Wednesday, July 31, 2013

Official Statement released regarding recent widely distributed misinformation


The Seventh-day Adventist Church headquartered in Silver Spring, Maryland, United States, has released the following official statement:

A rumor circulating that Pope Francis has a brother who is a member of the Seventh-day Adventist Church is untrue. Please disregard a widely distributed YouTube sermon in which Hugo Gambetta makes these claims. Church leaders from South America, who are familiar with the situation, have confirmed that Gambetta is a former Seventh-day Adventist minister.

Source: Adventist News Network

This post is also available in: French, Spanish

Categories From the World Church | Tags: | Posted on July 25, 2013



Pope Francis: Punking the Catholic Church



Puffington Host propaganda:

Why This Rabbi Went to Church Last Sunday

Rabbi David Wolpe

Author and Rabbi of Sinai Temple in Los Angeles

Posted: 07/31/2013 10:16 am 

Rabbis don't make it a practice to attend church. When I read that Rick and Kay Warren would be returning to Saddleback after their son Matthew's tragic suicide however, I resolved to go.

Rick had attended services at my synagogue several times and was even kind enough to contribute a foreward to one of my books. As I came to know him, he was a large man in every sense: in physical presence, in embrace, in ambition to do good, in faith and in spiritual stature. Eliphaz reminds the suffering Job in the Bible how often he has helped others and now is himself in need of help. Thousands upon thousands showed up at services to honor a couple that had helped them as well as helping countless others across the world through the network of purpose driven churches.

There was an almost eerie contrast between the sparkling sky, the immaculate Saddleback campus dotted with cheerful greeters, and the drama of grief and faith that had gripped the church. I met up with colleagues, Rabbi Elie Spitz and Dr. Ron Wolfson, who had also come to show their friendship and support. The music kicked up, as young men and women in jeans led the congregation and large screens supplied the lyrics. People sang enthusiastically but with an acute consciousness that on this morning praise was a prelude.

Two songs later the Warrens were introduced and the 5,000 person hall along with all the annexes and auditoriums erupted in applause that seemingly would not end. When finally calmed at Rick's insistence, everyone sat and listened as he thanked all those who had helped him through. Then drawing a deep breath, he spoke.

He did not hide. The pulpit can be as effective a mask as the stage but neither he nor Kay hid the hell they had endured. Rick spoke of having cried every day since Matthew's death. He recounted how he and Kay stood in the driveway on that awful day, fearing the worst, waiting for the police to come to break down their son's door, only too sure of what they might -- and in fact did -- find. He spoke about the inexpressible torment of mental illness that made Matthew's life so painful that at 17, ten years before he took his life, Matthew asked his father why he had to go on living.

Kay was, if anything, even more raw in her honesty. She talked about songs she listened to in the car the past few years that helped her hope Matthew might be cured and how she could not listen to them anymore. She showed us her 'hope box' that had been full of biblical verses that had braced her as they shuttled their son from dr. to dr. and clinic to clinic. Now those passages had to be changed and new inspirations found. The power of the moment was that neither spoke to solicit sympathy. Each spoke to tell the truth. It called to mind Whitman's etched lines: "I am the man. I suffered. I was there."

As a Rabbi I could not help but measure the theology of my own tradition against the explanations that Rick gave for Matthew's having been born with a mental illness. He spoke alternately of the scourge of mental illness itself, of the machinations of Satan and of a deep mystery that we cannot know. There was no sadness for Matthew now, for he was in a better place, in heaven. The pain was for those left behind who feel his loss. Both Rick and Kay were certain that this morning Matthew was cheering his parents on. Their task was to mine hope from the hopelessness of such devastation.

The distinguishing feature of Warren's contribution is not the theology of loss. It is enacted love. Author of the world's bestselling book apart from the Bible, he distills experiences into actions, clarifies them and makes them compelling. Carefully the process the Warren family had undergone in the past three months was outlined in six stages: shock, sorrow, struggle, surrender, sanctification and service. All of these Rick said he would elaborate, one by one, in the weeks to come to explain "how to get through what you're going through."

In that last stage, service, was the secret and the kernel of inspiration. When asked later about why he had more stages than Kubler-Ross in her work on grief, Rick kiddingly responded, "She didn't know about the alliteration!" But Kubler Ross focused on the mourner and not on the world. The stage of service was the real and characteristic theme of his presentation. When God, for whatever reason, has wounded you, you learn how to minister to others with the same wound. Saddleback, which has long had support groups for an array of human ailments, is working hard to destigmatize mental illness. The sermons and classes themselves are essential to 'service,' for they will help others. Part of the process of grief is learning to use your loss to reach out. Even the keenest anguish can be, as the poet put it, a "gauntlet with a gift in it" -- a challenge to use the wisdom to help others in the same pain. In the words of my own tradition, turn your mourning into mitzvah.

Rick spoke about the cruel things that had sometimes been written about him after the tragedy and how the opinions of others, if they ever could hurt him, could not touch him now. But of course it was not his or Kay's imperviousness but their openness, their brokenness, that left us who attended a little more whole, a little more healed. No matter one's faith, every worshipper walked away that day knowing they had seen God's work being done.


Be Singular for Christ’s Sake


Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgment. Exodus 23:2.
To be singular for singularity’s sake is positively detestable, below the dignity of a Christian, but to be singular because it is necessary to be so as the result of worshipping God and Him only, places Heaven’s dignity upon man. We must not be afraid of being singular when duty requires us to be thus to exalt and honor God....
Do not court singularity for the sake of being odd, but for the sake of avoiding sin and dishonor to God. And in this case we are not to mind even the multitude who are against us. “Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil.”
Because the law of God is made void in our world, does it make it a virtue to transgress that law? It may appear to the world a very small matter for the Christian to be in harmony with the world by just the act of keeping Sunday for the Sabbath in the place of the seventh day, but God’s Word says the seventh day is My holy day. The man of sin says, “I make a Sabbath for you and you must keep the first day of the week.” ...
God has a church. It is not the great cathedral, neither is it the national establishment, neither is it the various denominations; it is the people who love God and keep His commandments. “Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them” (Matthew 18:20). Where Christ is even among the humble few, this is Christ’s church, for the presence of the High and Holy One who inhabiteth eternity can alone constitute a church.
Where two or three are present who love and obey the commandments of God, Jesus there presides, let it be in the desolate place of the earth, in the wilderness, in the city enclosed in prison walls. The glory of God has penetrated the prison walls, flooding with glorious beams of heavenly light the darkest dungeon. His saints may suffer, but their sufferings will, like the apostles of old, spread their faith and win souls to Christ and glorify His holy name. The bitterest opposition expressed by those who hate God’s great moral standard of righteousness should not and will not shake the steadfast soul who trusts fully in God....

They that will be doers of the word are building securely, and the tempest and storm of persecution will not shake their foundation, because their souls are rooted to the eternal Rock.—Letter 108, October 28, 1886, to her older sister and her husband who had not accepted the Sabbath truth.                                

The Upward Look, p. 315

Obama's Jesuit Influence


2016: Obama's America; Jesuit Connections; Protestant Analysis

Drake Shelton

Published on Aug 30, 2012

Obama Harvard professor- Roberto Mangabeira Unger was trained as a
Jesuit in Brazil-

Jermiah Wright-University of Chicago Divinity School- Close connections
with the Jesuits:

Mugabe and the White African:

Racial liberation is not intended to help these people- Kenya,
Zimbabwe-Mugabe, Jesuit trained in Kutama College- South Africa-
Mandela-Knight of Malta

South Africa-Rape and muder capital of the world: The United Nations
Office on Drugs and C rime Homicide Statistics:

It is revealed through the South African Post office, in commemoration
of the 900th Anniversary of The Order of Saint John, that Mandela is
indeed a member of the Knights of Malta. The South African Post office
issued a stamp with Mandela's image in full uniform. The stamp is
posted at the top of this article.

