Download Category: Other Church

EARLY AMERICA LIVED BY LAW. At Jamestown in 1607, Captain John Smith opened the Bible and dispensed justice.

On the frontier, from the foothills of the Blue Ridge, down into Tennessee, over into Kentucky, and up into the Ohio, Virginians lived by the Law. There were few courts and almost no jails. People studied the Law. The Law was judge. The obedient enforced the law. Justice reigned.

Where outlaws appeared the “+” superimposed on “P” carved into a tree or chalked on a wall, reminded the outlaw that the “Law” was not done away with and that violations would be punished. Every man was expected to be a Christian and every Christian man was expected to be a Phinehas
Priest[1]. Law violators paid the penalty laid down by the Bible in the “judgments”.

Criminals were rare. So rare that their existence was carefully noted.

The Revolution

When the Revolution broke out ministers of The Church of England as well as the royal judges scampered back to England.

Land disputes in Piedmont Virginia were settled by a judge who was selected by his neighbours – Charles Lynch.

LONG AGO, IN THE DAYS WHEN CAMELS CARRIED THEIR PRECIOUS CARGOES OVER THE SPICE ROUTES – the spice- merchants divided the world among themselves[1]. Each spice-merchant then created franchises within his allotted territory and hired kings to manage them. Each franchised king raised his own personal banner to mark off “his country” from the franchise of another.

He built castles and garrisoned them with soldiers to keep and police what
he had been assigned. Each king had to guarantee that the merchant’s goods would be safely transported and delivered to their destination and that the slaves that came with the king’s franchise did their allotted work. Each king permitted to keep a percentage of the take as his income.

The job of king was “the good life” and so it had many applicants. Each applicant bid against other applicants, each making all sorts of concessions to get the job.

On occasion, the people of the land, tired of being slaves, listened to their ancient god and demanded rights that had been taken from them by the king and his spice-merchant employer. Such revolts were expected reoccurring events and so preparations had been made to deal with them.
“Trade-priests” were the first line of defence. It was their job to bless that which the gods cursed. They were paid to say that the king and his employer were right and the people were wrong. This blessing of the priests was meant to keep the slaves happy and less likely to object to their slavery[2].

All religions have two basic creeds.

Christianity has two basic creeds. The first is THE WORD – God’s Laws, statutes, and judgments. The second is “TRADE-CHRISTIANITY. “Trade-Christianity” sells Indulgences to permit merchants to violate God’s “Laws. Statutes, and Judgments”. sellers are called “Baal-priests” by the faithful[1].

Trade-Christianity” actively censors the 70% of the Bible dealing with government which might hinder the merchant paymaster and his trade. “Trade-priests” do what they are paid to do, and Christians despise them for it.

Trade Religion in Virginia

Before the Revolution, almost everyone in Virginia was Episcopalian – “Church of England.” The king was its head. He appointed bishops and they appointed ministers. There were Presbyterian and Baptist dissenters, but their lives were hard. Very hard. One of my grandfathers preached to his congregation from the barred window of the jail at Bowling Green. A grandmother who married a Baptist preacher was disinherited and her name stricken from the family Bible.

Dissenter Beliefs

Dissenters read the 70% of the Bible that deals with government and discovered that they were being deprived of specific basic rights promised them by their God. The king’s own Episcopalian priests said that only the king entitled to these rights. Dissenters quoted the Bible and insisted that Christ was their only king, that the King of England had stolen their “God-given rights” and made monopolies for himself – that taxes were wrong, and that black slavery was evil – that neither the Blacks nor the Indians should even be allowed in Virginia. The king’s church insisted that the king had the right to do as he liked.

CHURCHES AND RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS THAT ACCEPT GOVERNMENTAL AUTHORIZATION FOR FINANCIAL GAIN, for permission to assemble, etc., are then controlled by the state. They invariably become tools of the government, carrying out the agenda of rulers and spreading state propaganda. Church members themselves often demand their church obtain state recognition in order for their tithes and offerings to be deductible from their personal income tax reports.

The classification 501(c)(3) is a tax exempt status for religious or charitable organizations in the United States. While this article repeatedly refers to this particular classification, the warning crosses international boundaries. Any religious organization that is recognized as such by the national government comes under the control of that government. It is then an arm of the state and must comply with state policy or lose the desired recognition.

In August, 2007, KSLA News 12 out of Shreveport, Louisiana, reported on a shocking new tactic used by the United States government in its ongoing destruction of the U.S. Constitution. It was reported that the government had begun training pastors and religious leaders to influence the populace to comply with government demands, stating: “KSLA News 12 has discovered that [in the event of a disaster] the clergy would help the government with potentially their biggest problem: Us.”

