Her Majesty the Queen has decided to commence the New Year, (her 50th anniversary since the accession to the throne in 1952), by bringing disgrace to the throne, the nation’s Protestant heritage and by deliberately disregarding the centuries-old safeguards of the monarchy and the country. She is not only to insult the Bible but also all true Christians. How? The Queen has indicated that she is intent on inviting the head of the Roman Catholic Church of England and Wales to address and preach to her and to her family in January, at the Royal Estate of Sandringham.
Cormac Murphy-O’Connor received the unprecedented invitation and will be staying at Sandringham; also a first, as no Roman Catholic prelate has ever stayed with the Queen on the Norfolk Estate.
The Queen clearly has decided to continue disregarding her Coronation Oath, the Bill of Rights, Acts of Settlement, 39 Articles, Westminster Confession; something that she has increasingly done throughout her reign. By her actions she is thus no defender of the faith and not only thinks little of the infallible truth of the word of God but sees nothing errant in either her dalliance with Roman Catholicism and its claim to be salvation and truth or her man-centred understanding of both.
The Queen seems intent on reconciling the Reformation to the bin of irrelevant history. It would appear that she realises not that her main purpose is that of maintaining the safeguards, meticulously put in place by previous generations who having learnt some serious lessons about devious Rome, knew that such was and would always be vital.
The Royal family deceive themselves! Instead of seeing: the ongoing deception throughout the history of the Roman Catholic Church, the papal dynasty and the scheming of their current exploits, the Queen, by her acts consistently assists Rome in its deceptions. By her blindness she infers at the same time, that God’s given Reformation and resulting Protestant faith is defunct, having never been more than perhaps merely an historical episode. Opponents to such a disgrace and ecumenical thinking are labelled extremist, are marginalised, and thus their view is considered irrelevant.
The Reformation is not even mentioned on the history page of the Church of England web-site, as ever the whole business is reported to be the work of Henry VIII, not Latimer, Ridley, Mortimer or any other Reformer.
Simply one has only to listen to the Queen’s Christmas Messages given of the last two years alone to find numerous examples of unbiblical and non-protestant thinking that show the treachery in which she has allowed herself to be associated and involved.
Her 1999 Christmas message included:
Referring to the lessons of the past she says that we need to draw from our history those constant and unchanging values which have stood the test of time, fairness, compassion, justice and tolerance. At the centre of our lives must be the message of caring for others, the message at the heart of Christianity and of all the great religions. Love thy neighbour as thyself gives us the guidance and the reassurance we need.
The problem with this view is that it suggests that all religions are not in conflict with each other and that they are all equal. This is not a Biblical view. It is amazing that this millennial speech missed Christ and the cross and showed that her hopes are man centred and not Calvary centred. She has deceived herself with the social gospel of love thy neighbour and thrown away the saving gospel of Christ died for your sins. Further how can the queen or anyone bring down Christianity to the level of the man-made religions of the world and still say they believe in God, the God of the Bible. At the centre of our lives must be obedience to Almighty God through Jesus Christ.
Her 2000 Christmas message included:
References made about Jesus’ powerful teaching of love God and thy neighbour. However, then we see a report of her meeting with the pope, which is against the law, against the statutes of the realm and into the bargain brings in the very confusion the pope wants into the minds of millions of unbelievers. We saw also that the queen wore black to meet this puppet of lies thus giving him the credence he craves in the eyes of the whole world. State visit or otherwise, if he insisted she wore black in deference to him, she should not have gone. He is but a fraudster. There was no need for a visit! Further there was at this meeting, a letter which was handed to the pope informing him of the queen’s hopes that the two religions [?!] would continue to advance along the path that leads to Christian unity and which offered thanks for the pope’s help and support in the peace process in Northern Ireland.
What a joke and an insult!