Papal income tax was first leveled in 1199 by Pope Innocent III. This tax
originally required all Catholic clergy to pay one-fortieth of their
ecclesiastical income annually, to support the Crusades. Following
suit, Pope Gregory IX levied a one-tenth income tax to fund his war
against Frederick II, Holy Roman Emperor in 1228. An income tax was
levied in Britain by William Pitt the Younger in 1799, to fund the
Napoleonic wars. There is no doubt that this is why we Americans are
forced to pay this wicked tax. In 1914, just one year later, our government entered World
War I, and plunged us into a Second Thirty Years War. (See William Lunt's Papal
Revenues in the Middle Ages pg. 71-77)

Jeremiah Crowley on the Foreign Policy of the United States Government



The Vatican Jesuits , Obama and the SMOM controlled Muslim Brotherhood

Published on Nov 10, 2012

911 was an inside job done by The Jesuits , Knights of Malta , CFR pope serving Zionists and High level Freemasonry to trigger ww3 (Albert Pike's Agenda)
So......Protestant (Jesuit infiltrated) USA has now chosen a Muslim and anti christian to rule USA for the 2nd time......look like he is the BEACON for the Completion of the Jesuit Counter Reformation !!!! All the terror groups in The Middle East are controlled by The Jesuit Superior General / SMOM through high level freemasonry , SMOM Felice Palavincini that controls The Muslim Brotherhood , and King Juan Carlos that controls King Abdullah , Al Assad , Mammoud Abbas , Ahmedinejad and the leaders of these terror groups (nazism in islam / radical islam) through the Knights of malta and High level Freemasonry


The Jesuit Controlled Obama Administration

Published on Jan 25, 2013 The Roman Catholic Church has been potting the takeover of the United States of America for a very long time. The Jesuit Order had made this a fact with the grooming of Obama, as well as other U.S presidents.


Why NSA Surveillance Will Be More Damaging Than You Think

The real threat from terrorism is not the harm it inflicts directly but the over-reaction it provokes. We saw that with the invasion of Iraq. We're seeing it with security-state overreach.


JUL 30 2013, 4:39 AM ET

This column over the weekend, by the British academic John Naughton in the Guardian, takes us one more step in assessing the damage to American interests in the broadest sense-- commercial, strategic, ideological - from the panopticon approach to "security" brought to us by NSA-style monitoring programs.

Naughton's essay doesn't technically tell us anything new. For instance, see earlier reports like this, this, and this. But it does sharpen the focus in a useful way. Whoever wrote the headline and especially the subhead did a great job of capturing the gist:

In short: because of what the U.S. government assumed it could do with information it had the technological ability to intercept, American companies and American interests are sure to suffer in their efforts to shape and benefit from the Internet's continued growth.
American companies, because no foreigners will believe these firms can guarantee security from U.S. government surveillance; 
American interests, because the United States has gravely compromised its plausibility as world-wide administrator of the Internet's standards and advocate for its open, above-politics goals.

Why were U.S. authorities in a position to get at so much of the world's digital data in the first place? Because so many of the world's customers have trusted* U.S.-based firms like Google, Yahoo, Apple, Amazon, Facebook, etc with their data; and because so many of the world's nations have tolerated an info-infrastructure in which an outsized share of data flows at some point through U.S. systems. Those are the conditions of trust and toleration that likely will change.

The problem for the companies, it's worth emphasizing, is not that they were so unduly eager to cooperate with U.S. government surveillance. Many seem to have done what they could to resist. The problem is what the U.S. government -- first under Bush and Cheney, now under Obama and Biden -- asked them to do. As long as they operate in U.S. territory and under U.S. laws, companies like Google or Facebook had no choice but to comply. But people around the world who have a choice about where to store their data, may understandably choose to avoid leaving it with companies subject to the way America now defines its security interests.

Here's Naughton's version of the implications:

The first is that the days of the internet as a truly global network are numbered. It was always a possibility that the system would eventually be Balkanised, ie divided into a number of geographical or jurisdiction-determined subnets as societies such as China, Russia, Iran and other Islamic states decided that they needed to control how their citizens communicated. Now, Balkanisation is a certainty....

Second, the issue of internet governance is about to become very contentious. Given what we now know about how the US and its satraps have been abusing their privileged position in the global infrastructure, the idea that the western powers can be allowed to continue to control it has become untenable.... Nothing, but nothing, that is stored in their [ie, US-based companies] "cloud" services can be guaranteed to be safe from surveillance or from illicit downloading by employees of the consultancies employed by the NSA.

The real threat from terrorism has never been the damage it does directly, even through attacks as horrific as those on 9/11. The more serious threat comes from the over-reaction, the collective insanity or the simple loss of perspective, that an attack evokes. Our government's ambition to do everything possible to keep us "safe" has put us at jeopardy in other ways.
One more note: it is also worth emphasizing that this damage was not done by Edward Snowden, except in an incidental and instrumental sense. The damage comes from the policies themselves, just as the lasting damage from Abu Ghraib came not from the leaked photos but from the abuse they portrayed.

What governments do eventually becomes known. Eventual disclosure is likely when a program involves even a handful of people. (Latest case in point: Seal Team Six.) It is certain when an effort stretches over many years, entails contracts worth billions of dollars, and requires the efforts of tens of thousands of people -- any one of whom, as we've seen from Snowden, may at any point decide to tell what he knows.

In launching such an effort, a government must assume as a given that what it is doing will become known, and then calculate whether it will still seem "worthwhile" when it does. Based on what we've seen so far, Prism would have failed that test.


* Of course the "trust" comes with the caveat that the companies have been piling up this data for their own commercial, ad-targeting, data-mining purposes. But that's a known risk, more or less. The demands placed on the companies by the U.S. government are, for the public at large, the main news of the Snowden revelations.


With Smarter Cars, The Doors Are Open To Hacking Dangers

July 30, 2013 3:48 AM

Listen to the Story

3 min 57 sec

The Toyota Prius, seen here at the New York International Auto Show in March, was one of the cars security experts Chris Valasek and Charlie Miller showed to be susceptible to attacks by hackers.Mike Segar /Reuters /Landov

Chris Valasek and Charlie Miller have been hacking into products for a long time. But they don't steal stuff or mess with people; instead, their purpose is to pressure companies into making their products more secure.

This week, they scored big. Their research on hacking cars has captured the attention of millions and has been featured in Forbes and on the Today show.

Miller and Valasek are not the first guys to hack a car, but they demonstrated like few have before just how dangerous these kinds of attacks could be.

"That's really where Charlie and I came in," says Valasek, a security researcher at IOActive. "We really wanted to see, once someone was inside your car network, to what extent could you control the automobile?"

The pair got a grant from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and bought two modern, connected cars: a Toyota Prius and a Ford Escape. Then they tapped into the network of little built-in computers that run on virtually every car sold today.

Car makers began embedding electronic control units, or ECUs, in cars more than 30 years ago. These simple little computers were developed during the first gas crisis. Initially, they were used as tiny computerized carburetors.

"Engineers figured out that computers were much better at figuring out how to mix gas and air than a mechanical device," Valasek says. "They were much more efficient and you could get better gas mileage."

But soon these little computers were being used for a lot of things, like cruise control or anti-lock brakes.

"Now we're to the point where cars parallel park themselves," Valasek says. "And that's not just magic. There's computers in the car that have sensors and actuators."

Remote Control Havoc

All these little devices talk to each other on an open network. They listen in to every message that's sent, and they don't verify where a specific command is coming from. Miller says all of this makes cars easy to attack.

Any sensor attached to the processor on the network is vulnerable. So after Miller and Valasek learned the code that controlled the ECUs on the two cars they were testing, they were able to cause all kind of havoc.

They were able to jerk the wheel at high speeds in the Prius. They could cause the car to accelerate or brake. They could beep the horn or set off the crash preparation system and jerk the seatbelts back.

In the Ford Escape, if the driver was moving slowly, they could turn the wheel or even kill the brake. In fact, once Miller forgot that the hack was running on his Ford Escape and he drove it into his garage.

