Archie Bunker - Popish Role Model

Jesus says in Matthew 16:6, "TAKE HEED AND BEWARE OF THE LEAVEN OF THE PHARISEES AND THE SADDUCEES," and we do well to heed His warning. With "leaven" used in the BIBLE as a type of sin and corruption, I find it appropriate that the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Kansas City in Kansas calls it's newspaper, 'The Leaven.'

In Matthew 15:9, Jesus warns us of Pharisees, "TEACHING FOR DOCTRINES THE COMMANDMENTS OF MEN." We find such a modern day Pharisee in 'Father' Mark Goldasich, in his July 6 article, "Like it or not, we are 'All in the Family.'"

Unfortunately for Catholics in the American heartland, 'Father' is not teaching them lessons from the bible, but from the liberal TV show, produced by the ultra-liberal Norman Lear, "All in the Family."

I personally found the show offensive and nothing but a liberal mocking of the American working class, hidden under a phony veil of social justice themes. 'Father' writes, "Archie Bunker acted as a mirror for many of us; he showed what we looked like."

'Father's' teaching is that just like Archie Bunker over the course of the TV series, "we too will take time to mellow and grow into that place of liberty and justice for all."

This is typical Catholic teaching:

1. By comparing his flock to Archie Bunker, the priest wants to put people down in order to gain a moral advantage over them. This is a technique the priest has spent years honing in the confessional.

2. The subtle remark that the United States needs to, "grow into that place of liberty and justice for all," is a lie. Rome's only concern is to bring the United States under the papal heel! When did the autocratic Roman Church start standing for, "liberty and justice for all?"

Since every Catholic priest has submitted to the despotism and dictatorship of the Roman pontiff, a priest's heart yearns to bring all under the papal yoke as well. So, what example of "hope" is 'Father' Goldasich pointing to? He writes, "Maybe the person we can look to for hope is Archie Bunker. Over the years, he mellowed..."

Does this priest really think a TV character can help us grow in Christ? What will he write about next, the fellowship of Gilligan and the Skipper?

I say thank God for the BIBLE!!!!!!! Just imagine if we didn't have it, and had to depend on the "All in the Family" teaching of 'Father' Goldasich.

So, where does the bible say our hope is? 1 Timothy 1:1 says, "PAUL, AN APOSTLE OF JESUS CHRIST BY THE COMMANDMENT OF GOD OUR SAVIOUR, AND LORD JESUS CHRIST, WHICH IS OUR HOPE."

We have a choice - to hope some day we can be like Archie Bunker? Or to look to the bible and see that our hope is in Jesus Christ. I'll take the bible.

May Catholics forsake the worldly teaching of their priests, repent of the sin of Catholicism, and receive Christ by faith ALONE.

Rome - Mary Did Not Have Monthly Periods

God warns us of those that would pervert the bible for their own evil ends, as 2 Peter 3:16 says, "WHICH THEY THAT ARE UNLEARNED AND UNSTABLE WREST, AS THEY DO ALSO THE OTHER SCRIPTURES, UNTO THEIR OWN DESTRUCTION."

As Rome worships a false Jesus, Rome also worships a false Mary. The pagan heart of Catholicism will try to destroy any bible truth in it's efforts to justify Romish idolatry. The article, "Where Angels Fear to Tread," by Mr. Bryce Sibley at the Roman Catholic University of Dayton, Ohio, tries to answer the ridiculous question, "Did the Blessed Virgin menstruate?" Rome has to prove this did not happen to Mary in order for her to remain "immaculate."

Enough lies are in Mr. Sibley's article to warrant a small booklet, but I will focus on two blatant scriptural twistings:

1. John 1:13 in the Authorized Version says, "WHICH WERE BORN, NOT OF BLOOD, NOR OF THE WILL OF THE FLESH, NOR OF THE WILL OF MAN, BUT OF GOD." Mr. Sibley (not naming the supposed 'Greek Text' he uses) translates it, "he who was born, not of bloods," to change the meaning to that of a bloodless (and fluidless) birth of Christ, therefore keeping Mary pure!

