or intimidation. The Jesuits were ready if necessary to lay down their lives for the Church of Christ, and did so in countless places. They established schools and colleges so excellent that even Protestants and Jews felt obliged to send their children to them, if they were to get the best possible education. They were the confessors of the kings of Spain and Portugal, and naturally did all they could to keep those countries Catholic, and to guide the consciences of their royal penitents in accord with the revealed truth of Christ and His Church… The Inquisition, next perhaps to the Jesuits, was the ‘bêtes noire’ of the Masons, Jansenists, Encyclopedists, ‘broadminded’ or political Catholics seeking the favor of men in high places, and all the rest of the shameful crew who were preparing miseries for the Church and for humanity beyond the power of their puny minds to imagine. It was the company of Jesus, however, that they attacked first. As Voltaire wrote to Helvetius, ‘Once we have destroyed the Jesuits, we shall have it all our own way with l’infamie.’ A thousand lesser and noiser scribblers, many of whom, as Burke noticed, were in the pay of ‘the monied interest,’ laid down a barrage from, one end of Europe to the other in preparation for the main assault. A remarkable intrigue was set in motion in all the important capitals of Catholic Europe. In Portugal, the prime minister Pombal… expelled the Jesuits, almost without warning and on a pretext so flimsy that only the most rabid anti-Catholic propagandists endeavor to defend it. This was in 1759. In France, the Jansenists founded The Merchants Bank to finance books and pamphlets vilifying the Jesuits, and in 1764 the anti-Catholic minister Choiseul obtained (by the aid of the concubine of Louis XV) a parliamentary decree giving the Jesuits the choice of repudiating their Institute and their vows or leaving the country. Only five of the 4,000 French Jesuits shrank from the bitter test. Two years later, the Count of Aranda, champion of royal absolutism over the Church, champion, in short, of the ancient aberration of the Fraticelli, and forerunner of the modern totalitarian state – persuaded the Bourbon King Charles III to sign a decree expelling 6,000 Spanish Jesuits on trumped up charges without a hearing, much less a trial.
The stage was now set for the final coup. All the influence of the Bourbon courts was exerted at Rome to induce Pope Clement XIII to suppress the order founded by St Ignatius. This the holy pontiff refused to do. When he died 1769, the influence of the Bourbon kings, that is to say their Masonic ministers, supported the candidacy of a known enemy of the Jesuits, Cardinal Ganganelli, who was elected Pope Clement XIV. Although he had previously told the French Ambassador that he favored suppression of the order, he now saw the matter from a different perspective, and put off the decision that the enemies of the Faith desired. Finally the Bourbon ministers threatened him with a schism, and a new disruption of the Christian unity; and thinking to avoid this evil Clement signed the brief which deprived 22,000 Jesuits, in all parts of the world, of the organization and direction which the enemies of the Catholic Church so feared.” (Characters of the Inquisition, Ch. 8, P. 270-273, by William Thomas Walsh, 1940). Reproduced by Tan Books, Ph. 1-800-437-5876.
