John Paul II - Part 3
The new Bush
administration of 2001 seems set to unite conservative Roman Catholics
and Evangelical Protestants even closer together, in selecting John
Dilulio as head of the office of faith-based and community initiatives.
The London Economist, February 10, 2001 described Dilulio as "a
high powered social scientist who happens to be a Roman Catholic." In
this program, announced within a couple of days of his assuming the
Presidency, Bush promised eight billion dollars of Federal funds for
religious charitable work. Make no mistake, some of that money will find
its way into Church coffers.
No doubt many churches, mosques, synagogues and
temples will act nobly, but it is undoubted that when church activities
are government-funded, charity giving by the parishioners will drop.
Despite administrative claims to the contrary, evangelistic activities
will benefit. Rice Christians, those who join churches in order to
receive charity, still exist. Also, some religious entities will
handsomely overvalue their overhead costs and thus benefit from
government funds. Further, Christians should be asking the question,
Should churches be binding themselves to government regulations,
requirements, and dictates, which may meet the government’s political
aims rather than social needs? Many issues are at stake, but George Bush
will be a friend—of this there is little doubt—of the Christian
Coalition. The February 2001 Web site lists the Roman Catholic Church as
the first member of the coalition despite its Evangelical Protestant
That John Paul II has woven a clever net around
American Protestants cannot be doubted. Using the anti-abortion issue as
its focus, the Roman Catholic Church has discovered a masterful way of
using Protestant America to foster its political agenda. This method
serves its political and religious aims well. We ourselves are opposed
to abortion for all but the most critical circumstances, involving the
life of the mother. Russell, who has delivered almost a thousand babies,
has never once encountered such a need. We oppose abortion on Biblical
grounds, and Russell having witnessed the medical consequences, and
Colin the psychological results of this procedure have, in addition to
our moral convictions, other compelling reasons to abhor the practice.
But this belief does not provide us with the right to
use our convictions as a lever to penetrate and subvert the religions of
others and the political activities of nations. This Rome is doing very
effectively as it manipulates the United States to perform its bidding
as Revelation 13:11—18 prophesied. The Bulletin, Australia’s
premier weekly news magazine, in a revealing article published February
13, 2001, revealed this.
Commencing with the confirmation, by fifty-eight
votes to forty-two in the United States Senate of John Ashcroft as
Federal Attorney General, the article states:
The confirmation as attorney-general of former
Senator and religious right hero John Ashcroft also ensures an
escalation of the US’ holy crusade. . . . As head of the Department of
Justice, Ashcroft has huge powers: to prosecute or not; to investigate
or not; and to interview or not in dozens of legal areas. . . . Yet
during his Senate confirmation hearings, he promised to uphold the
present laws "as written" and not to enforce "his personal
preferences." The word "preferences" falls far short of his beliefs,
which as an adherent of the Pentecostal church, the Assemblies of God,
he regards as divinely inspired.
The article described Ashcroft as "The most powerful
religious radical to achieve such high office."
Speaking of the Christian Coalition the article went
on to explain:
The movement is associated with right-wing
Protestants, yet little known was that it was sponsored by the
Catholic Church right up to the Vatican and Pope John Paul II himself.
It is well documented by scholars, but little reported, how Catholics
launched anti-abortion politics in the U. S. soon after the Roe
Paul Weyrich, a Catholic and founder of the
ultra-right Heritage Foundation, coined the phrase "Moral Majority"
and drew up the agenda for the organisation of that name. The Rev.
Jerry Falwell, a Southern Baptist, assumed its leadership until it
became notorious in the 1980s, declined and was replaced by the
Christian Coalition under Dr. Pat Robertson, the religious broadcaster
and former presidential candidate. Yet behind these evangelists, [sic]
the Catholic Church, fearing accusations of a "papist plot" from the
remnants of the anti-Rome activists, also maintained a powerful,
although less prominent presence. (Ibid.)