Go check your concordance, "WHICH" should be translated, "WHICH," or "WHOM," not, "he." And, "BLOOD" is singular, not plural.

2. Luke 1:35 (AV) says, "THEREFORE ALSO THAT HOLY THING WHICH SHALL BE BORN OF THEE SHALL BE CALLED THE SON OF GOD." Once again, Mr. Sibley subverts the word of God to his own liking as he translates it, "That is why the one who will be born holy will be called the Son of God." Sibley sees the "born holy" to refer to Mary birthing Jesus in a holy manner, thus maintaining her purity!

As to the "OFFER OF SACRIFICE" that Mary makes in Luke 2:24 because of her giving birth, Mr. Sibley, in a repeat performance of Genesis 3:1, when his master the serpent got Eve to doubt the word of God by saying, "YEA, HATH GOD SAID," denies the plain truth of the bible by saying Mary was, "still ritually pure from her virginal birth," and really didn't need to offer the two turledoves, or pigeons.

I can only say to Mr. Sibley and his priestly masters the same thing Paul said in Acts 13:10 to the sorcerer Elymas, "O FULL OF ALL SUBTILTY AND ALL MISCHIEF, THOU CHILD OF THE DEVIL, THOU ENEMY OF ALL RIGHTEOUSNESS, WILT THOU NOT CEASE TO PERVERT THE RIGHT WAYS OF THE LORD?"

Is it a sin to be a Catholic? Absolutely yes! May Catholics repent and confess the sin of goddess worship, forsake Rome, and receive Christ by faith ALONE.

Letting the Innocent Suffer and the Guilty Go Free

The slippery nature of Roman teaching about confession and absolution, plus a priest's lack of concern for the innocent, has become evident in a New York City murder case from 1987.

While two innocent men were sent to prison for a murder, the real killer, Jesus Fornes (who was later killed in 1997) in 1989 called to his home one night his Roman priest, Joseph Towle, where they had, "a heart-to-heart talk," about the murder. 'Father' Towle did encourage Mr. Fornes to go to the courts, and he did go to the attorneys, where it appears the issue stalled.

Towle is now coming out in the open about this, and is saying it was not a confession but a, "confidential conversation," he had with Mr. Fornes. But........a CNN article about this episode says, "Towle did, however, say he granted Fornes absolution, or 'pardon in the name of God for the things he had done wrong.'"

In the grab bag of Roman theology, you can get absolution without going to a formal confession. Must be nice! Also, since this was not a formal "confession," Towle was not bound by his confessional "vow of silence," yet he let two innocent men languish in prison for years. As a matter of fact, they are still in prison.

We can see in the priest Towle the same spirit of the men who had Jesus Christ murdered. Yes - the spirit that murdered Jesus Christ is alive and well and dwells in the breast of every Roman priest! After all, they claim in the 'Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent,' in chapter one of the twenty-second session that Christ is, "Himself to be immolated," on the altar each time mass is said!

In Matthew 27:3-4 Judas comes back to the, "CHIEF PRIESTS AND ELDERS SAYING, I HAVE SINNED IN THAT I HAVE BETRAYED INNOCENT BLOOD." But the "CHIEF PRIESTS AND ELDERS" reaction was one of not caring, dumping all the guilt back on Judas, and not doing a thing about the crime that was perpetrated as they said, "WHAT IS THAT TO US? SEE THOU TO THAT."

The Jewish religious leaders' callousness of then is most perfectly brought to us today in men like 'Father' Towle. Two men are dead, two innocent men are in prison, but the Roman priest seems to be doing just fine.

May Catholics throw in the "Towle" on their priests, repent and forsake Rome, and come to Jesus Christ by faith ALONE for the joy of real forgiveness of sins.

