Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘False Doctrine’ Category

The Rise of False Prophetesses

Posted in abominations, Another christ, Apostasy, Discernment, False Christians, False Doctrine, False Prophets, idolatry, prophetic, Religious Babylon, Signs of The Times, Synchretism, Wolves on September 30, 2020| Leave a Comment »

from Herescope:

Recent events in the world have jump-started some of the old intentions of the Latter Rain movement to create a false revival. In southern California at Huntington Beach a new uprising is identified as “Saturate 2020” and it is attempting to invoke a “great awakening” or a second Jesus movement. It is getting quite a bit of press attention. Characteristic of these types of stage-managed productions, there is a great deal of hoopla and frenzied commotion, conscious altering music, and a hefty dose of Latter Rain/New Apostolic Reformation doctrine, including about building the 7 mountains of Dominionism. It also significantly highlights false prophetess Heidi Baker and several new ones on the scene, Jen Miskov and Jessi Green.

Rather than reinvent the wheel to write about this, we encourage you to read Sandy Simpson’s latest comprehensive post “Saturate 2020” detailing the problems with this event and providing key links to documentation. See also: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utbvEcLxuHs. Sandy writes:

The fact that some formerly Biblical churches have joined this circus is a testament to their lack of teaching discernment. Some of these denominations were warned repeatedly about the Latter Rain, Word of Faith and the New Apostolic Reformation yet they apparently wanted to remain “willfully ignorant”. The people advertised as being involved with this latest “revival” are almost all associated with Bethel in some way and promoters of what they teach. This is not a true Biblical revival but rather a revival of the occult and New Age among Christians. This meeting is actually hurting the cause of Christ…

Apologist Jackie Alnor produced an important video documentary on Saturate 2020 a few weeks ago. Watch her report because in it she names the names of men who seem to falling for this new revival:

Saturate 2020 and several other evidences of a striking increase in false prophetesses has given rise to deep concerns that godly evangelical men may be lured into their lair. The other day we received an email from a discerning friend who was very grieved, asking us how it is that seemingly godly men, respected and mature in the Lord, could possibly fall for these delusions. Below is our reply, which we post for our readers’ edification.

Why Men Fall for Jezebel 

To answer your earlier questions about how and why seemingly godly men would follow after false prophetesses, here are our observations after our many decades in the trenches with the Lord.

We have always considered the term “Jezebel” and the term “false prophetess” to be synonyms. The Scripture is clear that there are attributes of Jezebel in both the Old and New Testament that identify a false prophetess quite specifically.

Over the years Lynn and I have counseled many Christians trying to repent of all of their previous occult involvements. We have observed that there is a fallible “soft spot” in the hearts of certain vulnerable Christian men who lean sympathetically towards a false prophetess, epitomized by the women called Jezebel in Scripture. Worse, there is a “fear of man” (or, should we say, “fear of woman”) that is also a fatal loophole in men who fall into abject submission when confronted by the nasty side of false prophetesses. Every man of God needs to be exhorted to stand firm against such women. They persecute (threaten, intimidate, bully, verbally or physically abuse, etc.) the true prophets of God, meaning those men who are teaching the Word and standing for Truth. Jezebel literally killed godly men in the Old Testament!

There is also the seductive side to a false prophetess. She preys upon the sensory and/or emotional weaknesses in men — hooking them in where they have a “soft spot” for her. She massages their lusts — sexual, money, power, fame, etc. Or she makes them somehow dependent upon her, they feel that then “need” her or her machinations, or that they are somehow indebted unto her. She may even blackmail them. Or she may position them to “choose” between her and some godly woman (including possibly his wife!). She supplants the place of Christ in their hearts and minds with these clever methods. So if there is any weak spot in a man that has not been repented of? — This is precisely where she seizes control to wield and manipulate them. This is psychic, it is occult, it is satanic, it is idolatry. She stabs into the heart and it is deadly. It is a tragedy when we see her operate in a marriage. And this is how she destroys a church and/or a ministry.

We have observed that there is a darkness of vision that accompanies a false prophetess deception. Many men do not even realize they are under the spell of a false prophetess. We’ve known pastors who permitted an out-of-order heresy-prone woman to wreak havoc upon his congregation — either terrified to confront her, or wooed by her many elaborate ruses, or in a few cases, physically seduced by her.

At its most basic level there is a psychological weakness we humans all have for those whom we love and respect. Sometimes we have great tolerance for the sinful errors of others close to us, hoping we can lead them back to Truth. Indeed, the Lord Himself says He gave the Jezebel in Thyatira (Rev. 2) “space to repent” — therefore so must we. The Lord also gave those who committed adultery with her time and space to “repent of their deeds.” But, if there is no repentance, and when we find that we are actually having to justify our convivial relationship to the point of excusing flagrant transgressions or participating in her sins, heresies, errors and deceptions, then we are headed into deep trouble. And it behooves us to be continually on guard against any “desperately wicked” (Jer. 17:9) “soft spots” we may harbor in our hearts towards her that leave us vulnerable to her deceptions.

There is a notable sign of our times regarding this “prophetess” danger which we should be aware of. It may apply to men prophets, too. Our longtime friend Jack Morlan, who repented radically and came out of the homosexual movement 40 years ago (he got married, had children, and is now a grandfather) claims that certain men may wield this same Jezebel-ish psychic/occult power over other men, particularly if they are prone to homosexual sins (either known or in the closet). He has warned us of men who acted like Jezebel both within and without the church. Godly men need to guard against this sort of man as well.

As for women and their weaknesses — the many who desire to emulate Jezebel — this is another tragic story. Women prophetess-wannabes exhibit both a seductive and a nasty side. Many of them are trying to fill a void in their hearts — but not with Jesus Christ. They have left their first love, if they even ever held to Jesus Christ in the first place. These are women who crave power, fame, accolades, money, beauty, lust and sensuality on the path to emulating Jezebel. Often they come from broken homes or abusive background. There is an aspect of control as they look to build an empire, their own spiritual kingdom. Our heart grieves for them while they are lost in the depths of their depravity because only Jesus Christ can save them from their sins.

We once attended a church where the chief elder’s wife visited the New Age bookstore once a month to learn about the latest “spirituality.” She was a prophetess-wannabe, hoping for TV type stardom. This undiscerning lady became deeply involved in Kundalini — she even attempted to lay hands on ladies’ chakra points at a church women’s retreat. Discerning women attempted to warn the pastor. But because her husband donated large monies to the church the minister was reluctant to confront her. The church quickly fell apart in a series of disasters.

Some false prophetesses come to Christ out of the occult. But if they never fully repented of their occult “spiritual gifts” they are tempted to use them in Christianity. They can then wield great power over others with these false gospel gifts. It is far worse when a woman claims to be the voice of prophecy, or even the voice of God. At this point she’s become a full-blown dangerous false prophetess and people need to be warned of her dangers. The extent to which these women become public figures, acclaimed and renowned, sitting on platforms with or standing in the place of men, exhibiting their false gifts, poses a danger to the entire church at large. Can such a woman be saved? God gave space and time for the apparently high profile Jezebel and her followers to repent in Thyatira. But if no such repentance becomes evident — which should include not only a public repentance but an open renouncing of specific sins, errors, heresies, misleadings and false teachings — she should then be warned against publicly.

