Billions in the world today are grievously deceived by the Roman Catholic religion; those both within her walls and those without. Deceived in large part by her outward appearance as she arrays herself in purple and scarlet and decks herself with gold, precious stones and pearls. All in a vain attempt to present herself as holier-than-thou as her clergy dons their priestly collars, robes and outward accoutrements so as to appear elevated above the common man and immune from sin.
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess. Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness. Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity. (Mat 23:25-28)
But just as was true with the Pharisees, so it is true with the Roman priesthood. They do indeed appear to be beautiful outwardly, but inwardly they are full of hypocrisy and iniquity, just as anyone is who has religion and not Jesus Christ. A truth made all too clear only a few years ago when the religious facade of the Roman priesthood was briefly lifted which gave the world a glimpse into her blackened soul. For it was from this brief view that the world became aware of many of her priests either engaging in the most vile acts of sexual molestation of youth, or those who covered the dark deeds up.
(As an aside, this should give us a little insight into the motos operandi of Rome’s hierarchy where preservation of her reputation is paramount even when it involves innocent little children. Something to consider when you are bombarded by Catholic apologists and historical revisionists who classify her dark days of history including Papal wickedness, the Crusades, Inquisitions and brutal conquest of the Americas – to name a few, as nothing more than mere specks on her otherwise spotless character).
Well, tragically we are witnessing more of the same once again where a damning report has been released that speaks to child abuse in the Irish archdiocese of Dublin. Something which has apparently been going on for decades where the Catholic hierarchy has done all they could to cover up the abuse. Reading from a BBC article found here, authorities,
…found that the [Roman Catholic] Church placed its own reputation above the protection of children in its care. It also said that state authorities facilitated the cover-up by allowing the Church to operate outside the law.
The same article later goes on to state that,
Instead of reporting the allegations to civic authorities, those accused of horrific crimes were systematically shuffled from parish to parish where they could prey on new, unsuspecting victims.
The report stated: “The Dublin archdiocese’s pre-occupations in dealing with cases of child sexual abuse, at least until the mid 1990s, were the maintenance of secrecy, the avoidance of scandal, the protection of the reputation of the Church, and the preservation of its assets.”
It also said that the archdiocese “did its best to avoid any application of the law of the state”.
Another article in the NY Times reports that,
There was a similarly shocking investigation into decades of unchecked child abuse in Irish schools, workhouses and orphanages run nationwide by 19 Catholic orders of nuns, priests and brothers.
That report in May sought to document the scale of abuse as well as the reasons why church and state authorities didn’t stop it, whereas Thursday’s 720-page report focused on why church leaders in the Dublin Archdiocese — home to a quarter of Ireland’s 4 million Catholics — did not tell police about a single abuse complaint against a priest until 1995.
By then, the investigators found, successive archbishops and their senior deputies — among them qualified lawyers — already had compiled confidential files on more than 100 parish priests who had sexually abused children since 1940. Those files had remained locked in the Dublin archbishop’s private vault.
Absolutely shocking and how tragic indeed. To think of how deep the sin must be to commit such reprehensible acts all the while living a duplicitous life of feigned piety and holiness. So it goes and so it will go as long as Rome rejects the gospel of Jesus Christ and continues to hold to her damnable man-made religion of works.
One hope I have from this story is that there will be many Roman Catholics (including the brutalized victims) who will come, by God’s grace, to have their eyes opened to the reality behind the mask that Rome wears. Because religion never can and religion never will change a man’s or a woman’s heart no matter how pious or outwardly righteous they might appear. This being truth for the Catholic just as much as it is for the Protestant, Baptist and Evangelical.
My second hope is that evangelical leaders and their churches alike will repent of their alliances and fellowship with Rome and will stand apart from her as all of God’s faithful have done throughout the centuries; millions to the point of their brutal deaths. A call especially relevant for those who have recently signed The Manhattan Declaration. And a call especially relevant for those who desire not to partake of Rome’s sins nor receive of her plagues.
And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues. For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities. Reward her even as she rewarded you, and double unto her double according to her works: in the cup which she hath filled fill to her double. How much she hath glorified herself, and lived deliciously, so much torment and sorrow give her: for she saith in her heart, I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall see no sorrow. Therefore shall her plagues come in one day, death, and mourning, and famine; and she shall be utterly burned with fire: for strong is the Lord God who judgeth her. (Rev 18:4-8)
Christ Alone Wyoming 
There can be no peace with Rome until the Lord overthrows the corrupt leadership and structure of that cult. As Ken Silva points out http://apprising.org/category/roman-catholicism/ the Roman church is dark and creeping like a cancer within many so-called evangelicals – http://apprising.org/category/emergence-christianity/
LikeLike
How terribly horrifying it must be for those children who’ve been violated by these wicked, perverted lost sinners who mask themselves as ‘priests’. It seems a bit ironic the RCC stands against aborting children, yet, has no problem when it comes to violating children.
A lesson needed for those who follow this cult driven by Satan himself is to NOT put your faith and trust in man, even though he may ‘look’ like he’s holier than thou. Priestly attire may fool some, but dig underneath the superficial and you will find a heart that is rotten, wicked, vile, and hates Christ.