"Luckily, these weren't our cars," Valasek says.

But Miller did crush his lawnmower.

"My lawnmower — it was destroyed, utterly," Miller says. "The lawnmower was perhaps the first cyber-attack-in-a-car victim."

Car Companies Not Worried

Miller and Valasek tried to share their findings with Toyota and Ford before they went public. Both companies say while they are taking the research seriously, they're still convinced their cars are safe. They say if someone has to wire a computer into your car to get an attack to work, you are going to notice.

"I've actually been very disappointed with the reaction from these companies," says Don Bailey, a security researcher who has hacked into cars remotely via the cell phone network.

Bailey says Miller and Valasek have proven that "once you are through that initial barrier, you can and will be able to do almost anything you want to."

It's unlikely, however, that malicious hackers will take advantage of these attacks any time soon. All cars don't all use one operating system and they don't all speak one single language. So before a hacker can take control, he or she has to learn the specific code that runs the systems for that specific car.

That's tough, and it takes time. But Valasek says it's not impossible.

By going public with their research, Valesek hopes car companies will be forced to fix these problem before anyone — aside from a lawnmower — gets hurt.



Tuesday, July 30, 2013

Global Unity Summit urges cooperation between established Youth Ministries, supporting ministries

One persistent point of contention, Cangy said, is the perception that some supporting ministries are fringe movements touting dubious theology.

“Within the church, there is a wide spectrum of theological understandings, from the sinless perfectionists who want to see individuals be sinless before Jesus comes … to the rabidly liberal who see no need for obedience or accountability,” Cangy said. “The perception was that even the centered [supporting ministries] were professing a performance-driven Christian lifestyle that would earn them salvation,” he said.

“We discovered through our meetings that this was not the view that was embraced. It’s unfortunate that some extreme groups have tended to see some supporting ministries from that perspective,” he added.

Going forward, Cangy said he hopes both mainstream and supporting youth ministries will work together to address “extreme elements.”

Cangy envisions that similar summits will be held worldwide, “particularly where tensions exist” and there’s “a desire to bring together people of goodwill to address issues constructively.”

Source: © 2013, Adventist News Network


Sunday shopping the frontline in France's work-life balance war

By Natalie Huet

PARIS | Tue Jul 30, 2013 7:38am EDT

(Reuters) - Every Sunday in Paris, crowds of tourists clamber up the hill of Montmartre towards the whitewashed Sacre-Coeur Basilica, pausing by the clothing and gift stores that dot its cobbled streets.

Under France's Byzantine rules on Sunday trading, those at the top of the hill are in a designated tourist area and so can open, but those at the bottom cannot, and risk a fine of 6,000 euros ($8,000) if they do.

"It's absurd," said Sylvie Fourmond, head of a grouping of 180 "off-zone" shops around the Moulin Rouge end of Montmartre that are increasingly defying the law on Sundays.

"To get to the top of the hill tourists don't come by helicopter with parachutes. They walk up our streets and peer into our windows," she said.

The battle over Sunday trading in this neighborhood - once home to artists including Pablo Picasso and Salvador Dali - is part of a broader fight in France between the champions of deregulation and those defending a deep-rooted social model that treasures leisure time.

The unions that fiercely guard France's 35-hour working week and the churches of this mostly Catholic country oppose Sunday trading. But as recession bites, public attitudes are shifting.

A survey by pollster Ipsos last November showed 63 percent of the French favored looser Sunday shopping rules. Several hundred hardware store workers even took to the streets in May demanding the right to work on Sunday and chanting "Yes Week-End" in a play on U.S. President Barack Obama's "Yes We Can" campaign slogan.

Across Europe there is a diverse patchwork of Sunday trading laws, with Britain pushing ahead with a broad loosening of rules in 1994, while Germany and Austria still mostly prohibit Sunday opening. A number of recession-hit countries have recently softened their stance, including staunchly Catholic Italy last year and Greece only this month.

In France, backers of Sunday shopping say it would boost jobs and wages at a time when unemployment has surged above 10 percent and economic growth is close to zero.

But opponents say Sunday work usually creates low-paid, part-time labor and that extending opening hours would inflate commercial rents, threatening the existence of the small shops that add to the charm of Paris and other French cities.

"Sunday rest is central to the way society works in France," said Eric Scherrer of the French Confederation of Christian Workers. "We're defending a social achievement."


Shopping has its achievements, too; France's retail sector employs 1.7 million, and consumer spending has long been one of the drivers of economic growth. French hypermarkets were trailblazers for the world in the early 1960s.

Sunday has been enshrined in law as a day of rest in France since 1906, but myriad clauses exempt categories such as fishmongers, florists or the self-employed. Furniture and gardening stores can open, but home improvement stores cannot.

The rules for tourist areas, which are defined by local authorities, only add to the confusion.

The historic Galeries Lafayette and Printemps department stores in central Paris attract 12 million tourists a year - nearly twice as many as the Eiffel Tower - and rely on tourists for around 40 percent of their revenues. But they are not part of any tourist zone.

So, every Sunday, a man guarding padlocked doors at the Galeries Lafayette lets delivery men in but turns away bemused tourists.

"We were hoping to go shopping, so my wife is disappointed. We won't be able to come back because we have other visits planned for the week," said Simon Yim, a South Korean father of two, as he unfolded a map of Paris to find an alternative plan.

Claude Boulle, head of the UCV federation, which represents department stores, says the current state of affairs is disastrous for the sector and for the French economy.

"It projects a terrible image. The money that tourists won't be spending in France will be spent elsewhere," Boulle said.


A 2007 study by the Council of Economic Analysis, an advisory body that reports to the prime minister, recommended loosening Sunday trading rules, noting that similar moves in the United States, Canada and the Netherlands had created 3 to 10 percent more jobs in retail, particularly benefiting the young.

A 2009 law under conservative ex-president Nicolas Sarkozy slightly loosened Sunday trading rules and gave mayors the power to extend Sunday shopping zones.

The current Labor Minister Michel Sapin has said the current situation is "appallingly complicated" but he has no wish to nibble away at the restrictions. That means any movement is likely to come from the mayors, who have so far shown limited enthusiasm across the political spectrum.

Paris Socialist mayor Bertrand Delanoe is among those who have refused to extend the zones. The issue will be at the heart of next March's mayoral election, and some argue Paris's very attractiveness as a tourist venue is at stake.

With 83 million tourists last year, France is the world's most visited country, but a recent study by credit card company MasterCard found that Paris - once the world's top tourist city - will draw fewer foreign tourists this year and could soon be overtaken by newly popular destinations like Istanbul.

Conservative UMP candidate for mayor Nathalie Kosciusko-Morizet wants to free up Sunday shopping to win back tourists she says might otherwise be drawn to cities like London.

Her Socialist rival Anne Hidalgo says she is ready to review the authorized zones to reflect new shopping habits, but that Sunday should still remain a day of rest dedicated to family time, leisure and charity work. Her far-left allies have warned they could run against her if she reneges on this principle.


For now, the battle is being fought in the courts.

Patrolling shops on Sundays and collecting receipts and other evidence of illegal trading, trade unionists have snared over 100 stores in Paris since 2010, bringing them before a judge to be fined.

But when the unions got over 30 hardware stores in the Paris region to shut down on Sundays, a thousand workers and managers took to the streets, arguing that Sunday accounted for up to a fifth of revenues that cannot be recouped during weekdays.

Gerald Fillon, spokesman for the workers of DIY stores Castorama and Leroy-Merlin, said 7,000 workers were hit by the closures - a fifth of whom are students on weekend contracts - and that each Sunday gave them an extra 100 euros in earnings.

"It brings revenues to the company and bonuses to staff, so everyone is happy. It should be up to workers and their families to decide what they want to do with their Sundays," he said.

But Ian Brossat, head of left-wing Front de Gauche at the Paris council, said the issue went much deeper.

"It's really a philosophical question," said Brossat.