We will warn that there is a backlash to any Gospel dealings with Jezebel/false prophetesses. Just ask Elijah. Some of the most vicious persecution we have experienced in our Christian life has come from them or their minions.

Read Full Post »

Pope Francis: Pandemic Could Be ‘Nature’s Revenge’ For Ignoring Climate Change

Posted in abominations, Another christ, Apostasy, Catholicism, Discernment, False Christians, False Doctrine, False Prophets, False Teachers, Gaia, Humanism, Moonbats, Paganism, Panentheism, Post-Modernism, prophetic, Religious Babylon, Signs of The Times, Synchretism on April 10, 2020| 1 Comment »

Wait! What? The Pope uses a collective “person” term to describe “Nature?  But Pope Francis what about God the person? The Creator?

from CNN:

Pope Francis has said the coronavirus pandemic is one of “nature’s responses” to humans ignoring the current ecological crisis.In an email interview published Wednesday in The Tablet and Commonwealth magazines, the pontiff said the outbreak offered an opportunity to slow down the rate of production and consumption and to learn to understand and contemplate the natural world.“

We did not respond to the partial catastrophes. Who now speaks of the fires in Australia, or remembers that 18 months ago a boat could cross the North Pole because the glaciers had all melted? Who speaks now of the floods?” the Pope said.“I don’t know if these are the revenge of nature, but they are certainly nature’s responses,” he added.

The pandemic has radically changed the way the Vatican operates, with the Pope celebrating Palm Sunday mass in an empty church and the sites normally packed with tourists empty.The 83-year-old Pope, who has a damaged lung from an infection in his 20s, has twice tested negative for the novel coronavirus. He is being distanced from anyone who might be carrying the virus, takes his meals in his private quarters, and uses hand sanitizer before and after meeting any guests, the Vatican press office said.

Pope Francis also said in the interview he was recovering from his bronchitis and praying even more from his residence in the Vatican during this “time of great uncertainty.”Pope Francis presides over a moment of prayer on the sagrato of St Peters Basilica on March 27.Francis also revealed he goes to confession every Tuesday to ask forgiveness for his own selfishness.

“I take care of things there,” he said.He also criticized the response to the outbreak, saying the homeless should be quarantined in hotels and not in parking lots.“A photo appeared the other day of a parking lot in Las Vegas where they [the homeless] had been put in quarantine. And the hotels were empty. But the homeless cannot go to a hotel,” the Pope said.“This is the moment to see the poor,” he said, adding that society often treats those in need as “rescued animals.”

The Pope also warned against the rise of populist politicians — who he said are giving speeches reminiscent of Hitler in 1933 — and others who are focusing solely on the economy. He said he was worried by the “hypocrisy of certain political personalities who speak of facing up to the crisis, of the problem of hunger in the world, but who in the meantime manufacture weapons.

“The Pope encouraged those in a lockdown to find creative ways of being at home. “Take care of yourselves for a future that will come,” Francis said.

Read Full Post »

Campus Crusade Leader Invites Roman Catholics and Mystics to Speak at Event

Posted in Another christ, Apostasy, Catholicism, Discernment, False Christians, False Doctrine, False Teachers, Humanism, idolatry, Post-Modernism, prophetic, Religious Babylon, Signs of The Times, Wolves on March 1, 2020| Leave a Comment »

from Reformation Charlotte:

CRU — formerly Campus Crusade for Christ — has been exposed as a social justice political organization with the sole intention of turning young, Christian-minded students into progressive activists. Ranging from LGBTQ activism to Cultural Marxism and intersectionality, CRU has hosted a number of events with the intent of advancing both political and theological liberalism.

Sojourners is an ecumenical publication founded by the progressive political activist and theological mystic, Jim Wallis, who has admitted to — along with SBC leader, Russell Moore — receiving funding from George Soros to advance an open-borders agenda in the US. Sojourners hosts a number of Roman Catholics and mystics — among them, Kaitlin Curtice.

Curtice is described on her website as,

… a young, Native American Christian mystic who portrays the sacredness of the human condition in everyday language through her writing.

Curtice promotes the heresy of contemplation (contemplative prayer and meditation) and writes of her experiences with “other realms” of life,

By contemplation, I am basically referring to the work of creating and sustaining an inner life of peace, quiet, listening to the Divine/Mystery/Higher Power/God , and letting the overflow of that love stretch into other realms of life.

She is a climate change activist who worships the creation over the creator,

Perhaps if we returned to loving the land, waters, and all beings that live and breathe around us, we might learn how to love our human relatives again.

Nowhere in any of Curtice’s works or writings does she show one iota of understanding of the biblical gospel. Of course, we should not expect a Catholic to understand the gospel as the Catholic Church’s gospel is false. Yet, even in the spiritual blindness of the Roman Catholic Church, many Catholics still have a good grasp on general revelation, morality, and general common sense. This common grace is a gift from God to all creation — not just Christians. Yet, Curtice has not only suppressed the truth of the cross, but the truth of God and his revelation altogether.

Yet, for some reason, the Evangelical organization CRU — who is closely tied to the Southern Baptist Convention and The Gospel Coalition — sees a need to partner with people like this. Why? Because CRU, as outlined in Romans 1, has exchanged the truth about God (the gospel) for a lie (social justice activism).

By the way, did you know Reformation Charlotte has a Christian gear and apparel store? Check it out at ReformedGear.com.

Matt Mikalatos, a CRU leader in Portland Oregon desperately tried to invite Curtice to speak at one of CRU’s events. Thankfully, she declined and thousands of students did not have to be exposed to her spiritual poison. As seen in the screenshot below, Curtice did not want to sign the contract that was required.

When Mikalatos was asked about her up and coming presence at the event, Mikalatos was seemingly ecstatic that they were trying to get more Roman Catholics — including a priest who does idolatrous paintings of Jesus — involved in their work.

20190929_1409146123474437059293183

It is safe to say that CRU has largely apostatized from its original biblical, gospel-centered founding. What used to be a mission-focused evangelistic organization centered around biblical truth has now become an ecumenical gospel-less social justice and progressive political activist crusade.

If you were to die today, where would you go? Heaven? Hell? Not sure?

Read Full Post »

‘How Robot Priests Will Change Human Spirituality’

Posted in abominations, Another christ, Apostasy, Current Events, Discerning the Times, Discernment, Emerging Church, False Doctrine, Humanism, One World Government, Post-Modernism, prophetic, Religious Babylon, Signs of The Times on January 4, 2020| Leave a Comment »

2 Corinthians 11:13-15:

“For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their actions.…”

from OneZero:

One of the charges against Socrates was that his arguments were like robots. As the Greek philosopher approached his own trial, Euthyphro told Socrates, “You are like Daedalus.” He meant that just as Daedalus made automata that moved on their own in Greek myth, Socrates’ arguments were so persuasive that his ideas seemed to move under their own power. Even 2,500 years ago, automata inspired both fascination and fear.