The United States was founded with the deliberate intent of having a country without a king and ensuring the freedom to have a church without a pope. Consequently, the “separation of church and state” has long been a governing principle of laws and policy within the U.S. It is extremely portentous for the government to reach out to religious leaders in an attempt to control the citizenry. Revelation 13 warns of a despotic power that would seek to enforce its own agenda over the entire world:

AN INVOCATION OF OR PRAYER TO ANYONE LESS THAN GOD ALMIGHTY IS A HERESY AND A BLASPHEMY which, ns St. Peter has told us, above shall bring “swift destruction,” and after the events of the night of our Lord’s arrest and trial no one should know better the truth of that than St. Peter himself. Did we not see this exemplified quite recently in the National Life of France, that poor Country now lying under the heel of the NAZI Devil-ridden regime? On France’s last day of National Prayer she called upon her relics and idols to deliver her from the oncoming Hordes of Germans soldiery. We quote the actual report, taken from the Dublin Standard, of the prayers used in Paris on that day:—

Led by the Cardinal and her Prime Ministers, France invoked in a mighty act of Faith all the great leaders of that Christian past which has made her. High on the shoulders of boy scouts the priceless reliquaries of the Crown of Thorns and of St. Louis (King Louis 9th died 1270) the King were carried over the heads of the faithful, whilst from the pulpit a mitred Prelate implored, his arms outstretched to heaven, all the Saints of France, in a paroxysm of beseeching faith:—‘Come thou our Lady and thou St. Michael, thou St. Genevieve who protected Paris; thou Louis, model of all Monarchs, thou Joan of Arc, Liberator of our territory, thou simple Cure d’Ars, and little Theresa, who have sprung from our homesteads, come to our help, all of you, Saints of France.’

THIS MANUSCRIPT IS PUBLISHED in order that it might be demonstrated beyond any peradventure of a doubt that the Jewish problem is not in any sense a creation of modern bigotry. An alertness to the anti-Christian and aggressive activities of Jewish politicians and religionists has prevailed down through the centuries. It is neither a Catholic nor Protestant attitude. The Popes were compelled to speak firmly concerning the Jewish problem, and Martin Luther, the chief founder of Protestantism, wrote a book entitled “The Jews and Their Lies,” which is as strong as any statement ever issued by any Pope or leader in the Catholic Church.

Among Catholics the most recent, frank statement that has been made concerning the Jewish problem was made by Father Charles E. Coughlin, the noted radio priest of Royal Oak, Michigan. He published “The Protocols of the Learned. Elders of Zion”* which outlines the Jewish plot. He made numerous addresses over the radio in which he levelled pointed accusations at certain unrighteous Jews. He immediately became the victim of great persecution, slander and libel, and the organized Jews of America did not rest until he was removed from the radio.

The enemies of Father Coughlin tried to represent him as a modern villain and bigot, but the content of this brochure demonstrates that Father Coughlin was only experiencing some of the reactions that had been experienced by the Popes down through the centuries as well as by Martin Luther and other great Protestant leaders.

THE BIBLE FROM ITS OUTSET is a love story as the writers of this short booklet we believe that there are three main topics in scripture, the first topic is who God is, the second is who His people are and the third is the relationship between the two of them.
Today very few preachers make it clear to their listeners who His people are according to scripture. Not realising that the old testament books are really the new concealed and the new testament is the old revealed. We At The Truth Sets Free believe fundamentally what Malachi 3 v 6 declares ‘I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed’.
Isn’t it amazing that right there in this key passage of scripture Yahweh is defensive of Jacob. This very scripture is dynamite when we begin a study on the bride and the bridegroom.
To understand scripture its prophesies and fulfilment this topic is central and it can’t be understood without Yahweh’s law concerning the husband and wife.

THE ABBEY OF GLASTONBURY is one of those to which a peculiar interest has been always attached. The boldness of its legendary history, which claims for its site the privileges of being that on which the first Christian church was erected in our island, and the burial-place of King Arthur and Joseph of Arimathea : also the peculiar architectural character and beauty of the chapel which now bears the name of St Joseph, its singular plan and position; and lastly, the picturesque remains of the great church itself, little inferior to the chapel in beauty, and of the celebrated kitchen and barn;—these furnish sufficient grounds for the interest which has been maintained up to our own time, and has made this place the theme of so many writers, ancient and modern, that the subject might appear to have been exhausted in all directions.

Yet it must have been perceived by the readers of these writers, that the interpretation of the documentary evidence, with reference to its application to the build­ings, is still enveloped in indecision and conjecture.

Yet few monasteries have left to us a better col­lection of historical documents, including the memoranda of Leland and William of Worcester, both written before the Reformation, or furnish a more instructive example of the manner in which such buildings were carried on and altered. My first acquaintance with these venerable ruins in 1863 convinced me that the cloud of vague conjecture which still hung over their architectural his­tory might be partly dispelled by a personal and re­peated study of the structures themselves, combined with a careful analysis of the chronicles and records, selecting from them those passages only which have reference to the arrangement and purposes of the buildings, the time and mode of their construction, the manner of raising funds for that object, and the motives which caused them to be undertaken.

