Pope Wants Sunday As Day of Rest Starting in 2011

VATICAN CITY, SEPT. 26, 2010 (Zenit.org) - The next World Meeting of Families is not until 2012 in Milan, but Pope Benedict XVI is asking families and parishes to begin preparations a year in advance (2011) availing of Pope John Paul II's apostolic exhortation “Familiaris Consortio”.

The German Pontiff made this request in an August 23, 2010 letter to the President of the Pontifical Council for the Family, Cardinal Ennio Antonelli.  The Vatican released the letter this week.   The theme for the upcoming 7th World Meeting of Families is:  "Family: Work and Celebration." The Holy Father's letter reflected on these themes, and the appropriate balance of work and rest.

"Work and celebration are intimately connected in the life of families: they condition choices, influence relations between married couples and between parents and children, affect the relation of families with society and with the Church," the Pontiff noted. "Holy Scripture tells us that the family, work and the feast day are gifts and blessings of God to help us to live a fully human existence. Daily experience attests that the authentic development of the person includes the individual, familial, and communal dimension, activities and functional relationships, as well as openness to hope and to the Good without limits."

In this light, Benedict XVI lamented the modern organization of work, "in function of market competition and maximizing profit," and the concept of rest or celebration as an "occasion for escape and consumption."

He said both these factors "contribute to the break-up of the family and the community and to the spreading of an individualistic lifestyle."

"Thus," the Pope continued, "it is necessary to promote reflection and efforts at reconciling the demands and the periods of work with those of the family and to recover the true meaning of the feast, especially on Sunday,  the weekly Easter, THE DAY OF THE LORD and the day of man, the day of the family, of the community, and of solidarity." 

Characterizing the World Meeting of Families as a "privileged occasion to rethink work and celebration," he affirmed that the event "must connect to an adequate journey of ecclesial and cultural formation" if it is to bear fruit. 

"It is my wish, therefore, that already in the course of 2011, the 30th anniversary of the apostolic exhortation 'Familiaris Consortio', the great charter of family pastoral care, might be taken as a valid guide with initiatives at the parish, diocesan and national level, aimed at throwing light on experiences of work and celebration in their truest and most positive aspects, with particular regard to the effect on the concrete life of families,"he said. "Christian families and ecclesial communities of the whole world should thus feel called and involved and enter solicitously onto the path toward Milan 2012.'"

Source

Vatican synod ends with criticism of Israel

"Israel cannot use the biblical concept of a promised land or a chosen people to justify new settlements in Jerusalem or territorial claims, a Vatican synod on the Middle East said Saturday." -Why hasn't anyone noticed that both Islam and the Roman Catholic Vatican want to control the land in Jerusalem? We already know Rome invented Islam. Could it be they both agree because they are one in the same? After all, prophecy does say the beast in Rome will seek to set up shop in Jerusalem.  Source


Other interesting news
A Dominionist Prayer from Janet Porter: Damascus Moments and the Wall of Separation
This site has some interesting things today: 
Candid Conservatives

Phew! 2012 Doomsday Date May Be Wrong

"The much-hyped "prediction" that, according to the ancient Mayan calendar, the world will end on Dec. 21, 2012, may be based on a miscalculation. According to recent research, the mythological date of the "end of days" may be off by 50 to 100 years." -Those of us that study the Word of God know that 2012, 2062, or 2112 are all dates calculated by man and are not to be trusted at all. But you know what saddens me the most about all this? Christians, who supposedly read their Bibles, actually wondered if 2012 was the year Jesus would return. Even though the very Lord they supposedly trust, stated clearly in the Bible they purportedly read that, "But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only." (Matthew 24:36) In other words, as prophesied, most 'Christians' don't read Bibles today! And that's exactly what Rome prefers! Source

Glenn Beck: What if God made us from monkeys?

"Were human beings created by God in an instant, or over millions of years through evolution? Glenn Beck addressed the question on his radio show today as he came to the defense of Christine O'Donnell, the Republican U.S. Senate candidate from Delaware under fire for challenging evolution." -It appears even Mormons don't read or at least believe the Bible either today. I wonder, is it because the two last popes said we evolved from monkeys that all this falderal is running rampant today? Bottom line is this.. if you claim to be a Christian, then you must at least act like you believe the Bible written by the Christian God that clearly states in Genesis 1:26, "And God said, Let us make man in our image..." It doesn't say He made us monkeys that later evolved into man anywhere in that verse, or anywhere in all 66 books of the Bible for that matter. Look.. if you want to believe in evolution, that's your decision. But STOP claiming to be a Christian while doing so. You're making the rest of us look bad.

Source

Other Interesting News
Janet Porter Prays For Control Of the Government
The rise of The Right in Europe.... 

Iran, Venezuela leaders seek 'new world order'

"The leaders of Iran and Venezuela hailed what they called their strong strategic relationship on Wednesday, saying they are united in efforts to establish a "new world order" that will eliminate Western dominance over global affairs." -Does this mean they have finally bowed to the Vatican? Truth is, the NWO is Rome's invention. Does it also mean the USA will 'appear' to no longer hold dominance in the world since the Vatican has been slated as the domineering one? Time will tell. Since History has proven Rome prefers to work behind closed doors, and prophecy says "all the world" will follow the Vatican, then yes, it looks like certain puzzle pieces are in place so as to appease those that don't much care for the American government. I would be shocked to see Iran and Venezuela announce their allegiance with Rome. I'm sure many of their citizens would disapprove. However, Yassir Arafat did publicly do so back in 2003. So, it's any man's guess as to whether or not they will acknowledge the Pope. However, when all 192 nations do eventually bow, then it will become common knoweldge as to who is Caesar. For now, the Vatican is once again playing the moral card like they did when they wanted to distance themselves from their man Hitler. The ironic thing here is, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Hugo Chavez appear to be unaware that America is in fact run by Rome.


Source

O'Donnell questions separation of church, state

"Republican Christine O'Donnell challenged her Democratic rival Tuesday to show where the Constitution requires separation of church and state... "Where in the Constitution is separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked while Democrat Chris Coons, an attorney, sat a few feet away. Coons responded that O'Donnell's question "reveals her fundamental misunderstanding of what our Constitution is. ... The First Amendment establishes a separation." She interrupted to say, "The First Amendment does? ... So you're telling me that the separation of church and state, the phrase 'separation of church and state,' is in the First Amendment?" -This is why the wording in the Laws of the land are always worded in such a vague way so as to allow for manipulation later on when the enemy of souls has one under his thumb that he can use to push his agenda. They will form a church & State government, and comments like this fuel that agenda greatly so as to make it an easy task to pass Sunday Laws.


SOURCE


Related News:
mainstream-media-ignorant-of-first amendment

Surviellance GPS Illegal

“In August, three judges on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (two conservatives, one liberal) ruled unanimously — and correctly — that police violated the Constitution when they hid a GPS device on a person’s car and tracked his every move without a valid warrant. That person, Antoine Jones, was convicted of conspiracy to distribute crack cocaine based on the tracking of his Jeep for four weeks.” The day is here where digital technology raises questions about differences between cyberspace and the physical world.