I recently speculated about whether a machine could have a mystical experience. If we aren’t careful, the claim of divine inspiration can make the mystic’s words influential. When someone, whether human or machine, claims to have peeked behind the veil, we don’t know whether the prophet or the mystic has really glimpsed the divine. We only know what they claim, and it’s up to us to decide whether to trust them.

Deus ex machina

My interest in the connection between religion and robots is related to the charge against Socrates, and it’s a pragmatic interest rather than a technical one. What matters is not whether we have invented true artificial intelligence, but whether we believe we have invented it. If we trust the machine, we might let it function as a mystic or a priest, even if it isn’t one.

This raises the interesting question of what to do when someone makes a machine that is actually intended to play the role of clergy. Some pastors joke that they help people “hatch, match, and dispatch,” by celebrating births, weddings, and funerals. They joke, but even if we aren’t religious, we do tend to trust professionals to guide us through those serious moments. A few years ago, Mark Zuckerberg suggested that Facebook could play a similar role, giving meaning to lives just as a pastor does for a church. Given the amount of trust we put in clergy — and given the many examples of Facebook’s untrustworthiness — Zuckerberg’s suggestion is alarming. What does that trust entail?

Maybe our intention is to distance ourselves from the difficult work of care. Our machines might offer one kind of care, while being the physical expression of our lack of interest in those who need the care.

That’s an important question, because we’re being given more and more opportunities to trust machines to act in the roles of clergy. The company SoftBank Robotics created Pepper the robot to chant at Buddhist funerals in Japan, and a church in Germany programmed a machine to pronounce traditional blessings. Very recently in Dubai, the government’s cultural and Islamic affairs agency IACAD launched the first-ever “Virtual Ifta” that uses A.I. to issue fatwas. Other groups have experimented with machines that can hear confessions, offer prayers, or even offer sacraments.

Sinless machines?

Religious communities will need to decide whether they accept machines performing these functions within their traditions, but there’s a bigger issue that affects all of us: these machines are tools we have made, and to various degrees, they already “make arguments move around.” If they persuade us with voices that sound divine, we only have ourselves to blame.

Ursula Le Guin once wrote that “a machine is more blameless, more sinless even than any animal. It has no intentions whatsoever but our own.” The function of machines is the result of their design, even if the designers did not intend that function. As Charles Sanders Peirce wrote, even if we eventually make machines that can “wind their way through the labyrinths” of complex thinking, “the machine would be utterly devoid of original initiative, and would only do the special kind of thing it had been calculated to do.”

Perhaps someday Peirce will be proven wrong, and we will have machines that act originally and creatively. But in general we want machines that do what we tell them to do. We might want a machine to write original music, but we don’t want too much creativity; what we want is a machine that figures out what people already like, and writes songs that will sell. Only quirky academics are likely to pay for a machine that wrote songs that machines wanted to hear. Peirce adds, with some irony, “We no more want an original machine, than a housebuilder would want an original journeyman, or an American board of college trustees would hire an original professor.”

So we might not want a truly mystical machine, but maybe we could use machines that do the best things clergy do for us. A machine that resembles a human could chat all night with a lonely person, and might make a very good counselor. It could offer comforting words at the bedside of someone who suffers from dementia, or who needs a listening ear. It could read stories or sing songs. Why not automate the singing of hymns, the reciting of scripture, the chanting of prayer, the pronouncement of blessings? All of those things are desirable, at least to some people.

What risks come with the benefits of care-machines? As Euthyphro and Socrates point out, automated ideas and religious authority can be very persuasive.

But are there kinds of work, like caring for our communities and for our own bodies, that we should not automate? Tools amplify our efforts. They also amplify our intentions, and maybe our intention is to distance ourselves from the difficult work of care. Our machines might offer one kind of care, while being the physical expression of our lack of interest in those who need the care.

Here’s another question: What risks come with the benefits of care-machines? As Euthyphro and Socrates point out, automated ideas and religious authority can be very persuasive. Automata that speak and act with religious authority could be doubly persuasive. We worry about the influence of corrupt human clergy; what political, ethical, and economic influence could automated clergy have?

And here’s a third question: A machine can repeat ritualized “hatch, match, and dispatch” words for us, but can it share our experience as an empathetic companion? And if it can’t, does that diminish the meaning of the ritual?

What has it got in its pocketses?

In Jonathan Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels, the Lilliputians try to understand Gulliver by looking in his pockets. They have never seen a pocket watch before, so they observe how he uses it. They decide it must be “the god he worships: for he seldom did any thing without consulting it. He called it his oracle, and said it pointed out the time for every action of his life.”

The pocket watch was a new technology in Swift’s time. At first, pocket watches helped us to be on time. Little by little, we shifted from measuring our lives in hours to measuring them in seconds. The technology we invented to help us observe time wound up changing the way we viewed our own lives. There is a lesson here.

Paul Virilio puts a finer point on this: “When you invent the ship, you also invent the shipwreck; when you invent the plane you also invent the plane crash; and when you invent electricity, you invent electrocution… Every technology carries its own negativity, which is invented at the same time as technical progress.”

Whether we believe in gods or not, our technologies can begin to function like gods, or like the priests that tell us how to behave. Even if we don’t intend them to, our machines can become our oracles, and where there are oracles, there are people ready to profit from those oracles.

Pandora’s Facebook Box has been opened. I don’t know if robots can be priests, but some are beginning to function like priests. This calls for care on our part, and I don’t think it is wise to expect a machine to care on our behalf.

Read Full Post »

Pope Francis considers introducing new ‘ecological sin’ in bid to battle climate change

Posted in abominations, Anti-Christ, Apostasy, Catholicism, Discernment, Emerging Church, False Christians, False Doctrine, False Prophets, False Teachers, Gaia, Humanism, Moonbats, One World Government, Post-Modernism, prophetic, Religious Babylon, Signs of The Times, Socialism, Synchretism, Wolves, works not grace on November 17, 2019| Leave a Comment »

Where do you start with detailing how fundamentally flawed this pronouncement is? The Pope’s statement, to anyone who knows God’s word, is like the final punctuation in a multi-volume book detailing why the Roman Catholic Church always has been and still is a false church!

Now I have no doubt that there may be climate change, however THERE IS NO verifiable proof that this is caused by man. Secondly Anthropomorphic Climate Change clearly denies Biblical creation. It views man as just another species no different than animals, and whats worse classifies mankind as a kind of out of control virus that throughout most of his history has wreaked havoc on the earth!

from the Daily Mail:

Pope Francis is considering introducing ‘ecological sins’ in a new bid to battle climate change.

Speaking in Rome on Friday, Pope Francis said it’s ‘a duty’ to introduce the new sin to the Catholic Church’s teachings as a way to protect ‘our common home’.

This comes after the Pope held a three-week bishops’ assembly, called a synod, last month which addressed environmental dangers in the Amazon

Speaking on Friday, he said: ‘We have to introduce, we are thinking about it, in the catechism of the Catholic Church, the sin against ecology, the sin against our common home, because it’s a duty.’