"Do we see shopping as the be-all and end-all of humanity, or do we think Sunday can be devoted to other activities?"

($1 = 0.7539 euros)

(Editing by Mark John and Will Waterman)

Whatever happened to the wrath of God?

By Russell D. Moore, Published: July 30 at 11:59 am

Talk about the “wrath of God” kindles all sorts of images in the minds of contemporary Americans. Some immediately think of a powdered-wig Puritan, preaching about sinners dangling over hell as a spider over a flame. Some conceive of a hellfire-and-brimstone revivalist warning sinners to repent or perish. And some picture an angry cult group, protesting with signs announcing whomever God is said to hate that day.

But as distant as the wrath of God seems from our talk, just imagine singing about it.

At “On the Square,” the web commentary of the conservative Christian journal First Things, evangelical historian Timothy George notes a recent dust-up in the Presbyterian Church (USA) as the mainline denomination’s hymn selection committee decided to leave the popular contemporary hymn “In Christ Alone” out of the church’s hymnal.

At issue was the song’s use of language about the wrath of God in relation to the atonement. The hymn’s writers, Keith and Kristen Getty, composed the hymn to include the words, “And on that cross, as Jesus died, the wrath of God was satisfied…”

George rightly notes that revisionist hymns are nothing new, and neither is controversy over whether God is, or ever could be, wrathful. And George also demonstrates that the Christian church, even with all our debates about the central meaning of the atonement, includes a hearty affirmation that God is Judge. To ditch the wrath of God is to toss aside something essential to the mission of Christ. He also points out that God’s wrath shouldn’t be seen as a temper tantrum to be appeased, much less some sort of cosmic child abuse, but is instead a crucial aspect of what it means to say God loves.

I agree.

But one might ask, why should we sing about it? After all, there are all sorts of things Christians affirm that we don’t sing. There aren’t many hymns about the impassability of God, or the impeccability of Christ, or other theological fine-points, are there?

As an evangelical, I would argue that it’s necessary to sing about the wrath of God because we are singing not just from and to our minds, but to and from our consciences. There’s a reason why evangelical congregations reach a kind of crescendo when they sing out that line in the Gettys’ song. It’s not because, per the caricature, we see ourselves as a “moral majority” affirming our righteousness over and against the “sinners” on the other side of the culture war.

Instead, it’s just the reverse. When Christians sing about the wrath of God, we are singing about ourselves. Our consciences point us to the truth that, left to ourselves, we are undone. We’re not smarter or more moral than anyone else. And God would be just to turn us over to the path we would want to go—a path that leads to death. It is only because Jesus lived a life for us, and underwent the curse we deserve, that we stand before God. The grace of God we sing about is amazing precisely because God is just, and won’t, like a renegade judge, simply overlook evil.

Persons from other traditions will, of course, disagree with us about whether there is a God, whether he is loving and/or wrathful, and whether or not the Gospel is true. But Americans should recognize that the wrath of God isn’t some innovation by a tiny band of fundamentalists. American history is embedded with talk—and music—about the wrath of God.

The Civil War-era hymn “The Battle Hymn of the Republic,” after all, is far more direct in its wrath of God imagery than any hymn rejected by the Presbyterians. God is “trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored,” we sing. God is, in this American hymn, wielding a “terrible, swift sword” against injustice. Why is this important? It’s because the Americans singing the song were reminding themselves that slavery isn’t just a matter of regional conflict, but a matter of moral accountability, an accountability that transcends political caprice.

Likewise, the Civil Rights movement grounded its non-violent resistance to Jim Crow wickedness with language about the wrath of God. Martin Luther King Jr. spoke out against the fire hoses and dog attacks of the Alabama police forces by saying, “We will leave them standing before their God and the world splattered with the blood and reeking with the stench of our Negro brothers.” King was pointing a professing Christian populace to a judgment seat.

He was saying what Odetta would sing to the terrorist forces of the Ku Klux Klan and their allies, “You may run on for a long time, lemme tell you, God Almighty gonna cut you down.”

I’m hardly one to tell Presbyterians what they ought to have in their hymnals. But the Gospel is good news for Christians because it tells us of a God of both love and justice. The wrath of God doesn’t cause us to cower, or to judge our neighbors. It ought to prompt us to see ourselves as recipients of mercy, and as those who will one day give an account.

If that’s true, let’s sing it.

Russell D. Moore is president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, the moral and public policy agency of the nation’s largest Protestant denomination.


Men Arose

From time to time, men have arisen in our ranks with a message. But there were earmarks in their conduct and/or in their message that were as red flags which should have been a warning. Other men arose whose deportment and message were both beneficial. Yet, as we view the past century, we find that, repeatedly, each new generation of our people who has come onto the scene of action has not learned from the mistakes of the preceding one.

Let history teach you. He who will not be taught by the past is condemned to repeat it. Learn the lessons that others before you have failed to learn.





Dudley Mervin Canright (1840-1919) was at one time one of our outstanding evangelists. He had a way with words, and could both speak eloquently and place powerful metaphoric pictures in his written articles. Yet he was a weak man because he was vain and conceited. Ever concerned with what people thought of him, and how he could rise to a higher position in the estimation of the public, D.M. Canright was ripe for takeover by Satan,

On a number of occasions Ellen White pled with the man to change. You will find some of her counsel in the Testimonies (for example: 3T 304-329; 4T 277-278, 280-281, 297; 5T 516-520, 571-573, 621-628; 25M 162-170). But, each time, he only hardened his heart. Several times before his final separation from our people, he left the work.

On one occasion, he complained to a younger worker how he, Canright could have been a great orator in the world if he did not have to represent the Adventists and their unpopular teachings. Startled, the young worker replied that Canright was only a mouthpiece for God, and if he ever left our Bible/Spirit of Prophecy messages he would become a broken man.

Finally, in February 1887, Canright resigned for the last time. In his letter to Ellen White, he triumphantly told her he was taking his wife and children with him. The Baptists quickly ordained him as pastor of the Baptist Church in Otsego, Michigan, where he made his home. But he quit within a year after quarreling with the church members.

He spent the rest of his life writing attacks on Ellen White and our historic beliefs. One degree of misery after another came to him in the years to come, until he stumbled around lame, with a hole in one socket where an eye had formerly been. (A fairly lengthy biography of Canright,is on this website.)

John Harvey Kellogg (1852-1943) was an egotistical man who brooked no interference. Eventually he imagined himself to be smart enough to invent a great new religion. But when Elder William Spicer (later General Conference president, and earlier our first leader in India) told Kellogg he had not invented anything new that he was just teaching Hindu pantheism Kellogg refused to listen. (Alpha of Apostasy Part 1-6 [DH-251-256] contains a lengthy biography of Kellogg. It is now in our Doctrinal History Tractbook.)

John Kellogg thought he had devised a new religion. The problem is that when a man is proud, he is regularly letting devils talk to him. Satan had given Kellogg the same theories he had given to pagans in a number of other lands and times. Do not become a follower of a proud man. In the process of destroying himself, he will take his followers with him. The Kellogg pantheism crisis peaked around the years 19021903. The Ballenger crisis occurred not long afterward.

Albion Fox Ballenger (1861-1921) thought he could improve on the Spirit of Prophecy. While serving in England as a denominational pastor, he invented a different and self-contradictory scheme of doctrinal beliefs. Bold enough to think he could come up with better religious views than any before his time, Ballenger was also arrogant enough to laugh when Ellen White tried repeatedly to counsel with him by mail.

The crisis came in 1905, but the denomination weathered the storm. After leaving the church, Ballenger preached and wrote publications, in an effort to separate people from the Spirit of Prophecy and our historic beliefs. (See our Alpha of Apostasy-Part 1-6 [DH-251-256] for a biographical account of Ballenger, the 1905 crisis. and his later life. This is now in our Doctrinal History Tractbook.)