Private activity is protected under the U.S. Constitution. Yet surviellance and monitoring of private activity is increasingly becoming a reality according. For the discerning student of prophecy, this is a flagrant violation of the fourth amendment to the Bill of rights that allows “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.”

Matthew 24:12 “And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.” Are we approaching a time where those with very different beliefs from the majority, and who diligently seek to understand the signs of the times of Bible prophecy, will be tracked with this same technology? The foundations of the constitution of the United States are being slowly eroded by those who are duty bound, and whom we expect to uphold them. Eventually no protections will be left against the loss of freedom of religion and conscience. The time is coming when “our country shall repudiate every principle of its Constitution as a Protestant and republican government, and shall make provision for the propagation of papal falsehoods and delusions, then we may know that the time has come for the marvelous working of Satan and that the end is near.” Maranatha, p. 190

“Liberty of conscience, which has cost so great a sacrifice, will no longer be respected. The church and the world will unite, and the world will lend to the church power to crush out the right of the people to worship God according to His Word. Signs of the Times, 8 November 1899.

Thankfully, for the time being the district judges in Washington DC are upholding this principle for now.

NY Times Article

Tea Party Christians and Conservatives

A new poll is out from the Public Religion Institute, which describes how Tea Party members view themselves.

“First, it’s an overwhelmingly Christian group. 81% identify as Christian, and nearly half (47%) say they are part of the religious right or conservative Christian movement.

“Secondly, it isn’t libertarian, it’s much more socially conservative, with 63% saying abortion should be illegal and only 18% in favor of gay marriage.

“Third, it is fundamentally a Republican movement. 76 percent identify or lean towards the Republican party.

“And last, not terribly surprisingly, the media has blown their numbers out of proportion, only 11 percent of the population identifies with the Tea Party movement.

Though relatively small so far, the Tea Party is a vocal group. You don’t need a lot of voters to swing an election or a referendum, particularly if the nation is split fairly evenly in its opinions. As religious convictions play a larger and larger roll in national politics, advocates of restoring God in America’s laws, coupled with the idea that God is punishing America for its departure from His laws, there can be serious consequences for freedom of religion and worship. The U.S. Constitution’s separation of church and state could easily be undermined.

National Public Radio Blog

Biden and 5 Supreme Court justices attend controversial 'Red Mass'

“Vice President Joe Biden joined five Supreme Court justices to attend Sunday’s annual Red Mass, the Roman Catholic service for the courts that was initiated in 1952 by Catholic professionals.” This attendance of a religious event in their official capacities and offices raises the question of whether the separation of church and state, a principle so much enshrined in the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution, will still be practised by the very ones who legislate the laws of the land.

The first Amendment stands as a bulwark against religion excessively influencing government and by barring governments at all levels (federal, state, and municipal) from dictating what people must profess, how they may worship and with whom they may associate. The Catholic mass is a pillar of faith in the church, but “power brokers of other faiths were asked to attend the invitation-only event.”

Prophetically speaking, it is intention of the Holy See is to influence these well-respected thought leaders in the legal profession to think in her frame of mind, and eventually legislate policies and frame laws that will favour the Catholic Church. The Vatican goal is to “sit a queen.” (See Revelation 18:7 the Holy See intends to govern the whole world through her moral teaching, and destory the liberty granting U.S. Constitution

“God’s word has given warning of the impending danger; let this be unheeded, and the Protestant world will learn what the purposes of Rome really are, only when it is too late to escape the snare. She is silently growing into power. Her doctrines are exerting their influence in legislative halls, in the churches, and in the hearts of men.” Great Controversy, p. 581.

“God never forces the will or the conscience; but Satan’s constant resort—to gain control of those whom he cannot otherwise seduce—is compulsion by cruelty. Through fear or force he endeavors to rule the conscience and to secure homage to himself. To accomplish this, he works through both religious and secular authorities, moving them to the enforcement of human laws in defiance of the law of God.” – The Great Controversy, pg. 591.

CNN News Article

Papal Move to Revive Christian Roots of Europe

“Pope Benedict XVI formally created a new Vatican office… to revive Christianity in Europe, his latest attempt to counter secular trends in traditionally Christian countries.”

In a new decree, Ubicumque et Semper (everywhere and always), which established the new council, the Pope said the new office would promote church doctrine, use the media to get the church’s message out and mobilize missionary-type activities.

The president of the new Pontifical Council for Promoting the New Evangelization, Archbishop Salvatore Fisichella, said that “Europe will have to be the dicastery’s first priority, since that is the continent suffering the most aggressive process of dechristianization.”

It is also important from another perspective. With a huge decline in the traditional European population, and the rise of large numbers of Islamic immigrants in Europe, the Papacy sees that she might eventually be unable to establish herself as the cultural and religious center of Europe. So there is special urgency for reviving the Roman Catholic Church in Europe. The Vatican must re-establish her political control of Europe. In order to accomplish that, she must also resurrect her spiritual control of Europe in tandem.

But that’s not all. “Benedict has made reviving Europe’s Christian roots a priority. While the decree listed no specific geographical areas of concentration, the evangelization office is expected to also pay attention to Latin America, where evangelical movements are making inroads in traditionally Catholic countries such as Brazil.”

“In the decree, Benedict lamented that with tremendous scientific, social and cultural progress over the past century, parts of the world that once had strong Christian roots had grown to believe that they can exist without God.”

The Holy See must become the master of Europe if ‘all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him.” Revelation 13:8. The papal effort to revive the Christian roots of Europe is vital to Vatican’s future destiny.

Yahoo News Article

Zenit Article

Catholic News Agency Article

Related News

Sarkozy Wonders after the Beast

French President Nicolas Sarkozy visited Pope Benedict XVI on October 8, to “confirm constructive collaboration with the Catholic Church, after differences that have arisen in recent months.” A communiqué from the Vatican affirmed their “joint desire to maintain permanent dialogue at various institutional levels, and to continue constructive collaboration on matters of mutual interest.”

But this nice sounding statement is really typical Vatican-speak that obscures what really happened.

The French President, a Roman Catholic himself, and an honorary member of the clergy, met with the Pope for 30 minutes and then as usual for state visits to the Vatican, he met with the Papal Secretary of State, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone and other diplomatic leaders.

Sarkozy requested the meeting because, apparently, enough French Catholics who voted for him in 2007 were alienated from his party because of the expulsion of gypsies from France. The bishops had been outspoken on the matter. And on August 22, the Pope exhorted French Catholics gathered at Castel Gandolfo to “accept legitimate human differences.” In other words, he was saying that the French people should be accepting of the gypsies.