Several points arise here. How can a monarch who has promised to uphold the Protestant faith and throne say such things about unity? A false, ‘visible’, sort of unity at that. For unity in Jesus is for believers in him and thus it already exists in Christ’s true believers. There is incessant talk of unity and peace (pseudo), but true peace and unity is only available to Christians, as they are the only ones saved and in communion with Christ and his church of which he is the bridegroom.
Reciprocally a letter was presented by the pope which stated that he wanted evermore communion between Roman Catholicism and Anglicanism and emphasised that there can be no turning back from the ecumenical goal we have set ourselves in obedience to the Lord’s command.
How can the monarch accede to this and tolerate such a threat, especially as the reference is a deliberate misquote of scripture, used by all ecumaniacs. This statement by the pope is the very reason the safeguards were put in place! Sempre Eadem – Rome certainly is always the same even today! Further, who do ‘we’ think they are to make such declarations manipulating and forcing strategies upon the believers?
It should come as no surprise however, as we hear the very same threats being voiced against the nation’s doubts and involvement in the Europe Union.
What errors will be broadcast this year?
Returning to the current matter, according to a report in the ‘News Letter’ of 7th December ‘it is understood that the invitation comes after years [!!] of careful and gradual friendship-building [manipulating?] between two denominations’.
This sort of phraseology using the word denomination puts people off their guard by inferring that the two churches are on the same side and represent the truth or the same gospel. However, the Queen should know that this is not and never has been so, but she is obviously not good at discerning. During her Christmas message of 1999 she told of a remark by her first Prime Minister, Sir Winston Churchill:
‘the further backward you look the further forward you can see’
Evidently she has not as yet looked backward far enough for she would have otherwise been assured that the centuries of deceit, blasphemous lies, false doctrine and Roman made dogmas continue, are still applicable with new ones being created and applied in front of her face. This continues not only in her nation but is to continue also within the boundaries of her palaces!
According to a Buckingham Palace spokesman the invitation to the Cardinal was ‘in the spirit of co-operation, [?] unity and friendship’. ‘It is a sign of the ecumenical age we are living in.’ Has the queen put her hand to the plough but then looked backward?
Whom next - The Dali Lama – the earth worshipper, an Islamic leader, or a Hindu / Buddhist guru?
What is meant by the term ‘co-operation’? With whom or what, and in what way to what end, is the Queen co-operating when she is not so allowed?
The spokesman for the cardinal said that the cardinal was honoured by the invitation. More likely amazed that the strategy is working so well. Further according to ‘The Universe’ the spokesman said that ‘This is a further sign of the Queen’s own determination to promote ecumenical relations within the nation’.
Is the Queen guilty of duplicity then?
Why should the Queen want to do that?
The Queen’s ancestors rejected gestures towards the Church of Rome. They abided by the law and constitution of the realm, which she too has sworn to uphold and yet has, so far, miserably failed so to do. All the acts of parliament, Bills of Rights, 39 Articles, Coronation Oath were meticulously drafted and put in place to prevent the return of the blasphemous deception of Roman Catholicism from ever regaining a grip on this country and the throne. Not only in Northern Ireland do we see the treachery and the manipulation of Roman Catholicism into influential positions. Inch by inch the Roman Catholic church in its guise of a poor and defenceless animal has clawed back status from being allowed to build churches and then such on main roads to its present strategy.
Perhaps the Queen is falling into line with European thinking; that she is but a citizen of the E.U. and has no responsibilities. After all with the signing of the Maastricht Treaty the Queen (as advised by the Foreign Office) can vote in other EEC states and elections. Thus she is not a monarch but a citizen?
Does it really matter that the Queen has invited the Cardinal to preach? Simply, yes, because as Roman Catholicism is fraudulent and not the true gospel then what can be had from listening to such deception but the acquiescing to such. This is not allowed to her because it is contrary to Protestant belief. If one knows what is correct it is folly to spend time being told what is proven to be and known to be erroneous and to want to accept it, or worse, give credence to it in the eyes of others!