Then there was Alonzo T. Jones (1850-1923). Learning the sweet message of Christ our forgiving, enabling righteousness from E. J. Waggoner. Jones, always a powerful speaker. trumpeted it everywhere. But, although he had the right message, it was not firmly enough planted in his own heart. In the mid-1890s. his haughty traits of character began to reveal themselves. He became a man who was eager for high positions and overbearing with subordinates.

After resigning as president of the California Conference in 1903, Jones stopped by Elmshaven, at Ellen White's request, to see her. She pled with him not to unite with Kellogg, but the written transcription of that meeting (which the present writer has read) reveals Jones by that time to have been a sarcastic, self-confident man. Headstrong, determined to have his own way, Jones went to Battle Creek and became one of J.H. Kellogg's co-workers. Ellen White predicted Kellogg would take control of him, and exactly that occurred. Jones was ruined. later, he sided with Ballenger, and became one of his co-writers. When Ballenger died in August 1921, Jones wrote a stirring obituary to the greatness of the man who had defied Ellen White and those who supported her positions. (See above Kellogg and Ballenger biographical sources for additional information.)

Yet Jones' fall need not have occurred. Both Kellogg and Ballenger were openly arrogant. That should have provided Jones with a clear danger signal not to become one of their supporters.

Having by their strong conceit yoked up with Satan, arrogant men are able to exert a hypnotic control over minds willing to yield to them. Refusing to be warned by Ellen White, Jones was destroyed. Kellogg first, and then, Ballenger turned him fully against the Spirit of Prophecy. That sealed his doom.

Louis Richard Conradi (1856-1939) was one of our leading workers in Germany. Few men in our denomination have been more earnest and zealous in trying to build up the church in difficult places. He was often pursued by the police, and was arrested once. He was expelled from Romania, Turkey, and Hungary because of his missionary activities. Conradi had unusual strength of character, but, unfortunately. he was also proud.

When he learned that a German translation of certain denominational books were to be published on the continent, he had the audacity to try to change them to agree with his own ideas.

Filled with pride, he determined to resist the Spirit of Prophecy and said he was going to leave the denomination --and, when he did, he boasted he would take all the Adventists of Germany with him. When, in 1932, he did leave, relatively few believers followed him out.

In this study, we are briefly surveying the lives of several leading men who have arisen in our ranks over the past century. Now we come to a man who was not proud, who was not attacking the Spirit of Prophecy or our historic beliefs, but was only trying to point the people back to them.

In the early 1930s, a young man named Everett Rogers was the lay pastor or local elder of a small congregation in western Washington State. He had just come across a little book by the name of Christ Our Righteousness. It had been written by A.G. Daniells. But first, we should turn our attention to that book:

After his retirement in May 1922, after having served as General Conference president for 21 years. Elder Arthur G. Daniells (1858-1935) had time to think about the past. He recalled how he had rejected Ellen White's call for him to circulate the anti-meat pledge among our people. He thought again about the 1888 crisis and how it had never been resolved. He thought back over the Kellogg crisis and the Ballenger crisis. He reminisced on the fires at Battle Creek and the move to Washington, D.C. And then, incredibly, after his retirement, Elder Daniells experienced something of a reconversion experience. The rush and hurry of worldwide presidency was past and Daniells took time to make his peace with God and return to the Spirit of Prophecy. Then he wrote the books, Christ Our Righteousness and The Abiding Gift of Prophecy, both very good books.

Because a former General Conference president had prepared this Spirit of Prophecy compilation, it was kept in stock in our bookstores and, over the years, has helped many people.

When Everett Rogers began reading Daniell's book, Christ Our Righteousness, he was thunderstruck at what he found. The Spirit of Prophecy and Bible quotations were fabulous. Soon after, he began preaching the truths in that book in his local church at Enemclaw.

His message was simple, to the point, and powerful. I met Everett at his home in Boulder, Colorado, in the spring of 1965. He was a sincere, godly Christian man. To my knowledge, there was no error in Everett's basic message. It was just old-fashioned Righteousness by Faith, the kind so clearly explained in such books as Steps to Christ, Mount of Blessing, Christ's Object Lessons, and Desire of Ages. It is faith in Jesus Christ to forgave our past and enabled us to obey His Father in the present. He did not teach instantaneous removal of sin, nor did he downgrade obedience to God's law and call that "righteousness."

But when the conference folk heard about it, they were disconcerted that laymen over at the Enemclaw Church were making such a big issue out of religion. Besides, all this had started without being authorized by the conference leaders. The situation reminds us of the religious leaders, when they were instructed by shepherds and wise men (Desire of Ages, pages 62-63). Setting their faces against the preaching at Enemclaw, the order was issued that the preaching stop. Yet there was nothing wrong with the Preaching; it was simply Righteousness by Forgiving, Enabling Faith.

For their part, over at Enemclaw, the church members could not understand what was wrong at the conference office. Why were they so upset? But, then, they were told to stop preaching about the love and grace of Jesus or be shut out. After praying about the matter earnestly, they said they could not stop.

So the Enemclaw Church was cast out There had been no fanaticism, no error, just powerful preaching. I have been told it was the first time in our denomination that a special, new loyalty sentence was demanded of church members: "Are you willing to submit to duly constituted church authority?" Yet such wording was necessary because nothing could be found wrong with what was being preached at Enemclaw except one thing: The Washington Conference did not want it done. Forbidding was its own justification.

Soon it became known as the "Roger Brothers Movement" You may have heard vague references to it. There was no fanaticism, no time setting, no strange new beliefs; it was just simple Christianity. Everett was not trying to separate from the church or start a new one. He was just trying to help people draw closer to Jesus.

Soon the Enemclaw Church was excommunicated. At about that time, Everett's brother, Merle, united in the preaching. This was unfortunate. Merle was an even more powerful preacher than Everett, and soon had nearly everyone on his side. But Everett was the one grounded in the Bible and Spirit of Prophecy. Merle was a proud man.

Because the denomination had cast them out, the people looked all the more strongly to Merle to lead them. This also was unfortunate. They should have leaned the more heavily on the Inspired Writings and looked to God for leadership. With the denomination giving the group as much opposition as it could, they gradually scattered here and there and eventually went to pieces under Merle's conceited leadership.

In the 1960s, I met several elderly friends of Everett Rogers, who had remained with him. All were retired or nearly so, and were humble Advent believers. Everett, an older man by that time, had long since stopped preaching.

Some of you may recall Spirit of Prophecy Research. It was an anonymous group, which mailed out small Spirit of Prophecy compilations in the 1950s and 1960s. That which you probably do not know is that it was Everett Rogers, in Boulder, and Nellie Brewer, in Walla Walla, who prepared and sent out those studies. I met Nellie at her home in the 1960s.

As mentioned earlier, Merle took nearly the entire group away from Everett, and the majority of the followers went with Merle. Those who were the most solidly founded in Scripture stayed with Everett.

Why did this happen? Merle preached to the people and, because he was egotistical, there was a fascinating quality about him. But the faithful recognized that they did not dare follow an arrogant man. Drawing back, they remained with Everett. As a result, they did not depart from the Spirit of Prophecy, as did those who followed his brother.

Merle gradually revised his message of "righteousness by faith" into one even more advanced than that achieved by the present new theology in our church today. Merle taught that the righteousness of Christ saved those who smoked, drank, and did any other worldly thing, as long as they professed faith in His covering righteousness.

So, in this instance, a group arose in our ranks which (1) had a humble leader, and (2) which did not try to devise strange, new teachings. It was only when a proud, boastful man gained control of the movement that it crashed, taking nearly all with it.

There are several lessons here; the most important are these: First, stay with God's Word, no matter what it costs. Second, God's words are always more important than man's words. Third, it matters not whether the leadership is that of a conference officer or an independent ministry there is still danger of being misled.

Throughout the twentieth century, our people have been plagued with arrogant men who have arisen and taken many of our people with them. The hallmark by which to identify them has always been the same: a proud spirit and a determination to gain a large following. It is always detectable in the man. When you see that in your leader, run the other direction! Never, never, get on the bandwagon of a proud, arrogant man! You will be lost if you do.