The pope slapped Sarkozy’s hand. He used the expulsion of the gypsies to the advantage of the Vatican by exhorting French Catholics to oppose the French government’s actions. This made Sarkozy realize that he needed to make amends and seek a high-profile political visit to the pope in the interest of cooperation with the Vatican – and perhaps reconciliation.

During the meeting the two men discussed “the importance of the ethical and social dimension of economic problems, in light of the encyclical ‘Caritas in Veritate,” the papal encyclical published last year.

In other words, they discussed (or perhaps Sarkozy was lectured on) proper social policy as defined by the Vatican in Caritas in Veritate. The pope used the occasion to instruct Sarkozy on the moral principles of Rome in dealing with social problems such as the gypsies.

The Pope remarked about his affection for France by remembering his visit there in 2008 for the 1500 year anniversy of the baptism of Clovis, the first Catholic king of the Franks, in 508. So in spite of secular legal nature of the French government, Benedict invoked the Catholic soul of France in his remarks seeking to re-affirm the papal supremacy over French social life.

The president and his delegation later prayed in the Blessed Sacrament Chapel, before the altar of Our Lady of Perpetual Help and at the altar of the Confession, and the tomb of St. Peter. This may be surprising for the leader of a nation that prides itself in a secular government to do this. But students of Prophecy will recognize this behavior as part of the fulfillment of long-established prophetic principles.

Sarkozy, the head of a secular government, revealed his political preference for Catholicism by this official state visit to the Vatican. It is evident that Being caught in a political bind has led Sarkozy to wonder “after the beast” (See Revelation 13:3).

At a lunceon later in the day, the president publically stated that he seeks to promote relations with the Church and to defend its positions. Sarcozy is not hiding his desire to take France back to its Roman Catholic roots and heal the deadly wound inflicted by Napoleon Bonaparte in 1798.

“France does not forget that it has a common history of 2,000 years with the Church and that today it shares with her an inestimable treasure of moral values, of culture, of civilization, which have been inscribed in its identity,” said Sarkozy.

Sarkozy doesn’t remember his history very well. French history with the church not 2000 years. It has only been 1502 years. Nevertheless Sarkozy’s remark affirms Rome’s claim to be the cultural and religious center of French social and political life.

France is one of the most powerful and influential countries in the European Union, and as she is being brought more and more under Vatican control, she will have a strong influence on other nations as they follow the beast. Rome is working to resurrect the Holy Roman Empire in Europe and subtlety uses politial events to manipulate the nations into her orbit.

Sarkozy needs the Catholic vote to stay in power. His insecurity in light of their lack of support and even defection from his party, is revealing. There is great danger when national leaders think they have to court Rome in order to retain the Catholic vote.

“Rome is aiming to re-establish her power, to recover her lost supremacy. Let history testify of her artful and persistent efforts to insinuate herself into the affairs of nations; and having gained a foothold, to further her own aims, even at the ruin of princes and people. Romanism openly puts forth the claim that the pope“can pronounce sentences and judgments in contradiction to the right of nations, to the law of God and man.” [THE “DECRETALIA.”] Great Controversy, p. 580.

Zenit Article

National Catholic Reporter Online Honorary Clergy
http://ncronline.org/blogs/essays-theology/cardinal-mahony-notre-dame

Agency French Press

UK Telegraph: Roma Expulsions/Political Impact

History is Powerful -- And PBS Gets It Wrong

The PBS miniseries God in America began this evening and features a glaring error merits highlighting and correcting. Getting this important element of our history right helps us to answer the Religious Right's theocratic aspirations as well as claims the various claims of Christian nationalism.

God in America seeks to present a fresh narrative of the story of religion in America. While the first two chapters, presented back to back seem good, (albeit overly slanted towards the role of evangelical Christians), there is a glaring error I want to highlight that goes to the heart of the story of religious freedom and the right of individual conscience.

That this PBS documentary joins the Religious Right in eliding this important part of our history is disturbing.

So let's correct the record.

The film and the related web site contradicts itself each time the role of religion in the Constitution is mentioned:
The section on the drafting of the Constitution on the web site's "time line" of religious liberty is headlined: "U.S. Constitution drafted; no guarantee of religious liberty."

The discussion under this headline states:

"God and religion are scarcely mentioned in the document. Wanting to create 'a more perfect union,' some of the Constitution's framers fear that statements on religion would be divisive."

While it is true that there was concern about how best to approach the matter of religion, in fact there was a major statement regarding religious liberty in the Constitution thus it was not "scarcely mentioned" nor can anyone fairly say that there was "no guarantee of religious liberty" when in fact, Article Six made an extraordinary and unprecedented first cut at doing just that.

But even that dubious claim is more accurate than what is stated in the film itself. Thetranscript states:

NARRATOR: "And when, a year later, the Constitution was being drafted in Philadelphia, Jefferson and the Baptists hoped that their hard-fought principle of separating church from state would be part of the country's founding document.But when the Constitution was presented in September 1787, in not one of the seven articles was there any guarantee of religious liberty or other individual rights."

But this is a semantic spin on the facts. Article Six of the Constitution declared:

"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

This was the real break between the theocratic norms of the colonial era and the democratic values of religious equality that stand at the center of the struggle of the American experiment to this day. Understandably, it was a big issue at the time, since religious oaths had been standard, and perennially controversial in most of the colonies. The abolition of "religious tests" set in motion the disestablishment of the state churches. (I wrote about the significance of Article 6 an essay, History is Powerful: Why the Christian Right Distorts History and Why it Matters in The Public Eye magazine in 2007.)

Indeed, a great deal of opposition to ratification of the Constitution centered on religion. While it is true, as the film emphasizes, many were concerned about the absence of any mention of God or Christianity in the text, many opponents were also opposed to the banning of religious tests for public office.

The Constitution was ratified by a majority of the states, but part of the politics of getting there, was a deal made with civil libertarians like Jefferson that they would support ratification for a document that they felt insufficiently guaranteed religious liberty, in exchange for the promise that the Constitution would be amended later. They did, and it was.

In an online debate at Religion Dispatches (an outgrowth of a panel at Netroots Nation in 2009), I added:

"Barring religious tests for public office in Article 6 also obviously meant that there would be no religious test for citizenship. (You can't be elected to office if you are not a citizen.) Thus the framers were clearly not solely concerned with whether or not we had official federal or state churches, but first that the right of belief resided with individual citizens.

The plumb line of this principle is clear. When Thomas Jefferson first proposed the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom in 1777, he stated that this right of individual conscience must be extended to everyone, including: "the Jew, the Mohametan, and the Hindoo." Jefferson was not arguing the demographics of majority and minority religions, but first principles. It took time to advance them, even then. James Madison as governor of Virginia managed to push Jefferson's bill through the legislature in 1786--the year before the drafting the federal Constitution, of which Madison is credited with being the principal author--as well as the principal author of the First Amendment. Virginia had already disestablished the Anglican Church, the day after it joined the revolution in 1776. So there is no mistaking the meaning of formally extending religious liberty to all in the wake of disestablishment and as a famous forerunner to the Constitution itself."