He was addressing members of the International Association of Penal Law in Rome, Crux Now reports.

At the same event, the pope also said that politicians who rage against homosexuals, gypsies and Jews remind him of Hitler.

‘It is not coincidental that at times there is a resurgence of symbols typical of Nazism,’ Francis said in an address to participants of an international conference on criminal law.

‘And I must confess to you that when I hear a speech someone responsible for order or for a government, I think of speeches by Hitler in 1934, 1936,’ he said, departing from his prepared address.

‘With the persecution of Jews, gypsies, and people with homosexual tendencies, today these actions are typical (and) represent ”par excellence” a culture of waste and hate. That is what was done in those days and today it is happening again.’

During the 1933-45 Nazi regime in Germany, six million Jews were killed and homosexuals and gypsies were among those sent to extermination camps.

Pope Francis did not name any politicians or countries as the targets of his criticism.

In Brazil, President Jair Bolsonaro had a history of making homophobic, racist and sexist public remarks before he took office on January 1. He told one interviewer he would rather have a dead son than a gay son.

 

Read Full Post »

Transgender Baptism is Now a Thing, Thanks to the Church Of England

Posted in abominations, Apostasy, Babylon, Days of Noah, Discerning the Times, Emerging Church, False Christians, False Doctrine, Homosexuality, Post-Modernism, prophetic, Signs of The Times on January 20, 2019| Leave a Comment »

from Into:

The Church of England hasn’t always been LGBTQ-friendly. In fact, the official church stance is still that marriage should remain a strictly heterosexual affair between a man and a woman. But the church is slowly evolving, and on Wednesday announced new pastoral guidelines for an official gender transition ceremonythat can be performed by its parishes.

That’s a big deal for a country in which church and state are inextricably linked; the Church of England is the official state religion, public schools are run according to church tenets, and church bishops even participate in lawmaking through a special section of Parliament called “Lords Spiritual.” Unlike in the U.S., the English church has broad influence over national policy and the culture at large. And the Church of England is the mother-ship of the international Anglican faith, with over 85 million members worldwide.

The new ceremony for trans church members incorporates something called the Affirmation of Baptismal Faith into celebrations that mark a gender transition.

“Everyone’s journey through life is unique. Baptism is the place where we find our true identity in Christ,” reads the pastoral guidance. “As with all pastoral encounters with people negotiating major life events, ministers will wish to respond sensitively and creatively to the person’s circumstances.”

The church guidelines recommend a ceremonial event that fosters a “celebratory character.” The pastor conducting the ceremony is advised to use the trans person’s chosen name and pronouns, perform an anointment using water or oil, allow “testimony” to reflect on the person’s journey, and present the person with a baptismal certificate of sorts.

The impressively detailed church guidelines include basic definitions of what it means to be transgender along with an overview of terminology for church officials for whom the concept is new. “It should be noted that the term ‘transgender’ is typically preferred to transgendered,” reads the guidance.

The church’s ceremonial blessing of gender transition does not mean the work of LGBTQ advocates in England is over. With the church still defining marriage in heterosexual terms, a debate is roaring within its ranks over the welcoming of LGBTQ congregants.

This past May, bishops from the Lichfield diocese just outside Birmingham, England signed a letter calling for “radical Christian inclusion” that urged LGBTQ people to seek leadership positions within the church. In the letter, the bishops also instructed their parishes on how to treat LGBTQ people in a way that made them feel welcome.

“Nobody should be excluded or discouraged from receiving the Sacraments of Baptism or the Lord’s Supper on the grounds of their sexual orientation or gender identity,” read the May 2018 letter. “It is also unacceptable to tell or insinuate to people that sexual orientation or gender identity will be changed by faith, or that homosexuality or gender difference is a sign of immaturity or a lack of faith.”

Read Full Post »

“They Hate Christianity But Love (Another) Jesus – How Conservative Christians Are Being Manipulated and Ridiculed, Especially During Election Years”

Posted in abominations, Another christ, Apostasy, Discernment, Emerging Church, False Christians, False Doctrine, False Prophets, False Teachers, Humanism, Post-Modernism, prophetic, Religious Babylon, Signs of The Times, Synchretism, Universalism, Wolves on October 26, 2018| Leave a Comment »

from Lighthouse Trails Research:

In May of 2013, Lighthouse Trails released a report titled, “They Hate Christianity But Love (Another) Jesus – How Conservative Christians Are Being Manipulated and Ridiculed, Especially During Election Years.” In view of the upcoming elections and some of the things going on around the country in the “background,” it seems diligent to repost the report at this time. While some of the documentation in the report is a few years old, there are similar efforts going on today as are described in the report. For instance, the “Vote Common Good” (a website created on June 2018, just in time for the elections) bus tours taking place right now around the country are intending on “flipping congress.” The line up of those speaking on the tour are largely extreme liberal  emergent figures such as Brian McLaren, Shane Claiborne, Frank Schaeffer, John Pavlovitz (recently featured in a LT article), Mark Scandrette, Doug Pagitt, Samir Selmanović, Diana Butler Bass, and Nadia Bolz-Weber. Folks, these people mean business, and they won’t let up until they’ve accomplished their Marxist/Socialist-leaning, anti-biblical goals. This next election will come and go, but they will still be here, telling the world that they represent “true” relevant organic Christianity, and your children and grandchildren will believe them. We know that politics is never going to solve the problems of any country. And there is no perfect political party. But what is being presented by the people in groups like the one named above is an anti-Christ agenda. That sounds strong, but think about what Diana Butler Bass (who was part of the 2015 Parliament of World Religions) said in her book, Christianity After Religion: The End of Church and the Birth of a New Spiritual Awakening:

Conventional, comforting Christianity has failed. It does not work. For the churches that insist on preaching it, the jig is up. We cannot go back, and we should not want to. . . . In earlier American awakenings, preachers extolled “old-time religion” as the answer to questions about God, morality, and existence. This awakening is different . . . it is not about sawdust trails, mortification of sin [putting to death the old man], and being washed in the blood of the Lamb [the preaching of the Cross]. The awakening going on around us is not an evangelical revival; it is not returning to the faith of our fathers or re-creating our grandparents church. Instead, it is a Great Returning to ancient understandings of the human quest for the divine. (pp. 36, 99; emphasis added)

Several of the names we have listed above have said similar type things about biblical Christianity over the years as you can read about on our site and in our published materials. Some of you may remember our 2009 article “Brian McLaren Wants End Time Believing Christians Robustly Confronted.” As far as these highly influential emergents are concerned the “old-time religion” of being washed in the blood of the Lamb is over. And you can be sure their target is your children and grandchildren, especially ones who’ve grown up in Christian homes. When you consider how Rick Warren, Bob Buford (Leadership Network), and Bill Hybels all had a part in launching the emergent church back in the 1990s1 and then never retracted a single promotion of it, it’s difficult to witness the “fruit” of their labors these 25 years later and listen to the silence of Christian leaders who seem to care more about building their own empires than defending that old time religion.