“Pope Clement did not explain his decision to the Jesuits or anyone else.” said best-selling author and Jesuit, Fr. Malachi Martin in his book “The Jesuits”: “‘The reasons (for this decision) We keep locked up in Our Own heart,’ he wrote. Nevertheless, the Jesuits obeyed, collaborating obediently in the death of their order. Forty-one years later, in 1814, Pope Pius VII decided the papacy needed the Company, so he resurrected them. The revivified Jesuits started off again, with renewed zeal for the papal will, and made a huge commitment of men and labor to ensure that The First Vatican Council in 1860 would decree that the in fallible authority of the Pope was an article of faith and a divinely revealed dogma. That effort was so trenchant and successful, and so odious to many, that it won for the post-suppression Jesuits a new epithet; they were ‘Ultra-Montaines’ – people who backed that hateful Bishop who lived ‘beyond the mountains’ (the Alps) down in Rome… The fresh enemies of that belief lived mainly in France, Belgium, Holland, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, and England. They were bishops, priests, theologians, and philosophers… into any area they touched, the Jesuits introduced a note of reason, of rational discourse, and they leavened it with a shining muscular faith. Simply put, they took the mentality of Catholics in the 16th century by storm. That mentality had all its moorings in a prescientific, prenaturalistic sphere. Over a space of 400 years, with their own entombment in between, the Jesuits changed all that. By their educational methods, their researches, and their intellectual intrepidity, they made it possible for Roman Catholics to hold their own, as believing and faithful men and women, in the ocean of new ideas and fresh technology… In life and death, the Jesuits indeed wrote history as ‘the Popes men’ – whether it was Jesuit Father Peter Claver wearing out his existence among the South American slaves; or Fr. Matteo Ricci becoming a genuine Mandarin at the Imperial Court of Beijing; or Father Peter Canisius, the Hammer of Heretics, reclaiming whole Provinces and cities from Protestantism by his tireless, incessant traveling, preaching, and writing; or Walter Ciszek languishing in the Soviet Gulag for 17 years; or Fr. Jacquineau mediating between warring Japanese and Chinese over Hong Kong… No matter who they were or what they did, inherent in the mind of each Jesuit was that holy structure of Christ’s Church, anchored by Jesus on His personal vicar, the Pope, and held together by the hierarchy of bishops and priests, religious and lay people in union with that personal vicar of Christ. And no matter the year or the century in which he worked, each Jesuit knew that the Catholic Church he had vowed to serve under the Pope was the same Church that had existed in the 6th century under Gregory the Great, in the 11th century under Innocent IX, and in 1540under Paul III.” (The Jesuits, “The War”, P. 32-34, by Fr. Malachi Martin, published by Simon and Schuster, 1987).
Note: I take issue with the authors reference to so called “new ideas” as if they constituted a form of progress or innovation. They do not: “Nothing under the sun is new” (Ecclesiastes 1: 10). So-called modern ideas are simply the errors of atheism in all their logical conclusions. That is nothing new. Atheism is as old as the pre-flood “sons of God” being corrupted by “the daughters of men” (Gen. 6: 2). That is 5,000 or more years old. What are “the sons of God”, says the footnote in the Douay-Rheims Bible, only the followers and believers in God, not “nephilim”, or demons who effect human bodies, as daft occultists would have us believe. And what are the “daughters of men” only unbelievers or atheists, who live according to man, not according to God, and who brought destruction on the world.
The Jesuits and St. Ignatius who founded them were never involved with occultists and secret societies or with anything sinister, contrary to the calumnies of many detractors who are accusing their innocent victim of what they probably are themselves, be they Protestant ministers, “Catholic” priests, historical commentators or others so prolific in media, video, the conference circuit, or on Internet: As one author said of the holy and illustrious Pope Marcellus who intended to convoke the Council of Trent and employ the much maligned but innocent Jesuits for the reform of the Church: “For this purpose he intended to use the new Society of Jesus, for he was a warm friend of St. Ignatius, and loved him and the sincere and simple men who followed him, for the same reason that worldly men hated and despised them: because, like the Pope, they loved Christ and took His words quite literally.” (Philip II, Ch. 10, P. 173, by William Thomas Walsh, from Tan Books). St. Ignatius was investigated by the Inquisition on the suspicion of being associated with the newly discovered “Alumbrados”, or” Illuminati” as we know of them today. But he was cleared, and his character and subsequent work show that there was nothing of that in him or in his Society of Jesus (hence the name of The Jesuits).