In fairness, any story necessarily includes some facts and leaves out others in order to keep the narrative clear.

But in this case, the result is a gross distortion of the history of religious liberty in the U.S.

SOURCE

Other News:

420 banks demand 1 world currency

Church and State on the horizon

The EMERGENT BLUEPRINT

"At first blush, Jeremy Rifkin would hardly seem to be talking about Dominion Theology. After all, he advocates the paradigm of 'entropy.' Our mission as humans, this New Ager says, is to 'dress and keep the earth.' Rifkin calls this the "stewardship paradigm.' The Dominion theologians, on the other hand, such as Rushdoony and Gary North, say that our mission is to 'subdue the earth.' What do these two have in common? It is the pointing of their respective camps into preparation for revolution at approximately the same time, with both sides being convinced they will control the outcome. Both planned a significant role for the charismatics in advancing their mission.... While Dominionist theologian Gary North has been critical of Rifkin, he has nonetheless been following a Rifkinesque scenario of bringing the revolution he envisions to birth – both in terms of planned use of evangelicals and charismatics."

–Constance Cumbey, "THE PLOT TO USE THE CHARISMATICS"

What does the Emergent Church have in common with the New Apostolic Reformation? Everything! They are two sides of the same coin.

The same template has been followed for both – the very sameblueprint was used from day one. The rising political power and influence of the New Apostolic Reformation, and the simultaneous growth of the Emergent Church movement, is no accident. It was planned all along. And New Ager Jeremy Rifkin wrote the "blueprint" for it!

This blueprint for an "emerging order" was published as a book, significantly in the year 1979, just after the Evangelical Consultations on the Future,[2] and before the rapid rise of the political Right in the early 1980s. Titled The Emerging Order: God in the Age of Scarcity,[3]Rifkin's book, at first blush, appears to be a manifesto for environmental stewardship. And that is indeed one of its objectives. But that's not its full purpose, as New Age expert, author Constance Cumbey, noted. She wrote about it in her book A Planned Deception,[4] where she explained how Rifkin had passed himself off as a Christian during the era in which The Emerging Order was published:

"Rifkin has deceived many Christians and he has used his friendship with Pat Robertson to help do it. In 1980 Robertson praised Rifkin'sEntropy unpublished manuscript. (p. 157)

"Pat Robertson sent a newsletter endorsing that book while it was still an unpublished manuscript! Pat Robertson's Perspective of June/July 1980, rather than exposing this horrible threat to Christianity, almost made it sound Christian...." (p. 161)

Cumbey detailed the many New Age connections and philosophies embraced by Rifkin, and then explained that "Rifkin also wrote The Emerging Order. There he made it clear that the evangelical church would be their primary instrument to bring the new world order to birth." (p. 162)

Rifkin's book was touted as a blueprint. The cover jacket for The Emerging Order states, "In this provocative book, the authors provide a blueprint for American culture that is staggering in its implications. Beyond being yet another indictment of the liberal welfare state, their thesis points to a major cultural reformation in which religion will play a leading role in the rearrangement of our nation's priorities."

The book was also called "a blueprint for the economic and spiritual challenges facing the Christian community in the remainder of this century" by Senator Mark Hatfield, a key member of the secretive Washington Fellowship ("The Family").[5] Hatfield's endorsement of the book may become increasingly significant.


A "second Protestant reformation" –
"a great religious awakening"

In the introduction to The Emerging Order, Rifkin lays out hisblueprint, stating that he believed that "we are in the early morning hours of a second Protestant reformation" which is evident by "the shift now taking place in Protestant doctrine."(p. ix) In the late 1970s, noticing the rapid rise of "church renewal" that was taking place across America, he expressed the hope that this event would "give form to a new theological construct; one whose sweep is so broad that it could well consume the theological world view of the Reformation." (p. ix) He wanted to hitch a ride on the renewal train, and his blueprint told how to commandeer the train and turn it onto a new track.

This seemed impossible at the time. But Rifkin outlined a specific plan. He proposed jumpstarting a "second Reformation" with the missing element of mysticism. The emphasis on the "supernatural" would "provide a bridge" to acceptance of both new doctrines and a global economic transformation, he suggested. The basic blueprintfor using mysticism was articulated as follows:

"Today's Christian renewal movement is a two-pronged phenomenon. First, there are the millions upon millions of Charismatics, whose belief in supernatural gifts of faith healing, speaking in tongues, and prophesy represents a monumental assault on the modern age itself. For the Charismatics, these supernatural powers are beginning to replace science, technique and reason as the critical reference points for interpreting one's day-to-day existence. If this unconscious challenge to the modern world view continues to intensify, it could provide the kind of liberating force that could topple the prevailing ethos and provide a bridge to the next age of history." (p. x)

The blueprint also called for a corresponding more rational approach, a pseudo-intellectualism that could concoct new doctrines, especially doctrines that would lead Christians to embrace a "new covenant vision" and a "new world view."

"While the Charismatics are generating a potential liberating impulse, the more mainline evangelical movement is beginning to provide the necessary reformulation of theological doctrine that is essential for the creation of a new covenant vision and a new world view." (p. x)

What was to be the key doctrinal shift for this Emerging Order? Rifkin identified Dominionism, especially the early chapters in Genesis, as the core doctrine that must be "redefined." The process of "redefining" Dominionism is explained in this manner:

"God's very first commandment to humankind in the book of Genesis is being redefined. Its redefinition changes the entire relationship of human beings to both God and the temporal world. In the beginning, God says to Adam 'have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.' 'Dominion,' which Christian theology has for so long used to justify people's unrestrained pillage and exploitation of the natural world, has suddenly and dramatically been reinterpreted. Now, according to the new definition of dominion, God's first instruction to the human race is to serve as a steward and protector over all of his creation." (p. x)

Note how easily this "redefinition" of Dominion caught on. There was virtually no opposition to this heresy!

"It is interesting to observe that this most fundamental reconception of God's first order to his children on earth has been accepted by Protestant scholars, ministers and practitioners in just a few short years without any significant opposition being voiced. In fact, one would be hard pressed to find a leading Protestant scholar anywhere today who would openly question this new interpretation of dominion in the Book of Genesis.... While it is true that the new interpretation of dominion is also being promulgated by the mainline Protestant denominations and the Catholic Church, it is the evangelical community, with its resurgent spiritual vitality, that has the momentum, drive and energy that is required to achieve this radical theological transformation in American society." (p. x-xi)

Rifkin was right. Protestant and Catholic scholars had begun developing this Dominion theology. But by the mid-1970s, changing doctrines had also become a major project of Fuller Theological Seminary and its evangelical cohorts. C. Peter Wagner, Ralph Winter, and other professors began to chip away at traditional orthodoxy, slowly concocting a strange brew of ever-evolving progressive "revelations," heading towards an outright Dominionist theology. Thanks to Ralph Winter, Mission Frontiers, and the U.S. Center for World Mission, the "redefinition" teachings of Dominionism were standard fare in the global mission movement by the mid-1990s.