And now the 2013 Lighthouse Trails report:

“They Hate Christianity But Love (Another) Jesus – How Conservative Christians Are Being Manipulated and Ridiculed, Especially During Election Years”

In 2008, which was an election year, books, videos, broadcasts, and news articles were pouring into mainstream America with a guilt-ridden message that basically manipulated conservative Christians into thinking that either they shouldn’t vote because “Jesus wouldn’t vote,” or they shouldn’t vote on morality issues such as abortion or homosexuality. Suddenly, all over the place, there was talk about “destroying Christianity,” or “liking Jesus but not the church,” or “Jesus for president” (suggesting that maybe we could get Him on the ballot but certainly we shouldn’t vote for anyone already on the ballot). It all sounded very noble to many. After all, everybody knows there is so much political corruption in high government and certainly as much hypocrisy within the walls of many proclaiming Christian leaders and celebrities.

This special report by Lighthouse Trails is not going to attempt to answer the question, “Should a Christian vote?” But we hope to at least show that things are not always as they seem, and what may appear noble and good may not be so at all.

In January of 2012, another election year, a young man, Jefferson (Jeff) Bethke, who attends contemplative advocate Mark Driscoll’s church, Mars Hill in Washington state, posted a video on YouTube called “Why I Hate Religion, But Love Jesus.” Within hours, the video had over 100,000 hits. Soon it reached over 14 million hits, according to the Washington Post, one of the major media that has spotlighted the Bethke video (hits as of May 2013 are over 25 million).

The Bethke video is a poem Bethke wrote and recites in a rap-like fashion his thoughts and beliefs about the pitfalls of what he calls “religion” but what is indicated to be Christianity. While we are not saying at this time that Bethke is an emerging figure, and while some of the lyrics in his poem are true statements, it is interesting that emerging spirituality figures seem to be resonating with Bethke’s message. They are looking for anything that will give them ammunition against traditional biblical Christianity. They have found some in Bethke’s poem. Like so many in the emerging camp say, Bethke’s poem suggests that Christians don’t take care of the poor and needy. While believers in Christ have been caring for the needy for centuries, emerging figures use this ploy to win conservative Christians (through guilt) over to a liberal social justice “gospel.” Emerging church journalist Jim Wallis (founder of Sojourners) is one who picked up on Bethke’s video. In an article on Wallis’ blog, it states:

Bethke’s work challenges his listeners to second guess their preconceived notions about what it means to be a Christian. He challenges us to turn away from the superficial trappings of “religion,” and instead lead a missional life in Christ.1

What the article is talking about when it says “preconceived notions” is Christianity according to the Bible. Emerging figures accept some of it but find to accept all of it is too restricting. Many of them call themselves “red letter Christians,” supposing to mean they adhere to all the red letters that Jesus said; but they have actually chosen which red letters they adhere to—they don’t accept them all. For instance, they dismiss red letters that refer to there being a hell for those who reject Jesus Christ as Lord, God, and Savior. When the word missional is used, this doesn’t mean traditional missionary efforts to evangelize the world. It means to realize that all of humanity is saved and being saved along with all of creation and that the means of salvation didn’t take place in a one-time event (the Cross) but is an ongoing procedure that occurs as people begin to realize they are all connected to one another and can bring about a Utopian society through this interconnectedness. Such emerging buzz words like missional fool a lot of people though.

Incidentally, if you’ve never read the article we posted in the summer of 2010 regarding Jim Wallis and Sojourners, “Sojourners Founder Jim Wallis’ Revolutionary Anti-Christian “Gospel” (and Will Christian Leaders Stand with Wallis?)” we highly recommend it.2 But be warned—you may find it quite disturbing when you read what the agenda behind the scenes really is.

The rally call to throw out Christianity but keep “Jesus” isn’t a new one—we’ve heard it many times before from various emerging contemplatives. Futurist Erwin McManus once said in an interview:

My goal is to destroy Christianity as a world religion and be a recatalyst for the movement of Jesus Christ . . . Some people are upset with me because it sounds like I’m anti-Christian. I think they might be right.3

And, of course, there is Dan Kimball’s book, They Like Jesus But Not the Church. In a book review of Kimball’s book, Lighthouse Trails stated that the book should really be calledThey Like (Another) Jesus But Not the Church, the Bible, Morality, or the Truth.4 Kimball interviews several young people (one is a lesbian) who tell him they “like and respect Jesus” but they don’t want anything to do with going to church or with those Christians who take the Bible literally. Kimball says these are “exciting times” we live in “when Jesus is becoming more and more respected in our culture by non-churchgoing people.”5 He says we should “be out listening to what non-Christians, especially those in their late teens to thirties, are saying and thinking about the church and Christianity.”6

According to Kimball, it is vitally important that we as Christians be accepted by non-Christians and not thought of as abnormal or strange. But in order to do that, he says we must change the way we live and behave. Kimball insists that “those who are rejecting faith in Jesus” do so because of their views of Christians and the church.7 But he makes it clear throughout the book that these distorted views are not the fault of the unbeliever but are the fault of Christians, but not all Christians, just those fundamentalist ones who take the Bible literally, believe that homosexuality is a sin, and think certain things are wrong and harmful to society . . . and actually speak up about these things.

Perhaps what is most damaging about Dan Kimball’s book is his black and white, either or reasoning (the very thing he accuses Christians of). He makes it very clear that you cannot be a Christian who takes the Bible literally and also be a humble, loving, thoughtful person. They are two different things, according to Kimball. There is no such thing as a loving, humble Christian who takes the Bible literally. His book further alienates believers in a world that is already hostile to those who say Jesus is the only way to salvation, the Bible should be taken literally, homosexuality is a sin, and we are called out of this world to live righteously by the grace of God.

Brian McLaren, the emerging church’s early pioneer, resonates with these ill feelings toward the Christian faith when he states:

I must add, though, that I don’t believe making disciples must equal making adherents to the Christian religion. It may be advisable in many (not all!) circumstances to help people become followers of Jesus and remain within their Buddhist, Hindu, or Jewish contexts.8

Roger Oakland deals with this “we love Jesus but hate Christianity” mentality in his book Faith Undone. Listen to a few quotes Oakland includes in that book:

For me, the beginning of sharing my faith with people began by throwing out Christianity and embracing Christian spirituality, a nonpolitical mysterious system that can be experienced but not explained.9—Don Miller, Blue Like Jazz

They [Barbarians] see Christianity as a world religion, in many ways no different from any other religious system. Whether Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, or Christianity, they’re not about religion; they’re about advancing the revolution Jesus started two thousand years ago.10—Erwin McManus, The Barbarian Way

New Light embodiment means to be “in connection” and “information” with other faiths. . . .  One can be a faithful disciple of Jesus Christ without denying the flickers of the sacred in followers of Yahweh, or Kali, or Krishna.”11–Leonard Sweet

I happen to know people who are followers of Christ in other religions.12–Rick Warren

I see no contradiction between Buddhism and Christianity. . . . I intend to become as good a Buddhist as I can.13–Thomas Merton