Like all of the orders of the institutional Church, the Jesuits got infiltrated and taken over shortly before Vatican II, in the 1960s, by that same force the Inquisition tried to uproot, the same force that spawned Protestantism and Freemasonry and hence The French Revolution, The Russian Revolution, The Spanish Civil War, The Mexican Revolution that brought Mexico from a flourishing and prosperous Catholic civilization to an abjectly poor nation ruled over by a clique like what Nazi’s are to Jews. The same force behind all the modern revolutions including Vatican II itself, which was not a Catholic Council, but a Masonic congress for the takeover of the Church. The historical Jesuits are no more, all that’s left of them in the wake of Vatican II are Freemasons in clerical garb doing the work of what Pope Leo XIII called “The Kingdom of Satan”, when he described Freemasonry. That work is for the most part deceiving Catholics, converting them away from the Catholic faith which was given by God, to the Masonic humanitarian cult of man ideology, and keeping a tight rein on them.
Is There Any Female Aspect of God? No, there is not! The three men who spoke to Abraham on the way to destroy Sodom and Gomorrha, was The Holy Trinity, or Angelic representatives thereof. The Book of Wisdom refers to The Spirit of God as “she”, but this refers to the Church of Jesus Christ, which is called “The Bride of Christ” (Apoc. 21: 9,10). It also refers to the Synagogue in the Old Testament in the same way (Osee 2: 2), because there is no other means by which God communicated. It amounts to simply God identifying Himself with His Church and with His people, which in the New Testament are called “The members of Christ”, (Mystici Corporis by Pope Pius XII). Some have speculated that the Holy Ghost by Whom Christ was conceived was female, if the First Person of the Blessed trinity is the Father, and Jesus, the Son. But it is a male by whom conception occurs. Also, the Holy Ghost is the Third Person of the Holy Trinity, and Jesus Christ is the Second Person. The Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son, by an action known as “spiration”. (St. Thomas Aquinas, “Summa Contra Gentiles”, Vol. 4, Ch. 24: "That The Holy Ghost Proceeds From The Son". Imprimatur 1929, Benziger Bros. Publishers to the Holy See).
To attribute femininity or sexuality to God in earnest, is blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, which “Shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, or in the world to come” (Matt. 12: 31,32). Those who are guilty of this sin “ignorantly in unbelief” (1 Tim. 1: 13) should not lose heart, as St. Thomas Aquinas explains in “Summa Theologica”, Vol. 3, Q 14, because they may find forgiveness. However it should be dreaded as the sin of no return.
“The man indeed ought not to cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of the man.” (1 Cor. 11: 7, 8 & 3).
“For the Holy Spirit of discipline will flee from the deceitful, and will withdraw Himself from thoughts that are without understanding, and He shall not abide when iniquity comes in” (Wisd. 1: 5).
Identifying Wisdom with “she” in Holy Scripture, is also a prophecy of the Blessed Virgin mother of Jesus Christ. “Now all good things came to me together with her, and innumerable riches through her hands… For she is the brightness of eternal light, and the unspotted mirror of Gods Majesty, and the image of His goodness… For God loves none but him that dwells with Wisdom. For she is more beautiful than the sun, and above all the order of the stars: and being compared with the light, she is found before it. For after this comes night, but no evil can overcome Wisdom”. (Wisd. 7: 11, 26-30).
Sexuality is a lower function of lower creatures for the purpose transmitting life, it has no place in the life of spiritual beings such as Angels and God, which, moreover, do not have a body. God is the Creator, not a reproducer, like man and woman His creatures. “You err, not knowing the Scriptures and the power of God. For in the resurrection they shall neither marry nor be married; but shall be as the angels of Heaven” (Matt. 22: 29,30).
It could also be said that God stamped certain of His Divine attributes on the female nature: “Thou shalt be as the obedient son of the Most High, and He will have mercy on thee more than a mother” (Ecclusus. 4: 11).”Hearken unto Me, O House of Jacob, all the remnant of the House of Israel, who are carried by My bowels, are borne up by My womb. Even to your old age I am the same, and to your grey hairs I will carry you: I have made you, I will bear: I will carry and will save”. (Isaias 46: 3,4).