But all of this activity was still missing a critical ingredient Rifkin had identified as necessary to shift over to "a great religious awakening" – the mysticism. He wrote:

"If the Charismatic and evangelical strains of the new Christian renewal movement come together and unite a liberating energy with a new covenant vision for society, it is possible that a great religious awakening will take place, one potentially powerful enough to incite a second Protestant reformation." (p. xi)

Here it was, The Master Plan for the next "great religious awakening." It took one man, C. Peter Wagner, to ignite the fuse according the plan laid out in Rifkin's blueprint. Wagner became a key player in a confluence that began to have massive repercussions throughout the rest of evangelicalism. It began to take off when John Wimber of the Vineyard Movement connected with the Kansas City "prophets," part of the old Latter Rain cult. John Wimber had previously been hand-picked as an “experiment” by C. Peter Wagner as part of his Fuller Theological Seminary class on “signs and wonders.” Wimber’s connection to the Kansas City group proved to be the catalyst for the beginnings of "The Third Wave," what C. Peter Wagner was to later call the “New Apostolic Reformation.” In short order the esoteric doctrines of the Latter Rain movement trickled into mainstream evangelicaldom and gradually became an integral part of the postmodern evangelical canon. And because of Wagner’s influence, Latter Rain leaders such as Mike Bickle and Rick Joyner, who were obscure in 1991, are now widely known throughout evangelicalism. The Latter Rain cult, most notable for its anomalous signs and wonders, would pick up steam and continue to provide the necessary "powerful," "liberating energy" to fuel the blueprint.

Jeremy Rifkin's "great religious awakening" went a step further. It called for a "new Protestant conservation ethic, ready-made for the new age of scarcity the world is moving into."(p. xi) To accomplish this he called for a "great economic transformation," an "economic shift," the intended result of the "theological spark" created by "the evangelical awakening that is spreading across America and... the... second Protestant reformation emerging between now and the year A.D. 2000."(p. xii) This economic shift would be nothing less than a global redistribution of wealth. This theme was dutifully picked up by the New Apostolic Reformation as an abiding prophecy, and continues to gather steam as it co-mingles with Dominionism.[6]

There was still another missing ingredient. It took an entire generation to come up with it, but after oodles of money, gigantic publishing contracts, and massive stealth "change agent" training, Leadership Network became a leading player in the more mainstream evangelical world. It began by dialectically facilitating both components of the blueprint for transformation. It developed a church structure that modeled corporations in a form of extreme pragmatism that rewrote the basic biblical doctrines of "church." It then hijacked the consumer-driven train and turned the church into its own marketing agent for the blueprint. And it simultaneously launched the Emergent Church movement, which added the necessary pizazz of mysticism to blunt rational thought. Its leading Emergent spokesperson from early on, Brian McLaren, would serialize Rifkin'sblueprint in his successive books, each more fine-tuned than the last, systematically destroying the old order theology while laying the groundwork for the new order theology.[7]

Just how did Rifkin propose to implement such a monumental scheme? In 1980 it seemed far-fetched and nearly impossible. But the wholeblueprint is fully operational today, thirty years later, and no longer a plan but a reality.


To be continued. . . .

The Truth:

"Behold, they shall surely gather together, but not by me:" (Isaiah 54:15a)


Endnotes:
1. Constance Cumbey, "THE PLOT TO USE THE CHARISMATICS," New Age Monitor, May-July 1986, p. 11, links added. See http://cumbey.blogspot.com/ for more readings by this author.
2. See Part 4 of this series: http://herescope.blogspot.com/2010/09/concocting-great-awakening.html. The Discernment Research Group first broke this story in September 2005 in a series of posts that ran into October 2005. One can look through the posts to read more details about these consultations. http://herescope.blogspot.com/2005_09_01_archive.htmland http://herescope.blogspot.com/2005_10_01_archive.html
3. Jeremy Rifkin with Ted Howard, The Emerging Order: God in the Age of Scarcity (G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1979).
4. Constance Cumbey, A Planned Deception: The Staging of a New Age "Messiah," 1985. This rare book can now be downloaded by going here: https://public.me.com/cumbey
5. To understand the significance of this point, see Jeffrey Sharlet's two books: The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power (Harper, 2009) and C Street: The Fundamentalist Threat to American Democracy (Little, Brown and Co., 2010). Also read "Early Experiential Emergents" http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/009/discernment/5-emerging-2.htm
6. See "The Great Outpouring of Wealth," http://herescope.blogspot.com/2010/08/great-outpouring-of-wealth.html
7. See our Herescope series "The Emerging Church - Circa 1970" and follow the links and footnotes:
http://herescope.blogspot.com/2009/05/emerging-church-circa-1970.html
http://herescope.blogspot.com/2009/05/early-experiential-emergents.html
http://herescope.blogspot.com/2009/06/retro-emergent.html
http://herescope.blogspot.com/2009/07/new-thing.html
http://herescope.blogspot.com/2009/07/emergence-towards-convergence.html
http://herescope.blogspot.com/2009/07/envisioning-emergence.html
http://herescope.blogspot.com/2009/07/quantum-eschatology.html
http://herescope.blogspot.com/2009/08/reinventing-clergy.html
http://herescope.blogspot.com/2009/08/celebrating-open-inclusiveness.html

Note: The word blueprint is emphasized throughout this article, even in quoted material.

SOURCE

It's Their (Tea) Party - And The Religious Right Is Invited: Poll Shows Movements Closely Linked

A new poll confirms what a lot of us have suspected for a while now: The Tea Party and the Religious Right are more or less in sync.
The poll, conducted by the Public Religion Research Institute, found that nearly half (47 percent) of Tea Party activists consider themselves part of the Religious Right. They are also overwhelming Christian, with 81 percent identifying with that faith.

And what about all of that talk about the Tea Party being heavily libertarian and composed mainly of secular conservatives who just want low taxes and less government spending? This survey casts doubt on that. Sixty-three percent say abortion should be illegal, and only 18 percent favor same-sex marriage.

Finally, like the Religious Right, the Tea Party is quite partisan, leaning heavily Republican. Seventy-six percent say they belong to the GOP.

It's clear that Religious Right leaders hope to harness the energy of the Tea Party movement and use it to help elect favored candidates and push its theocratic agenda.

NPR reporter Barbara Bradley Hagerty put together an interesting piece recently on the Tea Party and religion. Hagerty quoted John Green, a political scientist at the University of Akron, who pointed out that the Tea Party came along at just the right time.

"There was an opening on the right for organizations and candidates and groups that could appeal to different elements of the religious coalition," Green said. "In many ways, the Tea Party has filled that niche."

