Deceit in the Vatican
It is an absolute fact that God dearly loves EVERY Catholic.
After all, He went to the Cross on their behalf. Nor can one deny
the commitment that many Catholics have in their denomination.
What God despises however is the system and the organization
which supports doctrinal deceit and heresy.
Now that the Media have cooled down from the almost irrational
fervour of flooding the news media with minute by minute accounts
of the death of one Pope and the election of a successor, it
seems to be a good time to do the decent thing and kill a few
sacred cows we have been exposed to which never should have been
given breath in the first place. Then clean air of truth will
There are 3 things that have been trumpeted long and hard in
the previous months in relation to the events surrounding the
Papacy, and it is these that I have in mind to comment on –
Sainthood for Pope John Paul, The Papacy tracing back to the
Apostle Peter as the 1st Pope, and Peter’s supposed mandate
as the Rock on which the Church is to be built.
of knowledge of the Scriptures, or worse, a deliberate flouting of God's Word.
All the above contribute to a thinly veiled belief that the
Catholic Church is the ONLY true Church. If this were not so, why
would we read these words regarding the election of the new Pope
under the byline of Brian Murphy in the Courier Mail on April 5th
2005? – "Protestant groups and nondenominational
evangelicals across Latin America – could get extensive
attention during the enclave. In 2003, John Paul complained of
"the insidious problem of sects" seen as eroding 500-year-old
Catholic traditions of Latin America."
If you are a Protestant, an evangelical or a Pentecostal, you
should be alarmed at reading about this brand of spiritual
dictatorship. I was born with the privilege of freedom of speech
and freedom of religion. If I am deemed to be an "insidious
problem" then that is religious vilification of the worst
kind according to current legislation.
Let us go back to the 3 points for discussion and check out
two unimpeachable sources of information to find truth –
the Holy Bible, and confirmed, provable history. We will approach
the 3 points for discussion in reverse order.
PETER THE ROCK
The Scripture used here by the Catholic Church to claim that
Peter was given a mandate to be the foundation of the Christian
Church are the words in Matthew 16 which follow Simon
Peter’s revelation of Christ being the Son of the living
God. Jesus calls Peter blessed because he could not have received
that revelation except by God Himself, or as Jesus says –
"My Father in heaven." Then Jesus, in verse 18 says these words
"And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this
rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not
prevail against it.
The word "Peter" or Cephas was given to Simon by
Christ when he called him to be a disciple, Cephas is a Syriac
word, meaning a stone. The meaning of the passage is obvious; and
had it not been that the Church of Rome has abused it, and
applied it to what was never intended, no other interpretation
would have been sought for. Jesus Himself is the Rock on which
the Church is founded. Psalm 18:46 prophesies that by saying
"The Lord lives! Blessed be my Rock! Let
the God of my salvation be exalted." Isaiah 44:8 asks
"Is there a God besides Me? Indeed there is no other
Rock; I know not one."
Jesus is the Rock who is also the Chief Corner Stone
(1 Peter 2:9) and He was telling Peter He was going to use him
foundationally to make known the gospel to both Jews and
Gentiles. This was accomplished. See Acts 2:14-36, where he first
preached to the Jews, and Acts 10, where he preached the gospel
to Cornelius and his neighbours, who were Gentiles. Peter had the
HONOUR of laying the foundation of the church among the Jews and
Gentiles; and this is the plain meaning of this passage.
But Christ did NOT mean, as the Roman Catholics say he did, to
EXALT Peter to supreme authority above all the other apostles, or
to say that he was the ONLY one upon whom he would build his
church. Peter in fact, was flawed in some of his actions and he
was not the one calling the shots. Acts 15 shows us the advice of
JAMES, and not that of Peter, was followed. Galatians 2:11
reveals PAUL withstood Peter to his face, because he was to be
blamed - a thing which could NOT have happened if Peter had Papal
Moreover, neither Peter, or any Pope or Church leader has been
given any authority to act as an intermediary, or as a "Vicar of
Christ," and therefore stand as head of the Church. Colossians 1:18
specifically says this office belongs to Jesus alone
"And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the
beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may
have the preeminence."
PETER THE FIRST POPE??
Unbiased records, too numerous to print here, clearly show a
web of deceit has been woven by the Catholic hierarchy in
relationship to the line of Popes which places Peter the Apostle
as the first in that line. Here are just two that show the
Catholic Church has been caught out revising history!
…the absence of any historical evidence permitting
the assertion that Peter exercised an office of an episcopal
nature in Rome." (Encyclopedia Britannica Vol 13 Pg 955/6
The title "Pope" was given from the 3rd to the 5th
century, TO ANY BISHOP and sometimes to SIMPLE PRIESTS
….but, since about the 9th century, reserved in the West
exclusively for the Bishop of Rome. (Encyclopedia Britannica
V111 Pg 118 1979 edition)
Note the year of publication of these quotes. Yet if one looks
at any Catholic website, they list Peter as the first Pope and
even attribute years of reign to each subsequent Pope. What
doesn’t add up here is answered by the fact that the
Catholic Church have been devious in the extreme, and have been
caught out shaping history to suit their story, something that we
usually only see done on a large scale by dictatorial Governments
for political reasons, to whitewash embarrassing facts of the
If these facts cast the gravest of doubt upon the succession
of the Papacy, we need to ask why this lie has been perpetrated?
Why is the Catholic Church so pervasive in the world? Why is the
Catholic Church rushing headlong into Ecumenism? Perhaps the
answer lies in the fact that according to the inerrant Word of
God, there is a mystery Babylon, one world Church, which will
rise and fulfil the aims and the objects of the antichrist. It
doesn’t take a Rocket Scientist to work out the most likely
candidate, does it?
Pope John Paul has hardly been buried and the clamour has
already begun for him to be ‘beatified’ to sainthood
- whatever that means! Already someone has given testimony of a
miracle that he performed in a Central American country which
could be counted towards the 3 evidenced miracles required by the
Catholic Church before one can be made a saint.
Once again, the Catholic Church shows a paucity of knowledge
of the Scriptures, or worse, a deliberate flouting of God’s
Word. The truth of the matter is this. Every person who is truly
born again by the Spirit of God is referred to in the Word of God
by many redemptive names such as the redeemed, the elect, a royal
priesthood, the sheep of His pasture, believers and so on. But
the most exciting name of all given to the committed Christian is
the title "saint." Just a cursory glance at Scripture shows us
that this is so – Aaron was called in Psalm 106:16,
"the saint of the LORD." How could that
be? Catholicism hadn’t been invented then!
Philippians 4:21-22 records, "Greet every
saint in Christ Jesus. The brethren who are with
me greet you. All the saints greet you, but
especially those who are of Caesar’s household." Do
you notice something here? All these saints are ALIVE!!!
Psalm 116:15 says, "Precious in the sight of the LORD is
the death of His saints." These people were
definitely saints before they died!
Paul says in Romans he is going to Jerusalem to minister to
the saints, and to give to those
saints who are poor. Obviously the term "saints"
includes more than just those who are in ministry. In Ephesians 3:8
Paul says he is the least of all the saints.
This is not a corpse speaking, nor is it a prophetic word!
The word "saints" appears 61 times in the New Testament alone,
and not once is it used in any way to describe a specific
individual, who through good works, piety or whatever else
(including miracles) has gained that title by that means. This is
Bible truth - if you are a born again believer, the King of Kings
and the Lord of Lords calls you a saint. Now
isn’t that good news?