Is The Bible the only religious authority? The Catholic faith is based on the Bible. In fact, The Rule of Faith (Rom. 12: 6 & 2 Cor. 10: 13) which guides the Popes, the Councils, and even the Apostles themselves, is made up of 8 points. Sacred Scripture being #1. But even The Bible itself says that it isn’t the only rule. The Bible clearly shows in the Old Testament and in the New Testament God instituting a priesthood and a High Priest to govern, to teach, and to sanctify. In the New Testament, Jesus fulfilled the law and the Prophets by instituting the Priesthood of Melchisedech (Psalm 109, & Heb. 6: 19,20, &: 7: 1-28), and replacing the See of Moses in the Old Testament, with The See of St. Peter, or The Pope as it is commonly known. The Pallium which the Pope and the Bishop wear when they fulfill their office as teachers and judges of Gods people, is the same thing as the rational of judgment in the Old Testament.
The Bible says that tradition is the mainstay of the Bible: “Stand fast and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our Epistle” (2 Thess. 2: 14). “By word” certainly means by Sacred Tradition, which can be either what is handed down by word of mouth, or in writing, The examining of questions about faith and morals based on Sacred Scripture by the Popes, Councils, or Fathers are part of the treasury of Sacred Tradition, Also matters like the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary into Heaven, which were not in the Bible, but in other writings and records not included in the Bible, are also part of Sacred Tradition. It is necessary for the faithful to be able to tell that these things are sound doctrine, because to keep the true faith is necessary for salvation and to be “in the Church”, and that would be evident in that the doctrine does not “dissolve Jesus” (1 Jn. 4: 3), but glorifies Him, and that it is consistent with the Bible, and with the goodness and holiness of God,
The Church compiled the Bible centuries after Christianity was founded by Jesus Christ. Therefore, Sacred Tradition preceded the Bible and produced the Bible, and is the source of the Apostolic succession: (Jn. 20: 21-23. Tim. 3: 1 & 5: 17-22), the Mass (Luke 22: 19,20), and the Sacraments (Jn. 3: 5, & 20: 21-23, Luke 24: 47), which were instituted by Jesus Christ. In the Old Testament the High Priest wore the rational of judgment when he passed judgment on serious matters relating to faith and morals. On this rational, were the words: “Urim” and “Thummim”, which meant “Truth and Judgment”. Truth being the Scriptures, and “judgment”, being the Divinely appointed authority of the High Priest founded in Sacred Tradition. Not to be confused with “the traditions of men” which Jesus condemned the Scribes and the Pharisees for, which were little more than occult superstitions and human punctilios unfaithful men had leavened the true faith with. What is Sacred Tradition? Only the true original doctrine of Christianity that was always believed by true Catholics, everywhere, in every time. See The Rule Of Faith, P. 24
Liberty: “When liberty leads to a loss of order, the need for order will lead to a loss of liberty”. Dr. Stanley Monteith. “I will shew thee all good” (Ex. 33: 19). Said God, who spoke directly to Moses.
The name of the Devil “Belial” means “’without yoke’, hence the wicked who refuse to be subject to the Divine law”, says the footnote of Deut. 13: 13 in the Douay Rheims Bible. “For right is a moral power… it is absurd to suppose that nature has accorded indifferently to truth and falsehood, to justice and injustice. (People –ed.) have a right freely and prudently to propagate throughout the State what things soever are true and honorable… but lying… and vices which corrupt the heart and moral life, should be diligently repressed by public authority, lest they insidiously work the ruin of the State… Thus, truth being gradually obscured by darkness, pernicious and manifold error, as too often happens, will easily prevail. Thus, too, license will gain what liberty loses; for liberty will ever be more free and secure in proportion as license is kept in fuller restraint. In regard, however, to all matters of opinion which God leaves to mans free discussion, full liberty of thought and of speech is naturally within the right of every one; for such liberty never leads men to suppress the truth, but often to discover it and make it known” (“Human Liberty” by Pope Leo XIII in “A Light In The Heavens, from Tan Books).