It's also important to remember that some Religious Right groups helped the Tea Party grow. I first heard of the movement in 2009 through e-mails sent by the Rev. Donald Wildmon's American Family Association (AFA). The AFA sent so many of them that early on I made the mistake of assuming that the Tea Party was a project of that group.

The new poll shows that about 11 percent of Americans identify with the Tea Party movement - a number that tracks roughly with the number who say they belong to the Religious Right.

That may not seem like a lot, but remember this: These people are motivated and politically active. With so many Americans staying home on Election Day, a determined minority can have a disproportionate impact on the results.

SOURCE

Related News Scarborough: Pastors Must Use Politics To Maintain Order Until Jesus Returns

Vatican: Dialogue takes more than talking

“Voicing opposite positions and irreconcilable ideologies is not truly dialogue, said Archbishop Dominique Mamberti, Vatican secretary for relations with states, at a recent UN General Assembly. Rather, he said, “true dialogue means exchanging and sharing wisdom.”

Dialogue, said the archbishop, extends to the “exchange of words and the search for balance between opposite interests to a real sharing of wisdom for the common good.”

Who is to define “wisdom” and the “common good?” Through these moral and ethical terms, Rome is telling the UN that their actions need to be defined by her moral teaching.

The Archbishop however affirmed that the UN was still of great interest to the Holy See, as the overall agenda of the UN is to unite the nations of the world under a new world order.

Archbishop Mamberti said that the history of human rights “shows that respect for religious liberty, which includes the right to express one’s faith publicly and to spread it, is the essential stone of the whole building of human rights,” the prelate affirmed.

Becoming the champion of Religious Liberty is ironic since throughout the dark ages, Rome was its destroyer.

“The pacific tone of Rome in the United States does not imply a change of heart. She is tolerant where she is helpless. Says Bishop O’Connor: ‘Religious liberty is merely endured until the opposite can be carried into effect without peril to the Catholic world…’ The archbishop of St. Louis once said: ‘Heresy and unbelief are crimes; and in Christian countries, as in Italy and Spain, for instance, where all the people are Catholics, and where the Catholic religion is an essential part of the law of the land, they are punished as other crimes…’” Great Controversy, p. 565.

SOURCE

The Hidden Faith of Our Founding Fathers

In Grayson Flap, Factcheck.org Misses Webster Ties To Christian Reconstructionism

So how close is Republican Congressional candidate Daniel Webster, running against Democratic Representative Alan Grayson for Florida's 8th Congressional District, to evangelist Bill Gothard? That question is now politically salient because of Gothard's participation in a radical Christian political movement called Christian Reconstructionism that seeks to impose stoning as a form of capital punishment for crimes including murder, adultery, "heresy," and "witchcraft.

Read full article here

Christian Reconstructionism

As Frederick Clarkson, in his landmark 1994 article on Christian Reconstructionism (otherwise known as Theonomy) at The Public Eye entitled Theocratic Dominionism Gains Influence, gives provides a list of of capital crimes under Christian Reconstructionism, or Theonomy, and some helpful context:

Epitomizing the Reconstructionist idea of Biblical "warfare" is the centrality of capital punishment under Biblical Law. Doctrinal leaders (notably Rushdoony, North, and Bahnsen) call for the death penalty for a wide range of crimes in addition to such contemporary capital crimes as rape, kidnapping, and murder. Death is also the punishment for apostasy (abandonment of the faith), heresy, blasphemy, witchcraft, astrology, adultery, "sodomy or homosexuality," incest, striking a parent, incorrigible juvenile delinquency, and, in the case of women, "unchastity before marriage."

According to Gary North, women who have abortions should be publicly executed, "along with those who advised them to abort their children." Rushdoony concludes: "God's government prevails, and His alternatives are clear-cut: either men and nations obey His laws, or God invokes the death penalty against them." Reconstructionists insist that "the death penalty is the maximum, not necessarily the mandatory penalty." However, such judgments may depend less on Biblical Principles than on which faction gains power in the theocratic republic. The potential for bloodthirsty episodes on the order of the Salem witchcraft trials or the Spanish Inquisition is inadvertently revealed by Reconstructionist theologian Rev. Ray Sutton, who claims that the Reconstructed Biblical theocracies would be "happy" places, to which people would flock because "capital punishment is one of the best evangelistic tools of a society."

The Biblically approved methods of execution include burning (at the stake for example), stoning, hanging, and "the sword." Gary North, the self-described economist of Reconstructionism, prefers stoning because, among other things, stones are cheap, plentiful, and convenient. Punishments for non-capital crimes generally involve whipping, restitution in the form of indentured servitude, or slavery. Prisons would likely be only temporary holding tanks, prior to imposition of the actual sentence.

Source

Basic Religion Test Stumps Many Americans

"Americans are by all measures a deeply religious people, but they are also deeply ignorant about religion.

Researchers from the independent Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life phoned more than 3,400 Americans and asked them 32 questions about the Bible, Christianity and other world religions, famous religious figures and the constitutional principles governing religion in public life.

On average, people who took the survey answered half the questions incorrectly, and many flubbed even questions about their own faith.

Those who scored the highest were atheists and agnostics, as well as two religious minorities: Jews and Mormons. The results were the same even after the researchers controlled for factors like age and racial differences."

"Fifty-three percent of Protestants could not identify Martin Luther as the man who started the Protestant Reformation."

Note: Wow... what has happened to protestantism?

Source: NYTimes

Hungary Wonders After…

Pal Schmidt the president of Hungary met with Benedict XVI on September 10. Hungary’s government will hold the rotating presidency of the European Union for the first half of 2011.

As usual Schmitt also met with Papal secretary of State Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone and with Archbishop Dominique Mamberti, Vatican secretary for relations with states.

A Vatican communiqué said that discussions involved the contribution of the Catholic Church to the common good in Hungary, “especially in the area of family and social life.”

Note the words “common good,” “family” and “social life.” These terms are nice sounding language for the agenda that the Vatican is pushing in Hungary and the rest of the European Union. It would certainly include Sunday observance, since the Church teaches that Sunday observance is in the best interests of family and the common good of society.

The leaders also discussed the upcoming presidency of the European Union in relation to international politics.

Hungary is a slight majority Roman Catholic population with 54.5% of the nearly 10 million people.

Zenit News Article

Spain Imposes Budget Cuts as EU Commission Seeks Control Over National Budgets

“Premier Jose Luis Zapatero told a stunned nation that public sector pay will be reduced by 5pc this year and frozen in 2011. ‘We must make an extraordinary effort,’ he said.”

Pensions will not be increased, the €2,500 baby bonus will be cancelled, regional subsidies will be slashed and infrastructure projects will be put on ice.

“Commission president Jose Barroso unveiled plans for EU control over national budgets, including an incendiary demand that Brussels should vet budgets before their first reading in Westminster, the Bundestag, and other parliaments. Current account deficits and credit growth will be monitored. Brussels can [impose] sanctions on states that let [budgets] run out of control. ‘We must get to the root of the problems,’ he said.”