In fact the effects of the Queen’s invitation to the cardinal has already caused great repercussions, by undermining Biblical truth in the eyes of unbelievers, deceiving some believers also. Especially so since having been described in one newspaper as a ‘formal end’ to more than 500 years of suspicion between the Church of England and the Roman Catholic Church and that such has come about after years of bridge-building between the two faiths. [?]
Two faiths? Surely this implicitly implies that the two are neither one nor the same and so why the inference that this joining is vital. The reason for this is that it is necessary to the Roman Catholic strategy that people be brainwashed into thinking that the Protestant church is ‘separated from’ and not simply ‘separate from’ the Roman Catholic Church. This way, if the take-over works, the Church of Rome will be able to say that she has always claimed to be the Church of Christ and this proves it so to be. It does not really, for Jesus’ church is invisible. Jesus is not the capstone, the head thereof or even the focus of the Roman Catholic Church, as it maintains that it is she that holds that position with the pope as its head.
In light of the current Irish situation, a time when people are bending over backwards to be accommodating to the Republic, Roman Catholics and local Irish terrorists could this be the reason for the invitation; the cardinal being Irish? There again is it just part of the conspiracy as is similarly the giving of an honorary knighthood to an ecumenical American evangelist that sends hearers of the Word into the lions den of Roman Catholicism. Alternatively could it be due to the fact that the Queen is to visit Dublin in the new year and is likely to attend that most blasphemous deceit of the Roman Catholic web, namely the mass. The mass is likely to be held at the city’s pro-cathedral.
What has Rome surrendered to be so highly favoured by the idiot (Archbishop) of Canterbury, the Queen and various other ecumaniacs that try and force their erroneous thoughts on the rest of us? ? ? Still thinking? ? ? Er? The answer: NOUGHT!
The Roman Catholic Church and the pope see the word co-operation only in terms of how and what the Queen and the Anglican Communion will concede. Co-operation is not a two-way operation in this case; never was, never has been and certainly never will be!
When the Church of Rome states that the constitution, 39 Articles and Bill of Rights are offensive to Roman Catholics it is given airing time as though it was worth a consideration. However, any mention of the utter offensiveness of the Church of Rome’s behaviour, politics and fraudulent teaching is seen by the wet leaders of the Anglican and other churches, the government and the Royal family as nothing short of disagreeable, bigoted and out of touch with reality. The reality is that they fail to realise that they are rooted here and of the world and not followers of the Protestant faith of the constant, unchanging reality of the word of God, the Bible, which always shows its contents to not only be true but relevant and fact.
During the queen’s reign this country has seen the abolition of the death penalty yet the legalising of abortion, the repealing of the witchcraft act and yet implementing laws against the disciplining of children, the legalising of divorce, the legalising of homosexuality and the reduction in age of consent to 16, legalising of pornography and drugs. Euthanasia and cloning will no doubt follow. Further Sunday trading has been allowed, continuous attempts are made to try and change the constitution and the sovereignty of our nation has been given to Europe. The Queen herself has visited and welcomed the pope, was the first monarch to attend and take part in a Roman Catholic service attending vespers at Westminster Cathedral and was the first monarch since the Reformation to allow a Cardinal Archbishop to preach before them. We have the first Roman Catholic speaker of the House of Commons, first Roman Catholic Prime Minister (in essence), and the Queen has Roman Catholic advisors. The leader of the opposition is Roman Catholic.
While the Queen keeps her head above the surface of the Windsor soup, her son and heir is lost to the wind on spiritual matters. It is one thing to be tolerant and allow people to have their view but this should not mean that it should either be accepted as equal or valid to the truth, already revealed and on which the nation has been based for centuries. It is amazing that people have a willingness to consider such nonsense and challenges to Bible supremacy by all other religions let alone the claims of those religions which can so easily be discredited in comparison.
