Menu Items
Start Page · Search
Rome In the News
Answers (Q&A)
Audio Sermons
Photo Gallery
Our Guestbook
Errors of Rome
Feature Articles
Union With Rome
Second Coming
Pope: Antichrist
Priesthood: Christ
Caustic Comments
History Lessons
Rome & Politics
Sword (Bible)
How To Witness
EIPS Lectures
Other Interest

Wednesday, September 20, 2017
Date Posted:

Gregory to Boniface
Rome On Orthodox Bloc
Put limbo into limbo
Paul VI and Aldo Moro
Break-Up Of Britain
Breach Wall of Secrecy
Crusade Is Faltering
Rome Dominating Europe
Father Christmas Bones
The Tainted Saint
Canonising John Paul
Rome Reaps What Sows
The ‘Hell of Nuns’ 2
The ‘Hell of Nuns’
Padre Pio Shrine
Unlikely Nun Supremo
Rome's Secret Weapon
The Irish Republicans
Irish Brigade In Italy
Pope's Irish Brigade
Why Pope Benedict XVI?
Where Rome Is Wrong 3
Where Rome Is Wrong 2
Where Rome Is Wrong 1
Athanasius ... Genius?
1st Pillar of Popery 5
1st Pillar of Popery 4
1st Pillar of Popery 3
1st Pillar of Popery 2
1st Pillar of Popery 1
Mandatory Celibacy
The Demon of Celibacy
What is the Individual
Infallibility of Pope
The Jesuits
Cult of Mary - 2
Cult of Mary - 1
Advance of Romanism: 2
Advance of Romanism: 1
Confess: Modern Sodom
The Perils of Popery
Purgatory Pickpocket
An Exposure of Popery
Popish Miracles
Punishment Of Heretics
The Eucharist, Or Mass
Doctrine Of Oaths
Who Intercedes? - 6
Who Intercedes? - 5
Who Intercedes? - 4
Who Intercedes? - 3
Who Intercedes? - 2
Who Intercedes?
Monasteries + Convents
Holy Orders
Rome's Rejection
Virgin Worship
The Jesuits
Saints And Angels
Duties Of Protestants
Condition / Prospects
The Inquisition
Popish Confirmation
Popish Baptism
Rome's Literary Policy
Clerical Celibacy
Image Worship
Extreme Unction
Catholic Unity
Communion In One Kind
Merit of Good Works
Auricular Confession
The Rule of Faith
Papal Infallibility
Luther Speak
Ten Commandments
Jesuit Oath Exposed
Imagery - II
Imagery - I
Antichrist to Light
Saint Worship
Scarlet Woman
Indulgences - Tetzel
Christ and Pope
Relics of Rome
Refuge of Lies
Papal Infallibility
Rome's Immorality
Rome Unchanging
True Papal Church
The Mass

Rome - Unchanged and Unchanging

The Roman Catholic hierarchy's public humiliation and disciplining of the Irish Republic's President Mary McAleese for participating in a Church of Ireland Holy Communion service in Dublin on December 7, 1997, has exposed the unchanged and unchanging character of the Church of Rome since the Dark Ages.
Professor Arthur Noble

"Passing commitments to Churches," writes 'Monsignor' Denis Faul in his Belfast Telegraph article of [recent article], "are no more acceptable than passing affairs with women or men. A Catholic person taking communion in another Church is like a married person committing adultery."

Regardless of the hypocrisy of a Church hierarchy which moralises about alleged adultery while itself being plagued with paedophilia, the assault on the religious freedom of the Eire President not only unmasks the sham of Rome's overtures to other Churches, but also reminds us that the false dogma involved in this controversy - that of transubstantiation - is nowhere to be found in the Bible.

1. False Overtures

The shameless authoritarian interference by the Roman hierarchy confirms that even in this enlightened 20th century the Church of Rome has never abandoned or even weakened her historical claim to dominion over all other Churches and the political State itself. It is proof that behind the modern fancy dress disguise of ecumenism with its attendant euphemisms of 'reconciliation', 'dialogue', 'church unity' and 'bridge-building' - all cunningly devised to lure her 'separated brethren' unsuspectingly into her fold - lurks the familiar old hag, the Great Whore of Revelation, unswervingly and unashamedly true to her motto 'semper eadem', 'always the same'.

In this regard, Faul is still true to the presumptuous arrogance of Pope Leo I, who at the Council of Ephesus in 449 first claimed authority over Church and State as a divine right. The Popes subsequently grew in power, wealth and pride until they claimed universal dominion over Church and State through the world. From that time, Kings and Emperors were crowned, deposed and degraded at the pleasure of these pompous Bishops of Rome.

A notable example from English history was the dispute over the appointment of Stephen Langton as Archbishop of Canterbury, when King John (1199-1216) was made to kneel before the Pope's legate, and his crown was ignominiously kicked from his head. One of the meanest of his retainers was made to retrieve it, before he handed it back to the King in token of England's being a vassalage of the Papacy, with a tribute of 1,000 marks a year as the infamous "Mary's Dowry". King John was forced by a Papal interdict to submit to the Papacy, and so-called Papal 'authorisation' was given to Philip of France to invade England.

The whole of British history records repeated struggles between the Crown and the Vatican, culminating in the supremacy of the former in 1688 and the subsequent safeguarding of this country against Papal despotism through the provisions of the Bill of Rights and the Coronation Oath.