The liberty of individuals and of society resides in the Divine law, to which all are subject, both governors and the governed alike, especially in the ramifications of this principle: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God, with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind, and with thy whole strength. This is the first Commandment. And the second is like to it: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself” (Mark 12: 29-31). “Render therefore to all men their dues. Tribute, to whom tribute is due: custom, to whom custom: fear, to whom fear: honor, to whom honor. Owe no man anything, but to love one another. For He that loveth his neighbor hath fulfilled the law. Thou shalt not commit adultery: Thou shalt not kill : Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not bear false witness: Thou shalt not covet: and if there be any other Commandment, it is comprised in this word, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. The love of neighbor works no evil. Love therefore is the fulfilling of the law” (Rom. 13: 7-10). That is why Magna Charta stated that: “allegiance was first to God” as its first principle. When King Henry VIII of England broke away from the Church, he abolished this first principle, so that allegiance became first to the king who intended to do, not what was right, but what gratified and empowered him, regardless of God and man. Those who fear God, in Whom there is no iniquity or ignorance, more than man, will not do wrong for any reason: “because our God hates iniquity” (Judith 5: 21), not even to obey a tyrant who enjoins unjust things, cost what it may! Therefore, a state of things in which everyone does right, and no-body does wrong, and where everyone means well to the other and renders him his due and is benevolent, is already a state of liberty, and the law becomes merely a regulator of society for the common good. “Now the Lord is a Spirit. And where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty”. (2 Cor. 3: 17).”But he that hath looked into the perfect law of liberty, and hath continued therein, not becoming a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work; this man shall be blessed in his deed”. (James 1: 25).
Is “Good Works” a False Romish doctrine? Not at all! Even if you leave out of account the Epistle of St. James 2: 14-26, which the Protestants of the 1500s belittled, there is hardly a letter in the Bible, especially in the New Testament, that does not emphasize the necessity of good works for salvation, joined to a right faith: “For by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God; Not of works, that no man may glory. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus IN GOOD WORKS, which God hath prepared that we should walk in them” (Eph. 2: 8-10). “It is a faithful saying, and I will have thee affirm constantly: that they, who believe in God, may be careful to excel in good works”. (Titus 3: 8). “Having your conversation good among the Gentiles: that whereas they speak against you as evildoers, they may, by the good works, which they shall behold in you, glorify God in the day of visitation.” (1 Peter 2: 12). “And in doing good, let us not fail” (Gal. 6: 9). In Matt. 25: 31-46 Jesus says that when He comes to judge the world at the end of time, those who failed to do good works will go to the left with the goats, and will go into eternal Hellfire; while those who do good works, will be put on the right hand, with the sheep, who will go to Paradise for all eternity. “To do good, to be rich in good works, to give easily, to communicate to others” (1 Tim. 6: 15).”In all things, show thyself an example of good works” (Titus 2: 7). These quotations are from the Books that were not cut from the Bible by Protestants in the 1500s.
The Protestants cut 7 Books and parts of books from the Bible in the 1500s. These Books were always accepted in the New Testament from the time of the Apostles. The lay men and the unfaithful monk of the 1500s who spearheaded the Protestant revolt were not like priests commissioned by God to speak in His Name, and as guardians of His revelation (Luke 9: 1-5 & 10: 16-19, Acts 15: 1-29)! “Some going out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, to whom We gave no commandment” (Acts 15: 24).
“Heretical movements never reformed the Christian Church. All of them professed their intention to do so; but invariably their effect was to confuse and destroy Christian doctrine – to dissolve Christ, in the phrase of St. John the Evangelist – without removing the human frailties complained of. From time to time, of course, there was need of reform in the world of men. The Catholic Church invariably accomplished the necessary corrections… one must consider circumstances often overlooked or omitted in the modern conspiracy against truth which has poisoned the records of the English speaking world, but painfully real to men of that time… The lootings and burnings of Catholic Churches in Germany, and the murders of priests and nuns there by the apostles of the New Freedom, convinced thoughtful Spanish Catholics that they were not dealing with a small and helpless minority of dissenters, but with part of a well-armed international anti-Christian force that aspired to nothing less than world dominance. As Professor Merriman says, speaking of the Protestant movement in the Netherlands, ‘Before long it became evident that some of the revolutionists would not be content with liberty to exercise their own faith, but were even intent on the destruction of Catholicism’… International finance gave the Protestant revolt a world capital at London.” (Characters of the Inquisition, Ch. 6, P. 200, 220, Ch. 7., P. 224, 225, Ch. 6, P. 217, by William Thomas Walsh, 1940), from Tan Books: Ph. 1-800-437-5876.