Protestant Biblical theology and doctrine remains opposed to Roman Catholic ministry and sacraments, such is rejected as unscriptural to God’s infallible word. In truth Roman Catholics dare not argue that their dogma can be found in the New Testament!
Roman Catholicism’s age-old problem is the question of authority and so they have to continue to peddle the theme of the inadequacy and opaqueness of the scriptures. Roman Catholic infallibility means that the Church can and does declare some things to be true even when it lacks the support not only of scripture but even of tradition itself. Such an example would be the Marian Dogmas, which, in fact do not represent an appeal to tradition more than the scriptures but is rather more a triumph of dogma over tradition!!
Concerning the infallibility of the Pope, this is serious fraud. In the ramblings of ARCIC this infallibility amounts to little more than saying that Rome claims its, no one else does so let Rome have this. Rather the point is that no one else would claim it because they have more sense. Strangely, when Jesus Christ made his claims, the majority did not believe him although so much was evident and supported by the scriptures. Yet regarding the dynasty of popes which has no scriptural support or other evidence, people including the Queen seem to be really rather gullible either embracing what they claim or in giving credence to it by their actions.
As Rome is consistently incoherent, muddled and self-contradicting why does the Queen invite a Prince of this political beast to preach to her and her family. The power and influence, which Rome plays, has only been gathered to itself via political intrigue, not any leading of the Holy Spirit.
God is the same today as he was when Hebrews was written. We are not called to an ecumenical collection of every guru and mystic who talks of love. No we are told to leave these worldly confusions and heresy and through identifying with the ostracised and crucified Christ be his reproach.
In the 18th January 1999 edition of the ‘Daily Telegraph’ an article stated that a consultation group recommended that the coronation should allow leaders of all other faiths to play a role.
Is this to make all feel inclusive and that all religious beliefs matter? Who would be excluded? But to have this happen would mean that Christianity would not be represented, believers would be excluded.
When Prince Charles says that he wants to be a Defender of Faith, is there a faith he wouldn’t defend. It is one thing to defend a persons freedom to choose to believe in something but it is quite another to incorporate something clearly contradictory to that which is known to be sound into the belief or in the running of a country. Would he embrace the hostility and dictatorial tenets of Islam in running in the British nation?
The Roman Catholic Church needs to gain an ever higher profile in the land. When it felt that it was the right moment to come into ecumenical structures in this country, the British Council of Churches dissolved itself in order to make this possible. Rome clearly sees that the apostate churches are compliant with her wishes and now she can gain a leading role and try and quash the Protestant nature and Biblical truth upon which it is founded.
A new sovereign is proclaimed at an Accession Council. Here they make a declaration and take an oath to preserve the Church of Scotland and also an oath to maintain the established Protestant succession. This was developed in the 17th century culminating in the Bill of Rights 1689 and the Act of Settlement 1701.
As the sovereign rules through Parliament the succession can be regulated by Parliament so that the sovereign can be deprived of their title through misgovernment.
The Act of Settlement confirmed that succession was by statute also. The Act laid down that only Protestants are eligible to succeed. Other Acts then confirm this.
Parliament with the Bill of Rights and the Acts of Settlement laid down various conditions which the sovereign must meet. A Roman Catholic is specifically excluded from the succession to the throne and the sovereign cannot marry a Roman Catholic and must also be in communion with the Church of England as well as swearing to preserve the Church of England and Church of Scotland. 50 years on the Queen is breaking every aspect and is not, for some reason, being dealt with.
You might ask why specifically Roman Catholics are barred. This simply stems from the experiences that this nation has had with Roman Catholicism. Its bloody hands and deceits testify to the dangers of which a repeat here is trying to be prevented through such exclusion. The reason no other faith is mentioned is because in the past another religion on the throne was inconceivable and none had endeavoured to try and establish itself in the monarchy. Today extra safeguards may have to be considered when necessary.
What Shall The End BE?