Allah is not another God … we worship the same God. . . . The same God! The very same God we worship in Christ is the God . . . the Muslims–worship.14–Peter Kreeft

Roger Oakland relates a story from the Book of Acts:

“[T]he apostle Paul had been arrested for preaching the Gospel. He was brought before King Agrippa and given the opportunity to share his testimony of how he became a Christian. He told Agrippa that the Lord had commissioned him to preach the Gospel and:

To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me. (Acts 26:18)

“Agrippa continued listening and then said to Paul, ‘Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian (vs. 28).’ Paul answered him:

I would to God, that not only thou, but also all that hear me this day, were both almost, and altogether such as I am, except these bonds. (vs. 29)

“If Paul had been following the emerging mentality, he would have told Agrippa, “No need to become a Christian. You can remain just as you are; keep all your rituals and practices, just say you like Jesus.” In actuality, if Paul had been practicing emerging spirituality, he wouldn’t have been arrested in the first place. He would not have stood out, would not have preached boldly and without reservation, and he would not have called himself a Christian, which eventually became a death sentence for Paul and countless others.”15

It’s hard to believe there was not at least some political agenda in this storm of “we love Jesus but not the church or Christianity” especially witnessed in election years. And we believe this agenda was aimed particularly toward young people from evangelical conservative upbringings who had joined the emerging church movement. In a CBS Broadcast, anchorman Antonio Mora suggests there may have been over twenty million participants in the emerging church movement in the United States alone by 2006.16 Even half that number would be enough to change the results of a presidential election.

Some may contend that Jefferson Bethke’s song doesn’t have any political message at all—it’s just about hypocrisy of religious people. But interestingly, in the very first few lines of the song, Bethke raps:

“What if I told you getting you to vote Republican, really wasn’t his [Jesus’] mission? Because Republican doesn’t automatically mean Christian.”

Could there be some message here that Bethke is trying to relay? Is it just to tell people that just because they are Republican doesn’t mean they are Christian? Surely not. A fourth grader could reason that out. It’s difficult not to believe there is some other message here that just happens to be taking place on an election year.

Just consider some of the things that were said by evangelical and emerging figures during the 2008 presidential election year. And think about what you are hearing today. A lot of people love the messages being sent out by people like Dan Kimball, Erwin McManus, and let’s not forget Frank Viola and George Barna’s book, Pagan Christianity, where they condemn church practices like pastors, sermons, Sunday School, and pews, but say nothing about spiritual deception that has come into the church through the contemplative prayer movement. These latter two figures (Viola and Barna) give readers a feeling that they should hate Christianity but just love Jesus. But what Jesus are these voices writing, singing, and rapping about? It may be “another Jesus” and “another gospel” (2 Corinthians 11:4).

As the world is gradually (but not too slowly anymore) heading toward a global government and global religion, it is becoming more and more apparent that this global society will be one where “tolerance” is the byword for everything other than biblical Christianity. And what better way to breed hatred toward biblical Christians than to say “we love Jesus but hate the church” (i.e., Christians and Christianity)? Perhaps they have forgotten what Jesus said:

If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. (John 15: 18-19)

I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. (John 17:14)

This report we have written may produce more questions than answers regarding things like politics, voting, the role of Christians in the world, the view the world has of Christians, and so forth. But while we have not answered such questions, we hope we have shown that indeed things are not always as they seem and that often what seems right may actually be from a deceiving angel of light and those who appear good may actually be only false ministers of righteousness.

And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness. (2 Corinthians 11: 14-15)

Read Full Post »

What does the Bible say about the prosperity gospel?

Posted in abominations, Apostasy, Discernment, Doctrine of Balaam, False Christians, False Doctrine, False Teachers, Humanism, Mammon, Prosperity Gospel, Word Faith on October 26, 2018| 1 Comment »

from Got Questions:

In the prosperity gospel, also known as the “Word of Faith Movement,” the believer is told to use God, whereas the truth of biblical Christianity is just the opposite—God uses the believer. Prosperity theology sees the Holy Spirit as a power to be put to use for whatever the believer wills. The Bible teaches that the Holy Spirit is a Person who enables the believer to do God’s will. The prosperity gospel movement closely resembles some of the destructive greed sects that infiltrated the early church. Paul and the other apostles were not accommodating to or conciliatory with the false teachers who propagated such heresy. They identified them as dangerous false teachers and urged Christians to avoid them.

Paul warned Timothy about such men in 1 Timothy 6:5, 9-11. These men of “corrupt mind” supposed godliness was a means of gain and their desire for riches was a trap that brought them “into ruin and destruction” (v. 9). The pursuit of wealth is a dangerous path for Christians and one which God warns about: “For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs” (v. 10). If riches were a reasonable goal for the godly, Jesus would have pursued it. But He did not, preferring instead to have no place to lay His head (Matthew 8:20) and teaching His disciples to do the same. It should also be remembered that the only disciple concerned with wealth was Judas.

Paul said covetousness is idolatry (Ephesians 5:5) and instructed the Ephesians to avoid anyone who brought a message of immorality or covetousness (Ephesians 5:6-7). Prosperity teaching prohibits God from working on His own, meaning that God is not Lord of all because He cannot work until we release Him to do so. Faith, according to the Word of Faith doctrine, is not submissive trust in God; faith is a formula by which we manipulate the spiritual laws that prosperity teachers believe govern the universe. As the name “Word of Faith” implies, this movement teaches that faith is a matter of what we say more than whom we trust or what truths we embrace and affirm in our hearts.

A favorite term of prosperity gospel teachers is “positive confession.” This refers to the teaching that words themselves have creative power. What you say, prosperity teachers claim, determines everything that happens to you. Your confessions, especially the favors you demand of God, must all be stated positively and without wavering. Then God is required to answer (as though man could require anything of God!). Thus, God’s ability to bless us supposedly hangs on our faith. James 4:13-16 clearly contradicts this teaching: “Now listen, you who say, ‘Today or tomorrow we will go to this or that city, spend a year there, carry on business and make money.’ Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes.” Far from speaking things into existence in the future, we do not even know what tomorrow will bring or even whether we will be alive.

Instead of stressing the importance of wealth, the Bible warns against pursuing it. Believers, especially leaders in the church (1 Timothy 3:3), are to be free from the love of money (Hebrews 13:5). The love of money leads to all kinds of evil (1 Timothy 6:10). Jesus warned, “Watch out! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions” (Luke 12:15). In sharp contrast to the prosperity gospel emphasis on gaining money and possessions in this life, Jesus said, “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal” (Matthew 6:19). The irreconcilable contradictions between prosperity teaching and the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ is best summed up in the words of Jesus in Matthew 6:24, “You cannot serve both God and money.”