The strategy of the Papacy was revealed in this
The US Conference of Catholic Bishops . . . in
November 1975, issued the pastoral plan for Pro-Life Activities, a
document describing in detail how to influence and infiltrate the US
democratic processes. . . . The Vatican approved the plan, and it
contains remarkably inflammatory language. . . . In a 1980 court
challenge to the removal of abortion subsidies, Federal Judge John
Dooling heard evidence that the movement was a grass roots, moral
force that grew spontaneously. But in his 328 page decision, Dooling,
a Catholic, outlined the movement’s origins in the Pastoral Plan. (Ibid.)
After Judge Dooling died "his opinion in the New
Jersey court records ‘mysteriously disappeared.’" (Ibid.)
A 1995 Papal encyclical declared that—
Christians are called upon under grave obligation
to conscience, not to co-operate formally in practices, which, even if
permitted by civil legislation, are contrary to God’s law.
(Encyclical—Gospel of Life)
The theme of this encyclical is perfectly proper. But
the design of Roman Catholic prelates to sabotage and infiltrate the
political process is not the duty of a church of any persuasion.
This design is no doubt similarly used to achieve
Vatican aims in other areas, not only within the United States, but
around the world. A worldwide church which is also a sovereign nation is
a peril to the nations in which their hierarchy is established. The
Curia is not unmindful of this.
If Malachi Martin was accurate when he wrote—
that the chosen purpose of John Paul’s
pontificate—the engine that drives his papal grand policy and that
determines his day-to-day, year-to-year strategies—is to be the victor
in that competition, (The Keys of this Blood, p. 17)
then John Paul might as well stand on the gold medal
When John Paul visited New York in 1976, two years
prior to his election as pope, he was an obscure cardinal from Poland,
yet his words, reviewed in retrospect, have a startling ring:
We are now standing in the face of the greatest
historical confrontation the world has gone through . . . a test of
two thousand years of culture and Christian civilization, with all of
its consequences for human dignity, individual rights and the rights
Chilling was his assessment of the American scene on
that occasion in relation to his assertion.
Wide circles of American society and wide circles
of the Christian community do not realize this fully.
It is this American Christian lack of perception that
John Paul has fully exploited, not to raise the rights of individuals
and nations, but in order to subvert them.
On February 21, 2001, John Paul consecrated
forty-four new cardinals in St. Peter’s Square, Rome. This was the
largest number consecrated at one time in the entire history of the
Papacy. The number of living cardinals reached 185. Those under eighty
years of age, the age mandated by Paul VI to be the upper limit of those
eligible to vote in a papal conclave, was 135, fifteen above the limit
set by Paul VI. The press widely reported the overwhelming number of new
appointees were "conservative." This was ominous in view of the medieval
mentality of the Pope and such conservatives. Curiously, there was one
exception. The German Cardinal Karl Lehmann, Archbishop of Mainz, was a
well-known liberal who had long supported the "reform" movement in Latin
America. Why did the Pope deign to make such an exception? Lehmann was
rewarded for services and assistance to Polish Roman Catholics during
the period of Communist rule. The Polish Pope had not forgotten this
Two cardinals, secretly appointed in 1998, openly
received their red birettas, the symbol of their rank. One was the
Archbishop of Riga, the capital of Latvia. Thus this strongly Lutheran
nation had a cardinal. We do not know why his appointment was initially
secret. But we do know that the Roman Catholic Church and the World
Lutheran Federation were coming close to their precedent-shattering
agreement at that time. Now that that agreement is history, perhaps the
Pope felt that he was free to name the cardinal without causing any
impediment to the signing.
Three Eastern-rite cardinals were appointed. One was
Lubomyr Husar, Archbishop of Lviv in Ukraine and head of the
Eastern-rite Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church. John Paul was determined
to make inroads into the Eastern Orthodox faith by such appointments.
The Melbourne Age newspaper, February 23, 2001
After the cardinals, dressed in their new scarlet
robes, recited in unison an oath of obedience and fidelity to the Pope
and his successors, John Paul II received them one by one at his
golden throne, handing them as they knelt before him the red biretta,
a silk square ridged hat that symbolizes their rank as "princes of the
What a scene! The pope claiming to be vicar of the
One born in a stable, sitting on a kingly throne, the cardinals
accepting the rank of princes of the realm. The contrast between our
Savior and these forty-five Roman Catholic leaders could not be greater.