The 'gracious' invitation to the 'separated brethren' to return to the fold was prepared for public consumption. Their own history and the outburst of 'Monsignor' Faul should serve to confirm to all Protestants and Unionists that the Roman Catholic Church today is only wearing a different mask which hides her real character and political aims. Rome has adopted a change of face and tactics, but no change of heart. The 'gracious' invitation to the 'separated brethren' to return to the fold was prepared for public consumption. Sadly and tragically, it was also eagerly swallowed by an unsuspecting, apostatising Protestantism which fails to see that a so-called 'good' Roman Catholic, whether a Head of State or not, is today just as much under the 'thumb' as in the past.

So would this country be if the Roman Church succeeded in destroying our Protestant Constitution; for all Popes are bound by the Syllabus of Pius IX, Article 77 of which states that the Church "has the right to require that the Catholic religion shall be the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all others".

2. False Doctrines

Referring to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994), Faul quotes: "Ecclesiastical communities derived from the Reformation and separated from the Catholic Church have not preserved the proper reality of the Eucharistic mystery in its fulness, especially because of the absence of the Sacrament of Holy Orders." Hence he is reiterating unaltered the 13th-century dogma of transubstantiation, i.e. the alleged "conversion of the whole substance of the bread and of the whole substance of the wine into the Blood [of Jesus Christ]".

The first teaches that the whole substance of the bread and wine are truly, literally and substantially changed into the substance of "the body, blood, and soul and divinity of Jesus Christ". For the Church of Rome the "sacrifice of the mass" depends on this absurd dogma, for, if the bread and wine are not "transubstantiated", or "changed", there is, according to the Roman Catechism, "no proper sacrifice". Yet the dogma of transubstantiation contradicts the doctrine of the sacrifice of the mass. The first teaches that the whole substance of the bread and wine are truly, literally and substantially changed into the substance of "the body, blood, and soul and divinity of Jesus Christ". Yet the mass is called an "unbloody sacrifice". In one there is the blood the same as that shed by Christ and in the other it is unbloody!

The false doctrines of Rome not only deny the full, sufficient and perfect sacrifice made by Christ on the Cross; they ignore the fact that Christ's command implied no more that symbolism: "Do this in remembrance of me." (Luke 22:19) For Christ can not be offered again as there is "no more offering for sin" (Heb. 10:18), "no more sacrifice for sins" (Heb. 10:26).

Holy Mother Church, however, curses us to all eternity if we do not believe:

  1. that a man can make from a wafer a Being Who made him
  2. that what has already existed can begin to exist
  3. that a body born of bread is the same as a body born of woman;
  4. that a body born 2,000 years ago is the same as a body made today;
  5. that a part contains the whole;
  6. that a body which is limited and local can be in all places at one and the same time;
  7. that the same body can be dead and alive at one and the same time;
  8. that a morsel of paste is the same as a fully grown man;
  9. that a body which cannot see corruption is the same as that which may corrupt;
  10. that a glorified body may be immolated and sacrificed;
  11. that Christ may pass Himself on the road - Priest A, having Christ in his pocket, on the way to Dublin, and Priest B, having the same Christ in his pocket, on the way to Belfast!
In an old magazine is to be found the following anonymous assessment:

"In the annals of history, remote or near, whether found in civilised or barbarous nations, there has never been broached or propounded an absurdity so monstrous as that of Transubstantiation. The man who can believe it is beyond the arena of being reasoned with; if he acted in the same way in temporal things he would be considered mad."

Gibbon, in his Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (vol vi, chapter lix, p. 510), appropriately calls transubstantiation and the Inquisition "the two most signal triumphs over sense and humanity".

To tamper with that Oath would be to undo the work of the Reformation, to betray the martyrs slaughtered and burned at the stake, and to return this country to the superstitions and bondage of the Dark Ages. Adam Smith, in his Wealth of Nations (p. 337), well said: "The constitution of the Church of Rome may be considered the most formidable combination that was ever formed against the authority and security of civil governments, as well as against the liberty, reason, and happiness of mankind."

In Article XXXI of the Established Church of England this is called one of Rome's "blasphemous fables and dangerous deceits", and the Westminster Confession of Faith states that Jesus, by His perfect sacrifice "once offered up unto God hath fully satisfied the justice of His Father". The Act of Settlement requires every British Sovereign, on coming to the Throne, to deny on oath that any man can change bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ, and to confess on oath that Mary worship, and the Romish mass, are "superstitious and idolatrous". To tamper with that Oath would be to undo the work of the Reformation, to betray the martyrs slaughtered and burned at the stake, and to return this country to the superstitions and bondage of the Dark Ages.

Back to Top

Email: eips_info@yahoo.co.uk
Return to EIPS Main Menu

Menu Items
- Start Page · Search - Rome In the News - Answers (Q&A) - Audio Sermons - Photo Gallery - Our Guestbook 
- Errors of Rome - Feature Articles - Union With Rome - Second Coming - Falsehoods - Pope: Antichrist 
- Priesthood: Christ - Caustic Comments - History Lessons - Rome & Politics - Contemporary - Sword (Bible) 
- How To Witness - EIPS Lectures 
Site best viewed with Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.0 in 800x600 resolution.
© 1999 Ian Paisley. All rights reserved.