Read Full Post »

“Desiring God” Says God Can’t/Won’t Make Gay People Straight

Posted in abominations, Another christ, Apostasy, Discerning the Times, Discernment, False Christians, False Doctrine, False Teachers, Homosexuality, Humanism, idolatry, Moonbats, Post-Modernism, prophetic, Religious Babylon, Signs of The Times, Synchretism, Wolves on September 12, 2018| 1 Comment »

You are seeing an ever increasing number of humanistic thought and ideologies overwhelm virtually all of Christianity today. It is at the point where a majority of pastors and leaders have basically given up believing what the Bible says verbatim! This includes other topics such as suicide, an increasing number of confessing Christians have no problem with believing that a Christian who commits suicide goes straight to Heaven!!

from Pulpit and Pen:

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. – 1 Corinthians 6:9-11

John Piper, a longtime figure in the New Calvinism movement, has proven himself in recent years to handle even the most basic doctrinal aspects of the Ordo Salutis clumsily. After butchering the doctrine of Justification almost beyond the point of recognition, being accused of holding to a modified form of Federal Vision or denying Sola Fide altogether (the accusations are not without merit), Piper’s Desiring God has now denied the heart and substance of the doctrine of Sanctification. While claiming that there is a “final justification” that is based on increased holiness, Piper’s website now argues that homosexuals cannot expect to be made holy, leaving them damned in their sins as a tragic and ironic result. Written by guest contributor, Jackie Hill Perry, and posted by Desiring God, an article on September 4 argues that we should stop telling gay people that God can make them straight.

To make the point of the insane levels of Downgrade in this argument, let me illustrate it in the following ways:

“Stop telling murderers that if they come to Jesus, he will keep them from killing people.”

“Stop telling thieves that if they come to Jesus, he will keep them from thieving.”

“Stop telling blasphemers that if they come to Jesus, he will keep them from profaning his name.”

“Stop telling idolaters that if they come to Jesus, he will keep them from idolatry.”

The argument from Perry is sinister, sick, and perverse. That Desiring God would post the refuse is beyond incomprehensible. It is irresponsible, detestable, and destructive. In order to craft her narrative, Perry operates under the presumption that so-called  “Same-Sex Attraction (SSA)” – the Bible would call this the desire for sodomy from a depraved and fallen heart – is not a sin. Although a shocking proposition to many evangelicals who haven’t been paying attention, the line of thought that SSA is not a sin has become a common one, advocated for mostly by the same New Calvinists who are a part of the new “woke” Social Justice movement and they speak in terms of “gay Christians” and “sexual minorities.” Even more shockingly, Perry says that telling gay people that God can reorient their sinful hearts is a “different Gospel.”

She writes:

I know, I know, some of us Christians believe that we are only pointing our gay and lesbian friends to the miraculous. To the power of God to make all things and them new. Well-meaning believers, in an effort to encourage or cast vision to their same-sex attracted (SSA) friends or family, preach this gospel often. This gospel is not the good news of Jesus however, but another gospel. A gospel that I call “the heterosexual gospel.”

Calling something “another Gospel” is a damning accusation from Perry toward anyone who believes in the doctrine of Sanctification, the belief that the Holy Spirit will continue a work in us after salvation, giving us a new heart with new desires. Paul says that anyone who is preaching another Gospel is “accursed” (Galatians 1:8). Essentially, Perry places all right-thinking and orthodox Christian believers (who have always identified homosexual desire as a sin) under the Galatian curse.

The woman continues:

The heterosexual gospel is one that encourages SSA men and women to come to Jesus so that they can be straight, or it says that coming to Jesus ensures that they will be sexually attracted to the opposite sex.

Clearly, mortifying sin and becoming like Jesus is one of the reasons one should want to come to Christ. New Calvinists should have no problem looking to Owen’s Mortification of Sinto examine this point further.  In fact, a hatred of sin is a sign of the Holy Spirit’s work in conversion. Anyone with homosexual desires who God wants to save will want to come to Jesus to be straight (and to put to death the rest of their sin as well). Furthermore, we should rightly reject Perry’s claim that coming to Jesus won’t ensure they’ll be sexually attracted to those of the opposite sex, and we should clarify in the strongest terms that what the Scripture teaches (from the verse at the top of this article) is that if they don’t stop lusting after those of the same sex, they will have no part of Heaven.

Perry goes on to call heterosexuality “idolatry” and creates a false dilemma between “being straight” and “being made right with God.”

When the gospel is presented as “Come to Jesus to be straight,” instead of “Come to Jesus to be made right with God,” we shouldn’t be surprised when people won’t come to Jesus at all. If he is not the aim of their repentance, then he will not be believed as the ultimate aim of their faith. They will only exchange one idol for another and believe themselves to be Christian because of it.

While there are plenty of heterosexuals who are right with God, we can say with all the authority of Holy Scripture that there is no homosexual on Earth – anywhere – who is right with God. Romans 1 presents that sin in particular as a demonstration of lostness. Paul says that homosexuals will not inherit the Kingdom of God. In other words, while heterosexuality doesn’t make us right with God in and of itself, everyone right with God will be a heterosexual and their sexual desires will be properly oriented toward that which is natural and not grossly deviant.

Again, Perry’s argument doesn’t make any sense when applied to any other list of sins not championed by the religious left. At no point would you (or should you) hear Christians claim that the Holy Spirit’s work in our heart should not be expected in the life of a believer. Only in the most recent of days has homosexuality received a privileged, special status among evangelicals and the deviant desire seen as an exception to the power of the Spirit’s transforming work.

What the gay community needs to hear is not that God will make them straight, but that Christ can make them his.

First, there is no such thing as a “gay community.” Communities are built around shared values, not shared deviancies. We would not classify pedophiles, necrophiles, or murderers as a “community.” The nomenclature itself is compromised. Secondly, when Christ “makes them his,” he makes them straight. God has no homosexual children. That is the Scripture; deal with it.

God has not come mainly to make same-sex attracted men and women completely straight, or to get them hitched. Christ has come to make us right with God. And in making us right with God, he is satisfying us in God. That news is good for a reason. For it proclaims to the world that Jesus has come so that all sinners, gay and straight, can be forgiven of their sins to love God and enjoy him forever.

If the Spirit’s transformative work can’t make the sinner whole in Christ, then the news is not that good. What is missing from Perry’s article and John Piper’s Desiring God is any indication whatsoever that the doctrine of Sanctification even exists. It appears not even to be an afterthought or speedbump on her way to apostasy.

Perry claims that God has saved her out of the gay lifestyle, but uses her unique position as one of evangelicalism’s growing chorus of “gay Christian” voices to minimize the abomination of Same-Sex Attraction and preach against the work of the Holy Spirit to fully redeem sinners.

Read Full Post »

Why the Vatican continues to struggle with sex abuse scandals

Posted in abominations, Another christ, Apostasy, Catholicism, Days of Noah, Discerning the Times, Discernment, False Christians, False Doctrine, False Teachers, Humanism, Mega Churches, Post-Modernism, prophetic, Religious Babylon, Signs of The Times, Synchretism, Wolves on August 13, 2018| Leave a Comment »

The reason is obvious but people continue to ignore it: The Roman Catholic “Church” is a false church, a man made organization modeled on fallen humanistic power politics. From it’s founding it was in direct opposition to how a church should function. The Bishop of Rome wanted to gather power around himself, and used his position as the Bishop of the ancient seat of power in the Roman Empire to force other churches to submit to his rule! From there on out it was downhill!

from MSN:

With revelation after revelation, a new wave of sexual abuse scandals is rocking the Roman Catholic Church and presenting Pope Francis with the greatest crisis of his papacy.