Jesus was humble. He was a Servant of servants.
Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered
unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.
The Pope and his cardinals were appointed to exert
authority over the flock. For Peter, along with the other apostles,
Christ told them that it was secular rulers and pagans (the Gentiles)
who exerted authority, but they themselves were prohibited from doing
But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know
that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they
that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so
among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your
minister; and whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your
servant. (Matthew 20:25—27)
Surely John Paul had no right, as an "infallible,"
authoritative ruler accepting an oath of obedience to himself, to claim
either to be the Vicar of Christ or the successor of Peter.
The Pope, in requiring the cardinals to bow before
him, accepted a privilege due only to God. Even the holy angels forbade
such submission to themselves.
And I John saw these things, and heard them. And
when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of
the angel which shewed me these things. Then saith he unto me, See
thou do it not: for I am thy fellow-servant, and of thy brethren the
prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book: worship
God. (Revelation 22:8, 9)
The Melbourne Age went on to explain,
The colour red traditionally symbolises the
cardinal’s willingness to shed his blood to defend the faith. The Pope
put it another way: "Is this colour not a symbol of the passionate
love for Christ? In that flaming red is there not the fire of love for
the church which must nurture in you the readiness, if necessary, to
even the supreme testimony of blood?"
These were high words indeed! Was it love for Christ
that caused many cardinals of the past to shed not their own blood, but
rather the blood of faithful Christians? Far more cardinals have been
implicated in the shedding of the blood of others than have yielded
their own blood for Christ. Perhaps the blood symbol of the red in full
display is more appropriately worn as a symbol of the blood of those
martyrs their colleagues of the past have shed. John Paul still upheld
the papal pomp of medieval times.
Reporting on the disappointment of Australian Roman
Catholics that the archbishop of Melbourne, George Pell, was not created
a cardinal, the Sydney Sunday Telegraph stated:
Powerful rumours were abroad in Catholic circles
last week that George Pell, the archbishop of Melbourne, would be made
a cardinal. But his grace missed out upon a berth among the
thirty-seven conservatives [later in the week the Pope added another
five] elevated to the Scarlet. He will have to be content with
arch-episcopal purple instead of red. (February 3, 2001)
"Scarlet and purple"? Are these colors not
appropriate for the religious power of the Papacy, for the Scriptures
have symbolized that power as a woman "arrayed in purple and scarlet
colour" (Revelation 17:4)?
Secular historians will unquestionably remember John
Paul as the man who dismantled European Communism. Students of prophecy,
while acknowledging that accomplishment, will remember him as the
pontiff whose actions and policies finally brought the Papacy back to
the prophesied pinnacle of power and influence. And we will not, surely,
have long to contemplate this achievement, for these signs assure us
that Christ is coming soon, very soon.
Our minds return to Hildebrand, the German prelate
who became pope in 1073. Hildebrand was impressed by the information
contained in a book written by the reforming Cardinal Peter Damiani
entitled The Book of Gomorrah. In this book, Volume 4, page 76,
Damiani set out to condemn the sodomy, fornication, bestiality and
adultery he claimed to be rife in the lives of large numbers of priests
Hildebrand, himself no saint despite his later
canonization, set out to reform the clerical immorality. He successfully
achieved the thwarted agendas of a series of previous German Popes.
Their aims had been fourfold:
They would suppress simony or the traffic in sacred
offices; they would enforce celibacy and chastity upon the bishops,
priests and monks; they would recover the Temporal Power of the
Papacy; and they would strengthen its spiritual authority until no
king or noble would dare raise a finger in any cause whatsoever when
the pope forbade it. (Joseph McCabe, A History of the Popes,
N.V. Douglas Ltd., Auckland, New Zealand, Circa 1939, p. 6)
All these aims Hildebrand as Pope Gregory VII
achieved. He has been the envy of later popes.
Ever since Hildebrand, Pope Gregory VII, (the pope
who summoned King Henry IV of Saxony to repent before him), died in
1085, the Roman Catholic Church has sought to find another Hildebrand.
It has taken just seven years short of nine centuries to achieve this
aim, but in John Paul II. they have at last discovered him.
The deadly wound is now fully healed!