Victor T. Houtiff was another conceited man. In 1929, through false interpretations of the Spirit of Prophecy, he began his efforts to obtain a following. Calling his organization, the Shepherd's Rod, in 1941 he renamed it the Davidian Seventh-day Adventist Church.

The present writer recently prepared an in-depth history of that organization. It became apparent that, what Houtiff and his successors did, was to appeal to pride in the followers. By doing so, they could fill their followers with the captivating devils they themselves were possessed of. We have received a number of letters from believers who have told of interviews they have had with Davidians who told them that they would soon reign as kings and priests over the earth, but first they must slay the unfaithful Adventists. The offer of eventual kingship and queenship came wrapped up in a package of conceit, which required murder to obtain. In order to gain the offer, the intention to murder must be accepted. By accepting it, the demon of conceit enters the heart.

A similar transaction occurs whenever a person binds himself to an arrogant leader.

Because he had predicted that he would not die before the Second Advent occurred, Houtiff's death in 1955 greatly shook his followers. The leaders, in a desperate effort to hold the group together, published a time prophecy, which failed. The Rod collapsed on March 11, 1962, but other conceited men arose who gathered the remnants of the Davidians to themselves. One was Benjamin F. Rodin. A later one was David Koresh. (See our booklet, Waco and the Davidians, for more on this.)

Milian Lauritz Andreasen (1876-1962) was another man who arose among us with a message. But M.L. Andreasen was neither proud nor did he try to tear down our God-given Bible-Spirit of Prophecy beliefs. Instead, he sought to defend them, even though to do so meant opposing leaders in our denomination. Andreasen was not afraid to name names and call sin by its right name.

For decades, he had been a leading evangelist, and later dean or president of one or more of our colleges.

Andreasen had a clear mind and never swerved from loyalty to the God of heaven and the Bible Spirit of Prophecy writings. He wrote 13 books, and, by the 1940s and 1950s, was our leading authority on the sanctuary service.

But while the Evangelical Conferences met in the mid1950s, efforts were made to keep a lid on the doctrinal sellout that our leaders in Washington were carrying out with representatives of the Evangelicals. When M.L. Andreasen learned what was happening, he was aghast.

It is an intriguing fact that there were hundreds of other men in our colleges, publishing houses, administrative offices, and local churches, who also gradually learned what was taking place. Word spreads fast among the work force. But, fearing to lose their job, nearly everyone kept quiet. But not M.L. Andreasen. He would not sell out for a mess of pottage. You will find the entire story of what occurred in our Evangelical Conferences, now in section two of our Doctrinal History Tractbook. Andreasen published the facts and named the names. He called sin by its right name. The only response was to castigate him as a "troublemaker. But he could rightly reply, as did Elijah to Ahab, "I have not troubled Israel; but thou, and thy father's house, in that ye have forsaken the commandments of the Lord, and thou hast followed Baalim" (read 1 Kings 18:1718).

Not the burden of denouncing error, but the vicious response of rejection and abandonment hurled at the man from every direction, led to bleeding ulcers which killed Andreasen in 1962. He died a martyr for God's truth. And that is not a poetic sentiment, but an accurate statement.

Andreasen was a man who arose with a message not of denunciation of the Spirit of Prophecy or our historic beliefs, but rather a defense of both, combined with a strong reproof of the very men who were trying to new model our beliefs into an image of modern Protestant error.

For additional information on the Evangelical Conferences, and the book of doctrinal revisions (Questions on Doctrine, 1957) our leaders wrote to promote those doctrinal changes, we direct you to the following: Evangelical Conferences Part 1-18 [DH-101-118]: Letters to the Churches [DH-151-159}, by ML Andreasen: How We Got Where We Are, by Kenneth Wood [DH-51-54]

For information on the errors contained in the book which took the place of Questions on Doctrine (Seventh-day Adventists Believe, 1988), read Seventh-day Adventists Believe part 1-8 [DH-301-308}, and Sequel to Questions on Doctrine Part 1-3 [DH-311-314].

In addition to our tract set, Evangelical Conferences (mentioned above), for additional information on the most influential non-Adventist in Adventist doctrinal history, you may also wish to read Walter Martin and the SDA Church (WM-249) and Walter Martin and the Scholars: Historic Adventism and Hebrews Nine-Part 1-2 (WM-250-251).

All of the above materials are now in our Doctrinal History Tractbook.

M.L Andreasen tried as hard as he could to stem the doctrinal apostasy that two men in Washington, D.C. (LE. Froom and RA. Anderson) were agreeing to, in order to keep peace with Walter Martin and Donald Barnhouse, so those Protestant leaders would print in their journal, Eternity; that we were a true-blue "Evangelical" church.

Most of Andreasen's efforts were made in the middle and late 1950s. Soon another voice was to be raised in our church.


Monday, July 29, 2013

POTUS Signed Seven Bills Repealing/Defunding Parts of ObamaCare


Published on Jul 25, 2013

"Meaningless" -- that's what President Obama called ongoing efforts to delay and dismantle his disaster of a health care law, even though he signed seven of those bills repealing or defunding parts of it.


Pope Francis: Who am I to judge gay people?

29 July 2013 Last updated at 09:45 ET

Pope Francis made the comments on his return flight from Brazil

Pope Francis has said gay people should not be marginalised but integrated into society.

Speaking to reporters on a flight back from Brazil, he reaffirmed the Roman Catholic Church's position that homosexual acts were sinful, but homosexual orientation was not.

He was responding to questions about whether there was a "gay lobby" in the Vatican.

"If a person is gay and seeks God and has good will, who am I to judge them?"

He also said he wanted a greater role for women in the Church, but insisted they could not be priests.

The Pope arrived back in Rome on Monday after a week-long tour of Brazil - his first trip abroad as pontiff - which climaxed with a huge gathering on Rio de Janeiro's Copacabana beach for a world Catholic youth festival.

Festival organisers estimated it attracted more than three million people.


David Willey 
BBC News, Rome
Pope Francis' unscripted remarks about gay people and about the essential role of women in the Church on his Vatican charter plane back from Brazil recall the many informal airborne news conferences held by Pope John Paul II during his worldwide journeys.
During the 1980s and 1990s, before his health declined, he used to mingle among reporters in the back of his plane, fielding questions in six languages.
By contrast, Pope Benedict, a shy academic, only replied to selected questions submitted in advance during his travels.
Pope Francis spoke only in Italian or Spanish to reporters, but displayed a sense of cheeky humour that's rare among recent pontiffs. "You see a lot written about the gay lobby [in the Vatican]." he said. "I still have not yet seen anyone in the Vatican with an identity card saying they are gay."
He defended gay people from discrimination but also quoted the distinction drawn by Catholic teaching between homosexual orientation - which is not regarded as sinful - and homosexual acts - which are.

His remarks on gay people are being seen as much more conciliatory than his predecessor's position on the issue.

Pope Benedict XVI signed a document in 2005 that said men with deep-rooted homosexual tendencies should not be priests.

But Pope Francis said gay clergymen should be forgiven and their sins forgotten.

"The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains this very well," Pope Francis said in a wide-ranging 80-minute long interview with Vatican journalists.

"It says they should not be marginalised because of this but that they must be integrated into society."

But he condemned what he described as lobbying by gay people.

"The problem is not having this orientation," he said. "We must be brothers. The problem is lobbying by this orientation, or lobbies of greedy people, political lobbies, Masonic lobbies, so many lobbies. This is the worse problem."

On the role of women in the Church, he said: "We cannot limit the role of women in the Church to altar girls or the president of a charity, there must be more.

"But with regards to the ordination of women, the Church has spoken and says no... That door is closed."

Answering questions about the troubled Vatican bank, he said the institution must become "honest and transparent" and that he would listen to advice on whether it could be reformed or should be shut down altogether.

"I don't know what will become of the bank. Some say it is better that is a bank, others that it should be a charitable fund and others say close it," he said.