“Good works” are enjoined in the Old Testament as well as in the New! Job, which is also in the Protestant Bible, speaks of works that made him pleasing in the eyes of God (Job 29), and for which God gave him grace before men. But: “Patience is a perfect work” (James 1: 4). “So let your light shine before men that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in Heaven” (Matt. 5: 16). Matt. 6: 1-21 tells us not to do good works to be seen and esteemed by men, like the hypocrites do, but to do our good works and almsdeeds in secret for God who sees in secret. “All things therefore, whatsoever you would that men should do for you, do you also to them. For this is the law and the prophets” (Ibid. 7: 12). What is this but the necessity of good works for justification and salvation! St. Paul says that in the day of judgment, God “will render every man according to his works” Rom. 2: 6 & 3: 10-12 quoting Psalm 13: 3.
Are all of these commandments and justifications of God in the Bible to be thrown out, by one man’s interpretation or mutilation of Rom. 3: 20-31 & 4: 1-25? One part of the Bible does not cancel out another part. Rather, it explains it, and puts it in perspective. The Church teaches (see footnote in the Douay-Rheims Bible for Rom. 3: 20-31) that these verses mean that it is by Gods grace and our obedience to him, that we are justified, because “faith” is the submission of the intellect to the authority of God revealing, who can neither deceive nor be deceived, and not of our own sufficiency. “Abraham believed God and it was reputed to him unto justice. Know ye therefore, that they who are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham” (Gal. 3: 6, 7).”Therefore, it is of faith, that according to grace the promise might be made firm to all seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham.” (Rom. 4: 16). Abraham proved his faith by his works - good works are the fruit of charity, the life of goodness, and the sign of merit. “Every tree that does not yield good fruit will be cut down, and cast into the fire”, (Matt: 3: 8,10).
Sacred Scripture needs Sacred Tradition to prevent what happened when the Bible was torn out of Sacred Tradition, that is, endless splintering and the multiplication of self appointed teachers, one smarter than the other, always thinking that theirs was the perfect Christianity, which caused people to lose their faith altogether, and which weakened Christendom, by dividing and conquering it. “We charge you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly, and not according to the tradition which they have received of us” (2 Thess. 3: 6).
“Account the longsuffering of Our Lord salvation; as also our most dear brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, hath written to you: As also in all his Epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, to their own destruction. You brethren, knowing these things before, take heed, lest being led aside by the error of the unwise, you fall from your steadfastness” (2 Peter 3: 16).
“Understand this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is made by private interpretation. For prophecy came not by the will of man at any time: but the holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Ghost” (Ibid. 1: 20).
“The spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets, for God is not a God of dissension, but of peace” (1 Cor. 14: 32).
The Index of Forbidden Books was an institution of the pre-1958 Church. It was not fear of letting people see for themselves, but because “a little information is a dangerous thing”. The Church was instituted by God for the salvation of souls and for the welfare of the whole world. These things depend on the primacy of truth and justice, which can only properly be known and maintained through the law and revelation of God. Most folks would not be able to spot the difference between what “Hail full of grace, the Lord is with thee” (Luke 1: 28) of the true original is saying, and the “hail highly favored one”, and suchlike, of the others. The difference is hardly detectable to the average person, but both renditions say something different, or at least, the false one fails to give the whole message given by God. As children have the right to expect clean and fresh food from their parents, the children of God have the right to expect their Mother the Church to feed them with repasts that are whole and uncontaminated with error or omissions. God is the source of truth and the Church founded by Jesus Christ is “the pillar and ground of truth” (1 Tim. 3: 15). Without this teaching authority given by God, intellectual anarchy prevails, because one man’s opinion is as good as another’s. And because as far as the moral and intellectual life of man is concerned, falsehood leads to many disorders, and in the spiritual realm, to the eternal loss of souls, therefore, God provided the world with a remedy to error, which is the natural state of man without God. Pernicious ideas like legalized pornography are poison, and so it is right to prohibit what poisons and corrupts.