Germany is already the defacto ruler of the European Union by virtue of the fact that it has the largest economy. If the EU central government gains the authority to approve national budgets, it will be Germany that will be the ultimate decider of other nation’s budgets.

As Europe works through the financial crisis of its economically weaker members, they are gradually losing what sovereignty they have left. Behind Germany is the Holy See. Germany owes its allegiance to the Vatican for engineering its reunification in conjunction with the United States in the late 1980s by their joint efforts to bring down Eastern European Communist governments. While Papal power in Europe is not yet mature, it is well on its way through Europe’s leading member nations. Greece and other weaker eurozone nations in in the process of being made vassal states.

For a global religion to be implemented (Revelation 13:8), Rome first has to gain control of the old world. She is in the process of patiently establishing a firm grip on the European Union just as prophecy predicted.

“Romanism in the Old World and apostate Protestantism in the New will pursue a similar course toward those who honor all the divine precepts.” Great Controversy, pg. 615.

EU imposes wage cuts.

SOURCE

The Antichrist's decoy antichrist

According to Jesuit futurism, the Antichrist comes after a "secret rapture" and 7 years before the end of time. There is a remarkable resemblance between this and Islamic prophecies concerning the coming of their 12th Imam, who they call the Mahdi! In other words, the Islamic Mahdi is the Jesuits' antichrist!

Both Sunnis and Shias shared the belief that at the end of days a messiah-figure known as the mahdi, or the 'expected one', would come to the rescue of Islam. He would return to Mecca at the head of all the forces of righteousness to take on the forces of evil in one final, apocalyptic battle, after which he and the lesser prophet Jesus would proceed to Jerusalem to kill the devil. Thereafter the world would submit to his rule until the sounding of the last trumpet, and Judgement Day. There were, however, significant differences between the Sunnis and Shias over the origins of the Mahdi, in that the latter held him to be the twelfth and last of the imams of early Islam. Unlike his predecessors, this twelfth imam had not died and gone to heaven but had disappeared from the sight of man to become the 'Hidden Imam'. He was said to be concealed in a cave in the mountains, waiting for the call from the righteous, when he would reappear as a padshah or 'great king' to lead the faithful to victory.
- Allen, God's Terrorists, The Wahhabi Cult and the Hidden Roots of Modern Jihad, p. 73

AL-MAHDI Lit. "The Directed One," hence, "who is fit to direct others, Guide, Leader." A ruler who shall in the last days appear upon the earth. According to the Shi'ahs, he has already appeared in the person of Muhammad Al-Qasim, the twelfth Imam, who is believed to be concealed in some secret place until the day of his manifestation before the end of the world. But the Sunnis say he has not yet appeared. In the history of Muhammadanism, there are numerous instances of impostors having assumed the character of this mysterious personage, amongst others, Saiyid Ahmad, who fought against the Sikhs on the North-West frontier of the Panjab, A.D. 1826, and still more recently, the Muhammadan who has claimed to be al-Mahdi in the Sudin in Egypt.
The sayings' of the Prophet on the subject, according to al-Bukhari, and other traditionists, are as follows:
"The world will not come to an end until a man of my tribe and of my name shall be master of Arabia."
" When you see black ensigns coming from the direction of Khorosün, then join them, for the Imam of God will be with the standards, whose name is al-Mahd"
"The Mahdi will be descended from me, he will be a man with an open countenance and with a high nose. He will fill the earth with equity and justice, even as it has been filled with tyranny and oppression, and he will reign over the earth seven years."
- Dictionary of Islam by Thomas Patrick Hughes


SOURCE

If you thought that was interesting, check this out:
SEPTEMBER 11TH… 1565

Britain Open to Catholic Faith in Public Square

Apparently, the Papal visit to Britian was more than a mere state visit. It overturned centuries of Protestantism. America Magazine, published by the Jesuits, reported that the British government has opened the door to the Catholic Church and its influence on its government, legislation and society.

“…In May this year a new government formed, speaking a new language, releasing the values and energies of faith organizations, among others, to build what it is calling the Big Society,” said the Jesuit magazine. “The prime minister drew his ideas from Philip Blond, a philosopher whose thinking was formed by the Anglo-Catholic theologian John Milbank and Catholic social teaching on civil society.

The, “on the eve of Pope Benedict’s arrival, the Conservative Party chairman told Anglican bishops that the government would ‘restore faith to the heart of Britain,’ promising an end to the exclusion of the religious voice from public life… The [papal] visit has helped to consolidate the government’s new faith-friendly stance.”
“Pope Benedict XVI’s four-day state visit to the United Kingdom, the first ever by a pope, quickly overturned negative expectations of apathy and hostility. Bidding him farewell at Birmingham’s airport, Prime Minister David Cameron told the pope he had made the nation ‘sit up and think’ and seemed to suggest that secularism had not, after all, gained the upper hand. Faith, Mr. Cameron said, was ‘part of the fabric of our country…a vital part of our national conversation.’

“The prime minister’s remarks suggested that the pope, who sought to deliver a sustained if gently reasoned salvo against what he called ‘aggressive secularism’ and to mount a passionate case for the inclusion of faith in public life, was pushing at an open door.”

America magazine also pointed out that the papal appeal was to integrate faith (meaning Catholic principles of mixing church and state) into public life. “The pope’s call to recognize the necessary interconnectedness of faith and reason, religion and politics, belief and society was made in arguments that were as persuasive as they were reasonable.”

Though Jesus Himself separated church and state when he said, “render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and unto God the things that are God’s, the Pope is advocating that religion and politics should work closely together. If the old Holy Roman Empire is going to be resurrected, it is essential for the papacy to assert its philosophy in public at every opportunity. Benedict XVI was not slack in doing so throughout his trip to Britain.
“Although he returned constantly to this theme in homilies and speeches throughout his visit, the message was delivered most categorically in an address to political and civil leaders in Westminster Hall… The sight of the British political establishment, including a row of former prime ministers, waiting patiently for the successor of St. Peter to address them from a gilded chair, then clapping enthusiastically as he entered to a fanfare of trumpets, will remain the icon of the visit. The fact of it happening at all, as the pope himself acknowledged, demonstrated that faith and public life were, after all, interlinked.

“Westminster Hall left some wondering whether this was the end of the myth of Britain as a Protestant nation-state,” wrote the magazine. Perhaps America magazine is pointing out that Britain has long ceased to be a Protestant nation-state, and now it is becoming Catholic again. And the Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow, even suggested this in his welcome speech to the pope. “What was once considered inconceivable now seems entirely natural,” he said.

The pope warned “against a ‘failure to appreciate not only the rights of believers to freedom of conscience and freedom of religion, but also the legitimate role of religion in the public square” and called for religious bodies ‘to be free to act in accordance with their own principles and specific convictions.’ This, he said, was the best guarantor of the freedoms that made Britain great.”