Roman Doctrine - Changeable when Needed!

In his July 27 message for 'The Catholic Telegraph,' Archbishop Daniel Pilarczyk of Cincinnati, Ohio aptly demonstrates the double-talk and sinking sand preaching that Rome is famous for. 'His Grace' wrote:

"To begin with, Christian life is not a series of obligations...(But) You have to go to mass on Sunday. You have to get married in the Church. You can't practice birth control. You have to be against abortion...But these obligations and expectations are not the primary thing."

Well........yes they are, "the primary thing," according to official Roman documentation.

The Catholic Catechism, in paragraph 2180 says, "On Sundays and other holy days of obligation the faithful are bound to participate in the Mass."

Paragraph 2181 says, "Those who deliberately fail in this obligation commit a grave sin."

Paragraph 1857 says, "Mortal sin is sin whose object is a grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent."

The result of mortal sin according to paragraph 1861 is, "exclusion from Christ's kingdom and the eternal death of hell." I would call "the eternal death of hell" a very "primary thing!"

As one of my Catholic relatives said a little while back concerning the Roman clergy (I was out of the room or else they would not have said it), "they re-write the rules whenever they want." It's quite obvious Archbishop Pilarczyk isn't paying attention to his own church teaching, let alone the BIBLE, but just in saying whatever he wants to.

1 Peter 1:23 says we are to be, "BORN AGAIN, NOT OF CORRUPTIBLE SEED, BUT OF INCORRUPTIBLE, BY THE WORD OF GOD, WHICH LIVETH AND ABIDETH FOREVER." The BIBLE "LIVETH AND ABIDETH FOREVER," but Roman doctrine changes whenever it needs to.

May our prayer be that Catholics be given the courage to admit that the teachings of Rome change, "whenever they want," and that they repent of the sin of Catholicism, trust in the BIBLE as God's infallible book, and receive Christ by faith ALONE. Lord, we thank you we can come to the BIBLE and know it won't change this Sunday, next year, or forever!

Not Giving Out the Whole Story

In his July 6 article, "We Should Recognize and Celebrate Goodness Among the Living," Roman priest James Walker of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Youngstown, Ohio neglects to tell his flock the full story about the love of Jesus Christ.

What's interesting is the 'Father' Walker misuses a scripture and it's teaching on the love of Christ that I wrote about in my June 16 article concerning Rome's false teaching on the love of Christ.

As an example of the love of Christ, Mr. Walker points to Mark 10:21 in showing that Jesus loved the rich, young ruler and writes, "how Jesus looked at the rich man with love. Even his eyes and the manner of his gaze conveyed a love that was unspeakably powerful, quite at home in the human heart, yet searching with eternity's purpose."

However, Walker stops there, writes about the Good Samaritan, and ends his article with, "Jesus awakened in others a sense of goodness...So we shouldn't try to be good. We are."

Some thoughts:

1. Walker deceives the people by not telling them the full story of the rich, young ruler - that he loved his riches and walked away from Christ. Why doesn't Walker, or any Roman priest for that matter, tell the people the full story of Jesus Christ? The answer is your local Roman priest wants to keep people away from Christ - because a person has to confess being a Catholic as sin and leave the Roman church if they are to receive by faith ALONE the forgiveness of sins and eternal life that is in the real Jesus Christ, not the thin wafer Rome claims to be Christ. God is not willing that any be Catholic, but that all come to repentance!

2. Walker wrote, "Jesus awakened in others a sense of goodness...We shouldn't try to be good. We are." Master of Deceit that he is, this priest is telling people that Jesus is looking for some "goodness" in them, but the bible (and how Rome hates the BIBLE as it exposes these priestly frauds) in Galatians 3:22, "BUT THE SCRIPTURE HAS CONCLUDED ALL UNDER SIN, THAT THE PROMISE BY FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST MIGHT BE GIVEN TO THEM THAT BELIEVE."