“Hail full of grace, the Lord is with thee” is a testimony of the fact that the Blessed Virgin was without original or actual sin - the doctrine of the “Immaculate Conception”. Since only Baptism removes original sin, and Baptism was yet to come when her son Jesus Christ became an adult, she could only have been preserved from original sin by a prodigy of God. Because if she had original sin, or if she had committed any sin in her life, she could not have been “full of grace”, which means of unblemished sanctity and innocence. We can know that the “Hail full of grace, the Lord is with thee” is the true original, because the “Hail Mary” prayer Catholics say, is from the first millennia: it comes from the Apostolic tradition and the Bible. The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception was not dogmatically defined until the 1800s, but it was always believed and taught by the Church. “Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb – Jesus”: is the first part of the Hail Mary, which is taken from Sacred Scripture. “Holy Mother Church gave us the conclusion in the year 430 when she condemned the Nestorian heresy at the Council of Ephesus and defined that the Blessed Virgin is truly the Mother of God… saying: ‘Holy Mary mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death’.” (St. Louis DeMontfort, in “The Secret of the Rosary”, P. 42: “15th Rose”. Order from: The Fatima Crusader 1-800-263-8160). 430 A.D. was long before self appointed Protestants rewrote their own Bible in the 1500s, cutting out 7 books of it, and revolted from the authority instituted by God to which He gave the exclusive charism of the Holy Ghost, as the Bible says, in a legitimate Pope (Jn. 14: 17, 26 & 16: 7-15). In the Old Testament as in the New Testament, there was always a teaching authority instituted by God. In the Old Testament it was The See of Moses: “The Scribes and the Pharisees sit on the See of Moses. All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do: but according to their works, do ye not; for they say, and do not” (Matt. 23: 2,3), with a High Priest of the Jews and the priesthood of Aaron. In the New Testament it is the See of St. Peter. The Latin word “Pontiff”, or Pope, means High Priest. The priesthood of the New Testament is the Priesthood of Melchisedech (Psalm 109 & Hebrews 7-10).
The “Hail Mary”, as St. Louis DeMontfort explains it, is one proof everyone can see, that the Douay is the true original Bible. God instituted the Papacy to protect the Bible, the doctrine of holiness, and the sacred ceremonies and sacraments, and to be shepherds leading souls to Heaven and saving them from Hell and from the deceits of the Devil and his human servants or dupes. As I, a good mother, would not allow my son to read lies or other sinful literature, the Church of the Living God was right to have had “The Index of Forbidden Books” in the past. The only thing that has changed in that regard, is that now that perverts and hypocrites are in power, they have an unwritten index of forbidden books of their own, based, not on truth and justice, but on suppressing the truth, and protecting vice.
“The beginning of Thy words is truth: all the judgments of Thy justice are forever” (Psalm 118: 160).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More proof about the death of Christ on the Cross: “After 62 weeks Christ shall be slain: and the people that shall deny Him shall not be His” (Dan. 9: 26). “Art Thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed God? And Jesus said to him: I Am” (Mark 14: 61,62).
Dr. Pierre Barbet was a Catholic surgeon who did a forensic examination on the Holy Shroud of Turin. Scientists admit that the shroud was at least from the Middle Ages, but when it was photographed for the first time in 1898, it was found to be a photographic negative, but one that defies even the technology available today, with no trace of artistic mediums to explain the image. Scientists tell us that it would not be possible to reproduce the Shroud even with the most up-to-date science, technology and artistry. Nor can they explain how the image got there, except to concede that at the moment of the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, light from the reunion of the soul with the body gave off an unidentified form of light that caused the image to appear on the shroud.