But it wasn’t just politics that the pope addressed. He also pushed the frontiers of ecumenism. At a prayer service in Westminster Abbey where he and the Anglican Archbishop Rowan Williams prayed together, the Pope said, “What we share, in Christ, is greater than what divides us…”

“Earlier, at Lambeth, the pope reframed the path to ecclesial unity as no longer about theological dialogue but about collaborating in witness to ‘the transcendent dimension of the human person and the universal call to holiness.’ He cited Cardinal John Henry Newman as exemplifying the ‘virtues that ecumenism demands.’”
What this is saying is that the ecumenical dialog between the Catholic Church and the Anglican Church no longer has any substantial theological differences. They are essentially one. Now it is only a matter of some practical differences. Moreover, it is time, the pope was saying, for the Anglican and Catholic communions to openly share a common witness that their faiths are the same.

“Pope Benedict’s other triumph was his direct response to the chorus of searing criticisms of the church’s (mis)handling of clerical sex abuse,” said America magazine. While it is probably true that Benedict XVI overcame at least some of the hostility over the sex abuse scandal, the real papal triumph is in the disintegration of the Church of England, and in stripping it of its Protestantism.

The papal state visit to Britain opens the way for more direct interaction between the Vatican and the British government.

Even (formerly) Protestant Britain is ready for it.

“All the world wondered after the beast.” Revelation 13:3.

SOURCE

Exposed: Christine O'Donnell Using Campaign Funds to Pay Rent

Interesting News and Links of The Day

I wasn't sure what to post, so here are some interesting things:

Catholic school 'could be run by mosque'

Pulpit Politics Will Be Preached This Weekend

Letter from James Madison to Reverend Jasper Adams

Book Review: “Why the Religious Right is Wrong About Separation of Church and State”

A Cloud of Witnesses Concerning Antichrist

The Waldensians

The purgatory is imaginary and "of antichrist".

The history of the Waldenses: connected with a sketch of the Christian church, p. 45

John Wycliffe (Bible translator)

Speaking of the Pope of Rome and the Pope of Avigon (France), Wycliffe said of them being both antichrist "two halves of antichrist, making up the perfect Man of Sin between them". Lectures on Medieval Church History, p. 314

William Tyndale (Bible translator)

The pope's forbidding of matrimony and foods created by God for man's use is a devilish doctrine and "tokens good enough" that the pope is the antichrist.

The Works of the English Reformers: The works of Tyndale, p. 178

Andreas Helwig

Helwig in 1612 identified the papal title of Vicarius Filii Dei with the number 666.

The Westminister Confession of Faith in 1647

"there is no other head of the church but the Lord Jesus Christ", not even the pope, which is antichrist.

The Creeds of Christendom: The Evangelical Protestant creeds, p. 723

Martin Luther (Lutheran)

"I know that the pope is Antichrist, and that his throne is that of Satan himself".

History of The Reformation of the Sixteenth Century, p. 141

Hugh Latimer (Oxford Martyr)

the papists "go about to thrust Christ out of his seat".

Sermons by Hugh Latimer, p. 147

Thomas Cranmer (Oxford Martyr)

Rome is "the seat of antichrist" and the pope is the "very antichrist himself" .

The Works of Thomas Cranmer, p. 63

Nicholas Ridley (Oxford Martyr)

The Papal See is "the seat of Satan" and "is antichrist himself".

The Works of Nicholas Ridley, p. 415

John Calvin (Calvinist)

"we call the Roman Pontiff Antichrist"

The Institutes of the Christian Religion: Vol. 3, p. 126

John Smyth (Baptist church founder)

"infant baptism" is an "antichristian heresy"

The Works of John Smyth, p. 617

Roger Williams (founder of the First Baptist Church in America)

the pope is "the pretended vicar of Christ" and "the Man of Sin" of II Thessalonians 2.

The Bloudy Tenent of Persecution for the Cause of Conscience, p. 216

John Wesley (Methodist)

The pope "in an emphatical sense" is "The Man of Sin, as he increases all manner of sin above measure". Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament, p. 551

Matthew Henry (Presbyterian minister)

"He who, being a man, a sinful man, makes himself a god, as the pope does, who claims divine powers and prerogatives, is, no question, a blasphemer, and that antichrist."

An exposition of the Old and New Testament, Volume 5, p. 806

John Gill (Baptist pastor and theologian)

"Now as I fully believe, and think it has been clearly shown, that infant baptism is a part and pillar of Popery, a limb of Antichrist, a branch of superstition and will-worship, introduced by the Man of Sin"

Infant baptism a part and pillar of popery, By John Gill, p.118

Jonathan Edwards (Theologian and Princeton University President)

"And it is prophesied, that this Antichrist, or man of sin, should be one that should set himself up in the temple or visible church of God, pretending to be vested with the power of God himself, as head of the church, as in the same chapter, verse 4. And all this is exactly come to pass in the church of Rome." The works of President Edwards, p. 324

George Whitefield (Anglican Protestant minister)

"I hope I shall always think it my bounden duty, next to inviting sinners to the blessed Jesus, to exhort my hearers to exert themselves against the first approaches of popish tyranny, and arbitrary power. O that we may be enabled to watch and pray, against all the opposition of antichrist in our hearts! for after all, there lies the most dangerous man of sin." Memoirs of Rev. George Whitefield, p. 164

Adam Clarke (Methodist theologian)

"[The Apocalypse] contains prophecies concerning the tyrannical and oppressive conduct of the Roman pontiffs, the true Antichrist; and foretells the final destruction of popery." The New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, vol 2, p.983

Edward Bishop Elliott (English clergyman)

Mr. Elliott takes the religious profession of the Antichrist to be one made under much show of religion, as in the instance of the Papacy, the name of Antichrist meaning either Christ's vicar, or an opposing and usurping Christ, and his system containing in it " the mystery of iniquity," and " all deceivableness of unrighteousness;" and he objects to the current view of the Futurists...

Observations on mr. [E.B.] Elliott's Horæ Apocalypticæ, p.19

Alexander Hislop (Free Church of Scotland Minister)

"The Pope exhibits himself to the church, as 'God upon earth'. It is this especially that constitutes him 'the Antichrist'."

The light of prophecy let in on the dark places of the papacy, p. 76

Isaac Newton (an unorthodox Anglican)

The Pope is "the little horn of the fourth beast".

Observations Upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John, p. 88

Henry Grattan Guinness (Irish Evangelical)

The little horn of Daniel is the symbol of the Roman papacy "fitting it as one of Chubb's keys fits the lock for which it is made".Romanism and the Reformation, p. 41

Joseph Tanner (???)

The abandoning of the historicist view of the antichrist for the modern futurist view (involving a secret rapture and 7 year tribulation) was a conspiracy of Jesuit doing. Daniel and the Revelation [London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1898], pp 16-17

Charles Spurgeon

it's claimed that Spurgeon believed that popery is antichrist (see alleged quote)

Ian Paisley (Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster)

Believes the pope is antichrist (source: wikipedia)