So Rome is teaching Jesus is trying to find some "goodness" in us. But......Jesus says in the bible in Matthew 9:13, "I AM NOT COME TO CALL THE RIGHTEOUS BUT SINNERS TO REPENTANCE." Do I believe Rome or the bible? I'll take the bible. My dear Catholic, repent and turn away from your priest, believe the bible Jesus will receive you.

Can We Get Confirmation On That?

The Roman Catholic Diocese of Cleveland, Ohio has issued a, "Confirmation Preparation Caution." It seems that this, "indelible spiritual mark," (Catholic Catechism #1304) which is, "given only once" at confirmation, has been done twice to some people in northeast Ohio!!

What has happened is the Eastern Rite Catholic churches "confirm" at a baby's baptism, while as most of you are aware, the much larger Roman Rite Church has a separate confirmation ritual at around the age of 12. So some children who were "confirmed" as infants have been confirmed again at age 12!

The diocesan note warns, "There were several instances this year in various parts of the Diocese of Confirmation being ministered invalidly to persons already confirmed." I guess priests are rummaging through their baptismal records to see where their "confirmants" were baptized.

This ritual of "confirmation," eastern or western, like the doctrine of the eucharist, places God subject to man as the Roman bishop, "invokes the outpouring of the Spirit," (Catholic Catechism #1299) upon the person the bishop has placed his hands on.

This illustrates the infinite difference between Romanism and what the bible says. In Rome, God is subject to man. But the bible teaches God is sovereign and not subject to man. The bible says in John 1:13 of those who have received Christ by faith ALONE, "WHICH WERE BORN, NOT OF BLOOD, NOR OF THE WILL OF THE FLESH, NOR OF THE WILL OF MAN (this includes every Roman priest, bishop, and pope), BUT OF GOD." "BUT OF GOD" negates the entire false Roman clerical system.

Jesus said in John 3:8, "THE WIND BLOWETH WHERE IT LISTETH, AND THOU HEAREST THE SOUND THEREOF, BUT CANST NOT TELL WHENCE IT COMETH, AND WHITHER IT GOETH, SO IS EVERYONE THAT IS BORN OF THE SPIRIT." Jesus teaches that the Holy Spirit goes "WHERE IT LISTETH," but the Roman bishop claims to be able to order the Holy Spirit around on confirmation day.

I implore all Catholics to flee from the false Roman clergy which does not have such power over God. Christ will receive you if you repent of the sin of Catholicism and receive Him by faith ALONE.

Roman Doctrine Never "Changes," It Only "Develops"

In his article, 'The Development of Doctrine,' Catholic Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz of Lincoln, Nebraska demonstrates that Rome will still present brazen falsehood, and expect people to blindly believe them.

He writes, "Development of doctrine does not mean new revelation...we now await no further revelation until the coming of Christ...(and) there is a once-and-for-allness about this revelation which St. Jude says has been, 'delivered once and for all to the saints.'"

How can Bishop Bruskewitz say such untruth in the face of new unbiblical Roman revelation? For example - papal infallibility, purgatory, plenary indulgences, the assumption of Mary, bread worship, etc. Not to mention Rome's belief that "Mary" appeared in 1917 in Fatima, Portugal, and said, "People are going to hell because there is no one to make sacrifice for them."

Romish belief in this last statement constitutes a complete denial of the work of Jesus Christ on the cross as an all-sufficient sacrifice for sin. This really shows how much disdain and contempt the Roman clergy has for Christ and His people.

'His Excellency' would just love it if we would check our brains at the door and unreservedly obey him, but the bible says in 2 Timothy 1:7, "FOR GOD HATH NOT GIVEN US THE SPIRIT OF FEAR; BUT OF POWER, AND LOVE, AND OF A SOUND MIND."