Thank you brother Michael for continuing to expose this cult that grips millions. Please pray for a co-worker of mine who God has graciously allowed me to share His Gospel with…her name is Mary. She told me she received a letter from her Roman Catholic Church stating if she didn’t increase her giving, they would have to raise her son’s tuition. I simply stated to her ,’that ought to tell you something’. She agreed…may the God of all mankind be gracious to her and reveal truth.
LikeLike
unworthy1 – Grow not weary in doing well, praying for Romans you know. For years, my boss was a cradle Catholic. I prayed for her and witnessed to her about the sufficiency of Christ and the Truth of Scripture and left the Roman Church alone. She contracted cancer and was bed ridden for 9 months during which time she read the Bible – and, in her own words, “discovered many things about the Lord Jesus that the Catholic Church never told me!” She returned to work with a song in her heart – “I’m a baby Christian! I don’t know why He waited until I was 52 to save me, but I know He saved me!” Her testimony was credible, her hunger for Scripture tangible. She left the Roman Church and joined an evangelical church. And died from cancer a year later – as a testimony of the grace of God.
Christ came to save sinners – some of which worship the false Jesus of the Roman Church. Praise the Lord, Jesus saves!
LikeLike
Indeed Lyn let us all pray for Mary. I rejoice that you are a light unto her sharing with her the sufficiency of Christ Jesus and the power of the gospel unto salvation.
Manfred – thanks for sharing that wonderful testimony. Brings tears to my eyes in seeing a picture of the grace of our God.
LikeLike
Side stepping breifly:
What is the orthodox postion on whether or not the RCC is infact the Mother of Harlots etc in Rev 17 ?
I have heard briefly both sides but am unsure.
LikeLike
Matthew 7:15-20
15Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
16Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
17Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
18A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
19Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
20Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
LikeLike
Matthew,
The Eastern Orthodox Church thinks itself to be THE authentic apostolic church, from which the Roman cult split off from in 1054. There’s no indication they see the Roman Church as anything but a schism of the true church.
More here from the Orthodox view: http://www.saintignatiuschurch.org/timeline.html
____________________________________________________________________________________
Found this jewel on the Eastern Orthodox page: http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/general/frjames_stgregory.aspx
Greg was the Pope of the Roman cult in the 6th century. Wonder what the modern popes thinks of this, if they allow it to be read by anyone?
LikeLike
Well – there is one pope I agree with! The modern popes and their defenders would probably call it a Protestant gloss.
LikeLike
Thank you for the replies and the links that I am now going to check out but nobody has of yet answered my question 🙂
Anybody?
LikeLike
Matthew,
I found this rather clear statement on this Eastern Orthodox web site: http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/ourfaith8523 My summary – they do not line up under the pope but see him as having a legitimate role in “the church”.
“In summary, Orthodoxy does not reject Roman primacy as such, but simply a particular way of understanding that primacy. Within a reintegrated Christendom the bishop of Rome will be considered primus inter pares serving the unity of God’s Church in love. He cannot be accepted as set up over the Church as a ruler whose diakonia is conceived through legalistic categories of power of jurisdiction. His authority must be understood, not according to standards of earthly authority and domination, but according to terms of loving ministry and humble service (Matt. 20:25‑27).[ 44 ]
“Before the schism, in times of ecclesiastical discord and theological controversies, appeals for peaceful resolutions and mediation were made to the pope from all parts of the Christian world. For instance, in the course of the iconoclast controversy, St Theodore the Studite (759‑829) urged the emperor to consult the pope: “If there is anything in the patriarch’s reply about which you feel doubt or disbelief… you may ask the chief elder in Rome for clarification, as has been the practice from the beginning according to inherited tradition.”[ 45 ] From an Orthodox perspective, however, it is important to emphasize that these appeals to the bishop of Rome are not to be understood in juridical terms. The case was not closed when Rome had spoken, and the Byzantines felt free on occasion to reject a Roman ruling.[ 46 ]
“In a reintegrated Christendom, when the pope takes his place once more as primus inter pares within the Orthodox Catholic communion, the bishop of Rome will have the initiative to summon a synod of the whole Church. The bishop of Rome will, of course, preside over such a synod and his office may coordinate the life and the witness of the Orthodox Catholic church and in times of need be its spokesman. The role of acting as the voice of the Church is not, however, to be restricted to any hierarchical order within the Church, still less to a single see. In principle, any bishop, priest or layman may be called by the Holy Spirit to proclaim the true faith.”
LikeLike
Manfred,
My most sincere apologies I ahve finally figured out what is going on here.
I asked “What is the orthodox postion on whether or not the RCC is infact the Mother of Harlots etc in Rev 17 ?”
What I meant by that was what is the biblical/othodox aka correct posistion on it. 🙂
I am sorry – to use the term orthodox in the context of a discussion on the RCC was silly!
Thanks!