The Tilma image of Our Lady of Guadalupe in Mexico is a similar thing, and it too defies science. It occurred in the year 1531 as the result of the apparition of The Blessed Virgin mother of Jesus Christ to a devout native Mexican man called Juan Diego. There is nothing else in the world similar to the Shroud of Turin and the Tilma of Guadalupe.
Dr. Pierre Barbet said in: “A Doctor At Calvary”: “I say wound in the heart, and not wound in the side, because this is attested by tradition, and it has been confirmed for me by experiment. The blow of the lance which was given to the right side reached the right auricle of the heart, perforating the pericardium. “But after they were come to Jesus, when they saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs. But one of the soldiers with a spear opened His side, and immediately there came out blood and water” (Jn. 19: 33,34)… “The water was pericardial fluid (not water from the lungs which he shows, but even that would certainly be fatal –ed.), after an exceptionally painful death agony, as was that of the Savior, this hydropericardium would have been particularly abundant, so much so, that St. John who was an eye-witness, was able to see both blood and water flowing… This flow of blood and water from a dead body has always deeply moved exegetes and theologians. We find Origen already replying to the idotic sarcasms of Celsus…: “I know well that neither blood nor water flows from a corpse; but in the case of Jesus it was miraculous”. This proves that Catholics would do well to rely on well established revelation, instead of letting themselves be carried away with the latest pseudo-scientific idea, for fear of appearing to be behind the times, as one sees happen all too frequently; the Church with her responsible and inspired high authority (in 1953 –ed), on the other hand, gives them the example of prudence… This blow at the heart from the right was always mortal, and must have become classical and have been taught in the fencing schools of the Roman armies; all the more so in that the left side was usually protected by the shield. I have also discovered when re-reading Caesars commentaries… that the expression “latus apertum” – the side being opened”, were the classical words for denoting the right side. Farabeuf used to teach us that blows into the intercostals spaces on the right edge of the breast bone do not allow of recovery, because they open up the thin wall of the right auricle” (Ibid. Ch. 7, The Wound In The Heart”, P. 113- 122). “Death occurred, as Dr. LeBec has written, and as has been finally established by experiment and observation by Dr. Hynek following tetanic contraction of all the muscles. This has no connection with tetanus (I stress this for the sake of those who are not doctors) an infectious disease which produces similar cramps. This tetanisation ended by reaching the respiratory muscles, thus causing asphyxia and death… Aufbinden in Dachau: The condemned man was hung up by his hands… The feet were some distance from the ground. After a short time, the difficulty in breathing became intolerable. The victim tried to overcome this by drawing himself up on his arms, which allowed him to regain his breath… They then tied weights onto his feet… Asphyxia then came on rapidly… At the last moment they would remove the weight, so as to let him revive, by allowing himself to draw himself up once more. The witness of this, who was not a doctor, was not able to ascertain whether this drawing himself upwards was a voluntary act or was due to contraction of the muscles. In any case, the respiration was greatly relieved. After hanging for an hour, this drawing up became more and more frequent, but at the same time, more and more feeble. Asphyxia set in, progressively and finally… Death occurred after about 3 hours” (Dr. Pierre Barbet, “A Doctor At Calvary”, Ch.8, P. 129, 130 & Appendix I).
Jesus was nailed to the Cross by His hands and feet. And remained there for 3 hours. He previously had the skin flayed off his back by scourging. He had been severely beaten, and had a crown of large thorns driven into his head. The wounds on the shroud make one wonder how he made it to Calvary! Indeed, the soldiers pulled a bystander from the crowd to help Jesus carry His Cross because Jesus was so badly injured by what He had been put through that He could hardly walk. The suggestion that He survived the crucifixion is ridiculous, and is not supported by any evidence. The evidence is all to the contrary.