Before leaving Brazil, Pope Francis gave a highly unusual one-to-one interview to a Brazilian TV programme.

The interview was shown on TV Globo's high-profile Sunday night documentary programme Fantastico, broadcast not long after the Pope departed for Rome.

The Pope was asked about the moment on his visit when his driver took a wrong turn and his vehicle was surrounded by crowds.

"I don't feel afraid," he answered. "I know that no-one dies before their time.

"I don't want to see these people who have such a great heart from behind a glass box. The two security teams [from the Vatican and Brazil] worked very well. But I know that I am undisciplined in that respect."

Asked about the recent protests by young people on the streets of Brazil, the Pope said: "The young person is essentially a non-conformist, and this is very beautiful.

"It is necessary to listen to young people, give them places to express themselves and to be careful that they aren't manipulated."

Asked about his simple lifestyle and use of a small car, he said it wasn't a good example when a priest had the latest model of a car or a top brand.

"At this moment I believe God is asking us for more simplicity," he added.


Pope Francis and The Jesuit Order


Published on May 18, 2013

An insight into the Vatican's counter-reformation military order Society of Jesus and the NWO. Titled Jesuit Wars (pt 1) All rights reserved to Adrian McQueen (Even At The Doors) #

Sunday, July 28, 2013

Vatican Inc.

People & Power : Vatican Inc.


Published on Mar 7, 2013

People & Power examines the secretive world of the Vatican's bank.


Secrets of the CIA

Secrets of the CIA reveals the truth about the CIA and how this organization is behind numerous terrorist plots throughout history. Many ex-CIA agents speak out about their experiences as agents and what they were required to do.

Some of these missions even included killing of children. Most of them are now spreading the word about the crimes of the CIA and how the organization needs to be extinguished.

Ralph McGehee, a reknown ex-CIA agent, is featured in this documentary. He is most famous for publishing Deadly Deceits.

Watch the full documentary now

..... ....

When is a coup not a coup?

1. When you are in the Nile.


2. When you are in denial.

3. When you are looking at the world through rose colored glasses.



  1. How is the momentum coming along on that remarkable Arab Spring?
  2. How are things working out in Libya?   Any breaking stories from there?
  3. How are things in the Republic of Tunisia these days?

On another note,..   I see Syria is still a lingering 'mere' speed bump on the road to peace, ha?

Let's wait until the end of the holy month of Ramadan and Friday prayers to see what else is new.


The Jesuit Oath Exposed

"Go ye, then, into all the world and take possession of all lands in the name of the Pope. He who will not accept him as the Vicar of Jesus and his Vice-Regent on earth, let him be accursed and exterminated."
Professor Arthur Noble

[The following is the text of the Jesuit Extreme Oath of Induction as recorded in the Journals of the 62nd Congress, 3rd Session, of the United States Congressional Record (House Calendar No. 397, Report No. 1523, 15 February, 1913, pp. 3215-3216), from which it was subsequently torn out. The Oath is also quoted by Charles Didier in his book Subterranean Rome (New York, 1843), translated from the French original. Dr. Alberto Rivera, who escaped from the Jesuit Order in 1967, confirms that the induction ceremony and the text of the Jesuit Oath which he took were identical to what we have cited below. – A. N.]

When a Jesuit of the minor rank is to be elevated to command, he is conducted into the Chapel of the Convent of the Order, where there are only three others present, the principal or Superior standing in front of the altar. On either side stands a monk, one of whom holds a banner of yellow and white, which are the Papal colours, and the other a black banner with a dagger and red cross above a skull and crossbones, with the word INRI, and below them the words IUSTUM NECAR REGES IMPIUS. The meaning of which is: It is just to exterminate or annihilate impious or heretical Kings, Governments, or Rulers.

Upon the floor is a red cross at which the postulant or candidate kneels. The Superior hands him a small black crucifix, which he takes in his left hand and presses to his heart, and the Superior at the same time presents to him a dagger, which he grasps by the blade and holds the point against his heart, the Superior still holding it by the hilt, and thus addresses the postulant:

(The Superior speaks:)

My son, heretofore you have been taught to act the dissembler: among Roman Catholics to be a Roman Catholic, and to be a spy even among your own brethren; to believe no man, to trust no man. Among the Reformers, to be a Reformer; among the Huguenots, to be a Huguenot; among the Calvinists, to be a Calvinist; among other Protestants, generally to be a Protestant; and obtaining their confidence, to seek even to preach from their pulpits, and to denounce with all the vehemence in your nature our Holy Religion and the Pope; and even to descend so low as to become a Jew among Jews, that you might be enabled to gather together all information for the benefit of your Order as a faithful soldier of the Pope. You have been taught to plant insidiously the seeds of jealousy and hatred between communities, provinces, states that were at peace, and to incite them to deeds of blood, involving them in war with each other, and to create revolutions and civil wars in countries that were independent and prosperous, cultivating the arts and the sciences and enjoying the blessings of peace; to take sides with the combatants and to act secretly with your brother Jesuit, who might be engaged on the other side, but openly opposed to that with which you might be connected, only that the Church might be the gainer in the end, in the conditions fixed in the treaties for peace and that the end justifies the means. You have been taught your duty as a spy, to gather all statistics, facts and information in your power from every source; to ingratiate yourself into the confidence of the family circle of Protestants and heretics of every class and character, as well as that of the merchant, the banker, the lawyer, among the schools and universities, in parliaments and legislatures, and the judiciaries and councils of state, and to be all things to all men, for the Pope's sake, whose servants we are unto death. You have received all your instructions heretofore as a novice, a neophyte, and have served as co-adjurer, confessor and priest, but you have not yet been invested with all that is necessary to command in the Army of Loyola in the service of the Pope. You must serve the proper time as the instrument and executioner as directed by your superiors; for none can command here who has not consecrated his labours with the blood of the heretic; for "without the shedding of blood no man can be saved". Therefore, to fit yourself for your work and make your own salvation sure, you will, in addition to your former oath of obedience to your order and allegiance to the Pope, repeat after me:

(Text of the Oath:)
I_______________ , now in the presence of Almighty God, the blessed Virgin Mary, the blessed St. John the Baptist, the Holy Apostles, St. Peter and St. Paul, and all the saints, sacred host of Heaven, and to you, my Ghostly Father, the superior general of the Society of Jesus, founded by St. Ignatius Loyola, in the pontification of Paul the Third, and continued to the present, do by the womb of the Virgin, the matrix of God, and the rod of Jesus Christ, declare and swear that His Holiness, the Pope, is Christ's Vice-Regent and is the true and only head of the Catholic or Universal Church throughout the earth; and that by the virtue of the keys of binding and loosing given to His Holiness by my Saviour, Jesus Christ, he hath power to depose heretical Kings, Princes, States, Commonwealths, and Governments, and they may be safely destroyed. Therefore to the utmost of my power I will defend this doctrine and His Holiness's right and custom against all usurpers of the heretical or Protestant authority whatever, especially the Lutheran Church of Germany, Holland, Denmark, Sweden and Norway, and the now pretended authority and Churches of England and Scotland, and the branches of same now established in Ireland and on the continent of America and elsewhere and all adherents in regard that they may be usurped and heretical, opposing the sacred Mother Church of Rome. I do now denounce and disown any allegiance as due to any heretical king, prince or State, named Protestant or Liberal, or obedience to any of their laws, magistrates or officers. I do further declare the doctrine of the Churches of England and Scotland of the Calvinists, Huguenots, and others of the name of Protestants or Masons to be damnable, and they themselves to be damned who will not forsake the same. I do further declare that I will help, assist, and advise all or any of His Holiness's agents, in any place where I should be, in Switzerland, Germany, Holland, Ireland or America, or in any other kingdom or territory I shall come to, and do my utmost to extirpate the heretical Protestant or Masonic doctrines and to destroy all their pretended powers, legal or otherwise. I do further promise and declare that, notwithstanding, I am dispensed with to assume any religion heretical for the propagation of the Mother Church's interest; to keep secret and private all her agents' counsels from time to time, as they entrust me, and not to divulge, directly or indirectly, by word, writing or circumstances whatever; but to execute all that should be proposed, given in charge, or discovered unto me by you, my Ghostly Father, or any of this sacred order. I do further promise and declare that I will have no opinion or will of my own or any mental reservation whatever, even as a corpse or cadaver (perinde ac cadaver), but will unhesitatingly obey each and every command that I may receive from my superiors in the militia of the Pope and of Jesus Christ. That I will go to any part of the world whithersoever I may be sent, to the frozen regions north, jungles of India, to the centres of civilisation of Europe, or to the wild haunts of the barbarous savages of America without murmuring or repining, and will be submissive in all things, whatsoever is communicated to me. I do further promise and declare that I will, when opportunity presents, make and wage relentless war, secretly and openly, against all heretics, Protestants and Masons, as I am directed to do, to extirpate them from the face of the whole earth; and that I will spare neither age, sex nor condition, and that will hang, burn, waste, boil, flay, strangle, and bury alive these infamous heretics; rip up the stomachs and wombs of their women, and crush their infants' heads against the walls in order to annihilate their execrable race. That when the same cannot be done openly I will secretly use the poisonous cup, the strangulation cord, the steel of the poniard, or the leaden bullet, regardless of the honour, rank, dignity or authority of the persons, whatever may be their condition in life, either public or private, as I at any time may be directed so to do by any agents of the Pope or Superior of the Brotherhood of the Holy Father of the Society of Jesus. In confirmation of which I hereby dedicate my life, soul, and all corporal powers, and with the dagger which I now receive I will subscribe my name written in my blood in testimony thereof; and should I prove false, or weaken in my determination, may my brethren and fellow soldiers of the militia of the Pope cut off my hands and feet and my throat from ear to ear, my belly be opened and sulphur burned therein with all the punishment that can be inflicted upon me on earth, and my soul shall be tortured by demons in eternal hell forever. That I will in voting always vote for a Knight of Columbus in preference to a Protestant, especially a Mason, and that I will leave my party so to do; that if two Catholics are on the ticket I will satisfy myself which is the better supporter of Mother Church and vote accordingly. That I will not deal with or employ a Protestant if in my power to deal with or employ a Catholic. That I will place Catholic girls in Protestant families that a weekly report may be made of the inner movements of the heretics. That I will provide myself with arms and ammunition that I may be in readiness when the word is passed, or I am commanded to defend the Church either as an individual or with the militia of the Pope. All of which I,_______________, do swear by the blessed Trinity and blessed sacrament which I am now to receive to perform and on part to keep this my oath. In testimony hereof, I take this most holy and blessed sacrament of the Eucharist and witness the same further with my name written with the point of this dagger dipped in my own blood and seal in the face of this holy sacrament.

(He receives the wafer from the Superior and writes his name with the point of his dagger dipped in his own blood taken from over his heart.)

(Superior speaks:)

You will now rise to your feet and I will instruct you in the Catechism necessary to make yourself known to any member of the Society of Jesus belonging to this rank. In the first place, you, as a Brother Jesuit, will with another mutually make the ordinary sign of the cross as any ordinary Roman Catholic would; then one crosses his wrists, the palms of his hands open, and the other in answer crosses his feet, one above the other; the first points with forefinger of the right hand to the centre of the palm of the left, the other with the forefinger of the left hand points to the centre of the palm of the right; the first then with his right hand makes a circle around his head, touching it; the other then with the forefinger of his left hand touches the left side of his body just below his heart; the first then with his right hand draws it across the throat of the other, and the latter then with a dagger down the stomach and abdomen of the first. The first then says Iustum; and the other answers Necar; the first Reges; the other answers Impious. The first will then present a small piece of paper folded in a peculiar manner, four times, which the other will cut longitudinally and on opening the name Jesu will be found written upon the head and arms of a cross three times. You will then give and receive with him the following questions and answers:

From whither do you come? Answer: The Holy faith.

Whom do you serve? Answer: The Holy Father at Rome, the Pope, and the Roman Catholic Church Universal throughout the world.

Who commands you? Answer: The Successor of St. Ignatius Loyola, the founder of the Society of Jesus or the Soldiers of Jesus Christ.

Who received you? Answer: A venerable man in white hair.

How? Answer: With a naked dagger, I kneeling upon the cross beneath the banners of the Pope and of our sacred order.

Did you take an oath? Answer: I did, to destroy heretics and their governments and rulers, and to spare neither age, nor sex, nor condition; to be as a corpse without any opinion or will of my own, but to implicitly obey my Superiors in all things without hesitation or murmuring.

Will you do that? Answer: I will.

How do you travel? Answer: In the bark of Peter the fisherman.

Whither do you travel? Answer: To the four quarters of the globe.

For what purpose? Answer: To obey the orders of my General and Superiors and execute the will of the Pope and faithfully fulfil the conditions of my oaths.

Go ye, then, into all the world and take possession of all lands in the name of the Pope. He who will not accept him as the Vicar of Jesus and his Vice-Regent on earth, let him be accursed and exterminated.

[Note: The following books on (or particularly relevant to) the Jesuits are held by the EIPS Library:

Anon.: The Female Jesuit. London, 1851

Anon.: The Mystery of Jesuitism. London, 1658

Anon.: The Secret Instructions of the Jesuits. London, 1824

Anon.: The Secret Instructions of the Jesuits. London, 1824

Barrett, E.B.: The Jesuit Enigma. London, 1929

Barthel, M: The Jesuits. New York, 1984

Bert, M.P.: Gury's Doctrines of the Jesuits. London, 1947

Blakeney, R.P.: Alphonsus Liguori. London, 1852

Brodrick, J., S.J.: The Origin of the Jesuits. New York, 1960

Bungener, L.L.F.: The Jesuits in France or The Priest and the Huguenot. London, 1859

Coape, H.C.: In a Jesuit Net. London, no date

Dalton, E.: The Jesuits. London, 1843

De Courson, R.: Concerning Jesuits. London, 1902

Gallahue, J.: The Jesuit. New York, 1973

Goodier, A.: The Jesuits. London, 1929

Griesinger, T.: History of the Jesuits. London, 1903

Groves, H.C.: The Doctrines and Practices of the Jesuits. London, 1889

Hanna, S.: Jesuitism: or Catholic Action. Belfast, 1938

Hastings, M.: Jesuit Child. Newton Abbot, 1972

Hillerbrand, H.: The Reformation. A Narrative History related by Contemporary Observers and Participants. Ann Arbor, 1989

Lathbury, T.: The State of Popery and Jesuitism in England. London, 1838

Lehmann, L.H.: The Secret of Catholic Power. New York, no date

Liguori, A.M.: The Council of Trent. Dublin, 1846

MacPherson, H.: The Jesuits in History. London, 1914

Martin, M.: The Jesuits. New York, 1987

Nicolini, G.B.: History of the Jesuits. London, 1854

Paisley, I.R.K.: The Jesuits. Belfast, no date

Paris, E.: The Secret History of the Jesuits. London, 1975

Ridley, F.A.: The Jesuits: A Study in Counter-Revolution. London, 1938

Roberts, Archbishop, S.J.: Black Popes. London, 1954

Robertson, A.: The Roman Catholic Church in Italy. London, 1903

Seebohm, F.: The Epoch of the Protestant Reformation. London, 1877

Seymour, M.H.: Mornings among the Jesuits at Rome. London, 1850

Steinmetz, A.: History of the Jesuits. London, 1848 (3 Vols.)

Walsh, W.: The Jesuits in Great Britain. New York, 1903

Wild, J.: Canada and the Jesuits. Toronto, 1889

Wylie, J.A.: Jesuitism: Its Rise, Progress and Insidious Workings. London, no date

Ybarra, T.R. (translator): The Kaiser's Memoirs, by Wilhelm II. New York, 1922]