This in fact is the sys­tem that I have pursued throughout my researches into the Architectural History of so many Cathedrals and Monasteries, and the following pages contain the result of its application to Glastonbury. Several visits to the ruins, employed in sketching and measuring; alternating with the home examination at leisure, of the docu­mentary evidence; have emboldened me to assert with confidence the identity of the so-called chapel of St Joseph with the Lady chapel of the Abbey church and with the site of the original wicker church or “Old Church,” the “Vetusta Ecclesia” of William of Malmesbury, and thus not only to fix the date of this most valuable piece of transition work to the year 1184, but to identify a spot, which, without crediting the tradition
literally which assigns the date of the “Old Church” to A.D. 63, was certainly occupied by one of the very ear­liest of the British churches.

I have pointed out that the tradition of the visit of Joseph of Arimathea, hinted at by Malmesbury, and evidently neither really credited by him, nor held forth as one of the prominent attractions of the site up to his time or that of his continuator Adam de Domerham, was brought into excessive importance and made a source of profit and honour to the Monastery in the fourteenth century. Thus, finally, the popular name of St Joseph’s chapel has superseded the original dedication of the Lady chapel.

Lastly, I have shewn that the crypt is entirely a construction of the fifteenth century, inserted in a building which had no previous crypt, and have endea­voured to explain the steps by which this remarkable undertaking was carried out. As far as I know, this fact has escaped all previous writers.

THE ACTS OF UNIFORMITY ARE INCIDENTS IN A GREAT MOVEMENT. They are far from being the most important of its incidents. Their importance has perhaps been exaggerated, and their purport is commonly misunderstood. My object is to place them in their true relation to other incidents. It is useless to study them apart; they cannot be understood except as details of a connected history. I shall confine myself, however, to a narrow, question: assuming the general history, I shall ask how the several Acts of Uniformity come into it, with what purpose and with what ultimate effect. To study immediate effects would be to engage in too wide an inquiry.

We owe thanks to the men who drafted the statutes of the sixteenth century for their long argumentative preambles. These are invaluable as showing the occasion and purpose of the Acts. We shall not go to them for an uncoloured record of facts—their unsupported assertions will hardly, indeed, be taken as evidence for facts at all; but they tell us to what facts the legislator wished to call attention, and in what light he would have them regarded. The preamble of the first Act of Uniformity is among the most illuminating, and with its help we can assemble the facts in relation to which the purport of the Act must be determined.

We are in the year 1548. Important changes in matters of religion had taken place; greater changes were in prospect. The processions before High Mass on Sundays and Festivals, conspicuous and popular ceremonies, had been stopped on rather flimsy grounds, and a Litany in English substituted—the “English Procession,” as it was called. Many images in the churches had been destroyed, as superstitious; the censing of those remaining had ceased.

THE TESTIMONY OF SISTER CHARLOTTE IS DISTURBING AND SHOCKING, but provides important insights into the worst of convent life as well as the dynamics of Romanism. It testifies with others such as “Maria Monk” and “The Martyr in Black The Life Story of Sister Justina” (Lord willing, both of these will be on the site one day) as well as the testimonies of former priests such as Chiniquy (The Priest, the Woman and the Confessional), Fresenborg (Thirty Years in Hell), and Hogan (Auricular Confession and Popish Nunneries). Sis. Charlotte’s testimony seems incredible but only because most people do not know the history of the Romish religion. One of our readers said this about Sis. Charlotte’s testimony–
Thank you for printing this testimony, I have been so troubled by what I have read and I can believe what she said because I worked as a waitress. And the priest and nuns would come in [and] order drinks while wearing the habit. I had a friend that confronted one of the priests and boy what a big blow up that was. He tried to get her fired and then they really started coming in with the habit on and getting drunk. We told them that it didn’t look good for children to see them drinking especially when they were godly people (in the children’s eyes.) It was very eye opening to say the least. So I can understand some of what the woman said. I would really like to pray for those other nuns. thank you for your site and information. SR

Here’s an excerpt from a modern day Roman cloistered nun:
(http://www.passionistnuns.org/vocationstories/findinglove/). This quote is supposed to make a convent sound good but read between the lines and you get a hollow feeling…
Being a Passionist Nun: I had always desired to enter more deeply into the mystery of Jesus’ love for us in His sacred Passion. Where better than a Passionist Monastery where one takes a vow to promote devotion to and grateful remembrance of the Passion of Jesus? Flowing out of this main vow we take four other vows: Chastity, Poverty, Obedience and Enclosure. Prayer, penance, poverty, silence and solitude are a very important part of our spirit handed down to us by our Holy Founder, St. Paul of the Cross. Also, a deep love for our Spouse, Jesus in the Eucharist [a cracker Romans call “Jesus”]; devotion to our Immaculate Mother and fidelity to the Magisterium of the church attracted me to this hidden way of life, where prayer knows no bounds.
I think a lot of these women feel empty and want to get close to God. They think they have to “leave the world” for a religious life and of course the priests and nuns are happy to suggest joining a religious order. Not, “Get washed in the blood of the Lamb and born again,” but “Join our convent or monastery”.