God gives His born again children, "SOUND MIND(s)," that we may, as 1 John 4:1 says, "BELIEVE NOT EVERY SPIRIT, BUT TRY THE SPIRITS WHETHER THEY ARE OF GOD: BECAUSE MANY FALSE PROPHETS (Bishop Bruskewitz, for example) ARE GONE OUT INTO THE WORLD."

This illustrates the difference between the Roman god and the God of the bible. The Roman god wrote a bible that no one, except for a few priests, can understand. Great misunderstandings happen and many people are lost because they are reading the bible for themselves. The Roman god only wanted the bible in Latin (which is the only language you will find the bible in at www.vatican.com, but the 'Catechism,' papal letters, and so on are in English and other languages), so if you go to the official Vatican website and want to read the bible, take your Latin primer or your local pharmacist along to help!

The God of the bible wants His word in everyone's hands. He even promises, as Revelation 1:3 says, "BLESSED IS HE THAT READETH, AND THEY THAT HEAR THE WORDS OF THIS PROPHECY, AND KEEP THOSE THINGS WHICH ARE WRITTEN THEREIN."

If the Bereans of Acts 17:11, "SEARCHED THE SCRIPTURES DAILY," in checking out Paul's teachings, should we do any less with the Roman clergy? May God expose the deceptive and utterly black hearts of these Roman bishops, and may Catholics repent of their Romanism, and receive Christ by faith ALONE.

Lutheran and Episcopal Bishops Compromise with Rome

'A Covenant' was signed June 3 by three northeast Ohio bishops where they will, "Work toward the day when there will be no obstacles to our union in the tradition of the apostles."

These three bishops were: Roman bishop Anthony Pilla, along with two apostate bishops, Lutheran Marcus Miller, and Episcopal J. Clark Grew II. A few notes on this document:

1. Their covenant cleverly divides the bible into, as it says, "the Scriptures of Israel and the apostolic Scriptures." This is yet another Catholic attempt to claim authorship for at least the New Testament, despite Romans 3:2 saying, "UNTO THEM (the Jews) WERE COMMITTED THE ORACLES OF GOD." As well as Jude 3 which says, "THE FAITH WHICH WAS ONCE DELIVERED UNTO THE SAINTS," not a small elite of divinely empowered priests who claim to have the power to snap their fingers, and God jumps whenever a piece of bread is to be turned into Jesus Christ. How Rome hates the word of God being in the hands of the common man!

2. These apostates will also encourage their churches to share in the very politically correct Dr. Martin Luther King Day activities.

I'm not surprised, unregenerate birds of a feather will flock together. Dr. King, who pretended to be a Christian minister, did not believe in the Jesus of the bible. An essay King wrote, in seminary of all places, in the fall of 1949 reveal where he really stood.

As to the divinity of Christ he wrote, "In order to receive inspiration from Jesus the Greeks had to apotheosize (to raise to the status of a god) him." In other words, Jesus was attributed divinity because the Greeks would have settled for nothing less. But, the Magi knew beforehand Jesus would be divine, and came to the babe prepared to "WORSHIP" Him, for Matthew 2:2 has them asking, "WHERE IS HE THAT IS BORN KING OF THE JEWS? FOR WE HAVE SEEN HIS STAR IN THE EAST, AND ARE COME TO WORSHIP HIM."

As to the virgin birth King wrote, "First, we must admit that the evidence for the tenability of this doctrine is too shallow to convince any objective thinker." But, Matthew 1:23 says, "BEHOLD, A VIRGIN SHALL BE WITH CHILD, AND SHALL BRING FORTH A SON."

On the resurrection King wrote, "In fact the external evidence for the authenticity of this doctrine is found wanting." But, Mark 16:9 says, "NOW WHEN JESUS WAS RISEN EARLY THE FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK." The bible is very clear about the deity, virgin birth, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

It's interesting our three bishops choose to celebrate the day of a man who denied the real Jesus Christ. May Catholics and other apostates flee from such false teachers, repent of their sin, and be born again.