LikeLike
Matthew,
LOL! What a funny play on words! Within evangelical Christianity, I do not think there is a consensus view. We who hold to the classic reformed theological view, summed up in the Westminster or 1689 London Baptist confessions do look at the office pope as being of AntiChrist. Arminians, dispensationalists, and others who claim Christ typically do not.
LikeLike
Thanks brother,
The Lord wanted us to look into what the Orthodox Churches view of Rome was today! 🙂
Thanks for your answer. I wonder if exegetically it can be proven that the RCC is the Mother of Harlots………
LikeLike
Matthew,
A couple other resources that may provide some edification on this topic:
http://kimriddlebarger.squarespace.com/the-latest-post/2007/8/22/eschatology-q-a.html
http://kimriddlebarger.squarespace.com/the-latest-post/2006/6/3/and-the-survey-says-the-antichrist-is-.html
LikeLike
Manfred,
Thank you. You really are a blessing with all these links!
Checking them out now…..
LikeLike
Matthew –
Here are a few more for you to consider in your studies. Many blessings to you and thanks to Manfred for all the Orthodox info.
Click to access thepapacy.pdf
http://www.ianpaisley.org/antichrist.asp
LikeLike
Anyone,
I am having trouble finding out the real meaning of the word Christmas.
It is the last part of the word- mas- that I am finding many definitions for it— from it meaning the actual mass, to meaning it means to dismiss, to depart, the end of the catholic mass, mission, etc.
Thank you.
LikeLike
Diane,
From a paper I wrote a while ago about the history of Christmas, I noted the origin of the name for this day. From the Catholic Encyclopedia, we find that:
The Mass of couse being when the Roman Catholic priest re-presents the sacrifice of the Catholic Jesus on their high alter as he is immolated in order to have his flesh eaten and his blood drunk.
LikeLike
brother Michael,
I bookmarked both those sites you listed and have just finished reading Wylie’s booklet. Wow! Wylie makes a compelling, comprehensive argument that the office of the pope IS the AntiChrist. It’s a keeper.
Many thanks!
LikeLike
Thank you brother Michael. I read your paper a few days ago. I am trying to figure out how the latin word for mass— missa— means the mass as defined by the RCC. It is confusing to me. If it means, to dismiss, what does that mean? I have also read it can mean –a festival.
I can’t think of anything more horrifying than to say Merry Christmas if it means happy or pleasing or pleasant Christ’s sacrifice. Before I tell people I want to understand.
Thanks for helping me, anyway, I do appreciate it.
LikeLike
Diane,
Oh – I see now. You are looking for the word’s etymology. What I could find confirms what you noted previously. From Noah Webster’s 1828 Dictionary:
From the Online Etymology Dictionary, I found for Mass:
Finally, from Encyclopedia.com
One more article you may find helpful is from the source herself: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09790b.htm
I do believe “horrifying” sums it up; at least that is how I view tying one of Jesus’ title, that being Messiah or Christ to the Roman Mass or a tree.
Blessings to you.
LikeLike
brother Michael,
The mass is nothing short of cannibalism. To think that the “priest” has the authority given him through the church to call down our Great High Priest and resacrifice Him over and over and over while making a gluttonous winebibbing fool out of himself is nothing short of sacrilege. It is heresy of the rankest order! To believe and remain in the Roman Catholic system is to condemn the soul to eternal damnation. No true believer can grow in faith and still remain in this cult – EVER – and still claim to know the true Christ and be a new creation in Christ.
LikeLike
brother Michael,
I apologize for not being more clear about what I was looking for. Thank you very much for your help. It still is somewhat confusing to me because it can mean so many things…a feast, festival, to dismiss and/or the celebration of the eucharist. Since the definitions include the actual mass itself how can I say merry christmas again to anyone? I cannot.
When I think about what those poor people believe occurs at mass and how the priests think they can trample over the Lord and His perfect sacrifice as they do, I can’t even think about it for too long as it grieves me so much. I have family that are still catholic. I left it when I was 18.
Thank you again.
LikeLike
Found another site that has some of the same and some additional research on documenting the papacy as the AntiChrist: http://www.who-is-the-antichrist.org/index.html
LikeLike
Desert Pastor – I agree 100%. I was just sharing this with a believer who was telling me her mother, a Roman Catholic, professed faith in Jesus Christ and has for 10 years. But in all these years she still remains in Rome. I was incredulous and tried to explain to her about Rome and how her mother must come out. Not sure whether she heard me.
Manfred – Thanks for the links and you are correct about the Wylie paper. I was a die-hard dispensationalist for years, but now have left that behind (pun intended) and embraced the historic position regarding anti-Christ.
Diane – No worries. The confusion is not unheard of as the same will be true for many words as definitions change over time. Think of the word “gay” as a prime example. Here, although I strongly disagree with sodomites appropriating this word, the meaning has sadly changed.
Regarding “mass” I settle on how it is used and what the definition is surrounding its context in said case. Thus, Mass means exactly how Rome defines it regarding their cannibalistic feasting on their false jesus. And this likewise was the definition of the word at the time it was joined by Roman Catholics to Christ to create Christ-Mass.
LikeLike