In Chile, prosecutors have raided church offices, seized documents and accused leaders of a coverup. In Australia, top church figures are facing detention and trials. And in the United States, after the resignation of a cardinal, questions are swirling about a hierarchy that looked the other way and protected him for years.

The church has had more than three decades — since notable abuse cases first became public — to safeguard victims, and itself, against such system failures. And, in the past five years, many Catholics have looked to Francis as a figure who could modernize the church and help it regain its credibility.

But Francis’s track record in handling abuse is mixed, something some outsiders attribute to his learning curve or shortcomings and others chalk up to resistance from a notoriously change-averse institution.

Analysts who have studied the church’s response to sexual abuse, and several people who have advised the pope, say the Vatican has been unable to take the dramatic steps that can help an organization get out from under scandals — and avoid their repetition.

“Each new report of clerical abuse at any level creates doubt in the minds of many that we are effectively addressing this catastrophe in the Church,” Cardinal Sean O’Malley, the archbishop of Boston, warned last month. Failure to take action, O’Malley said, “will threaten and endanger the already weakened moral authority of the Church.”

Francis is credited with some meaningful moves. Last month, he accepted the highest-level resignation to date when Theodore McCarrick stepped down from the College of Cardinals. The former archbishop of Washington and longtime church power broker is accused of sexually abusing adults and minors. He faces a church trial in which he could be defrocked entirely.

But the pope has also had notable missteps. During a January trip to South America, he drew widespread criticism by saying he was convinced of the innocence of Bishop Juan Barros, accused of covering up the acts of a notorious abuser.

Francis sought to recover from that episode by sending two investigators to Chile, apologizing for his “serious errors” in handling the crisis and making a reference — unprecedented for a pope — to a “culture of abuse and coverup.” He invited Chilean abuse victims to the Vatican. He also called Chile’s 34 bishops to Rome, where, according to a letter that was leaked to the Chilean media, he accused them of failing to investigate possible crimes and destroying evidence. The bishops offered to step down en masse. So far, Francis has accepted five of those resignations.

Yet the church has struggled with a more comprehensive effort to close the chapter on sexual abuse.

Whereas transparency is typically advised, the church remains quiet about its investigations and disciplinary procedures. It does not release any data on the inquiries it has carried out. A proposed tribunal for judging bishops accused of negligence or coverup was quashed by the Vatican department that was supposed to help implement it. And, rather than being fired and publicly admonished, offending church leaders are typically allowed to resign without explanation.

“The church doesn’t like removing bishops,” said the Rev. Thomas Reese, a Jesuit priest and a senior analyst at the Religion News Service. “Bishops are vicars of Christ in their diocese. They’re not just McDonald’s franchise owners or local managers that can be fired by the CEO. And the church has always been reluctant to give in to political pressure to remove them.”

Francis has called on churches to maintain a “zero tolerance” policy and warned about the “sin of covering up and denial, the sin of the abuse of power.” But the Vatican declined to distribute to bishops conferences suggested guidelines, drawn up by the commission advising Francis on sexual abuse, on how to respond to abuse complaints and cooperate with civil authorities.

Even when the Vatican does take action, resolution comes “at a very glacial pace,” said Juan Carlos Cruz, who was among the Chilean abuse victims who met for several days with Francis this past spring.

Cruz said he tried to tell the pope bluntly that a deeper shake-up was still needed. He specifically mentioned Francisco Javier ­Errázuriz, a member of the pope’s powerful nine-member advisory Council of Cardinals, who victims have long said ignored their abuse accusations and tried to discredit them. Errázuriz has denied wrongdoing.

“[The pope] asked us to give him time to act,” Cruz recalled. “He said, ‘I have to pray about this and let the Holy Spirit guide me on what I have to do.’ ”

Meanwhile, in the wider world, the cultural ground is shifting, and other forces are taking the lead on accountability.

A separate movement fighting abuse and harassment in the workplace has helped spread awareness about victims while diminishing skepticism about their stories.

At the same time, law enforcement agencies have been pursuing abuse cases in countries that once treated the church with deference. In Australia, some state and territory governments are even going after one of the church’s most sacred tenets and are on the verge of enforcing new laws requiring priests to report child abuse that they learn of during confessions. In the United States, the Catholic Church is bracing for the release of a 900-page grand jury report into sex crimes across six dioceses in Pennsylvania.

There have been competing calls within the American church on strengthening oversight of the hierarchy. Church leaders in Albany and Atlanta took the notable step of suggesting the involvement of expert laypeople, either to investigate or chart reforms.

“I think we have reached a point where bishops alone investigating bishops is not the answer,” said Bishop Edward Scharfenberger, of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany. “We bishops want to rise to this challenge, which may well be our last opportunity considering all that has happened.”

A similar conversation, about how to strengthen the response to abuse, has played out for several years in the Vatican — particularly within the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, which Francis created a year after he became pope. But little has come of the commission’s ideas.

In 2015, Francis approved its proposal of a tribunal, placed within the Vatican’s powerful doctrine office, that would assess cases of bishops accused of concealing or neglecting abuse. The tribunal, though, was never created. Four former members of the commission, as well as outside analysts, say the idea was thwarted by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Some outside analysts say the objection could have been on legal or logistical grounds.

In an interview published last year with the Corriere della Sera, Cardinal Gerhard Müller, then the head of the doctrine office, said the Vatican already had the “tools and legal means” to handle cases. Vatican watcher Marco Politi said congregation members and others in the Vatican hierarchy were also concerned about opening a “Pandora’s box.”

“This would mean hundreds of cases that would then bounce back to Rome with a huge media impact,” said Politi, author “Pope Francis Among the Wolves,” a papal biography. “It would signify the beginning of hunting season on culprits.”

In turn, Francis used another method to bolster accountability of the church hierarchy, issuing an apostolic letter that made it clear that bishops could be removed from office for negligently handling sexual abuse. But under the current system, any of five different Vatican congregations can be involved in investigating bishops, depending on the accused person’s role and affiliation within the church, and also on whether he has been accused of coverup or abuse. Coverup cases are handled by the same congregations that help to appoint bishops.

“It’s a potential conflict of interest,” said Davide Cito, a canon lawyer at Rome’s Pontifical University of the Holy Cross. “That’s absolutely an issue.”

The stalled effort to launch the tribunal prompted the resignation from the commission of Marie Collins, an Irish abuse survivor. Current and former members of the commission said that they are not given data and information on abuse-related cases being handled by the Vatican. Krysten Winter-Green, a former commission member who was a longtime counselor for abuse victims, said they were up against a “domain of secrecy.”

“The crime in the Catholic Church remains causing scandal, not covering up,” said Anne Barrett Doyle, co-director of the site BishopAccountability.org, which tracks sexual abuse cases. “Bishops all over the world are not being forthcoming.”

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: