Sunday, June 7, 2009

The "Lipa Experience"

Our Lady of Mediatrix of All Grace

When the Lord calls you to a specific vocation, you have but one choice -- obey. This is what happened when a friend, sister Zelfa Fabregas, decided to enter the religious life as a Carmelite nun in Lipa Carmel. She entered the Carmelite Monastery as an observer for 3 months. I don’t know if she personally chose the date when she entered, but if she did, she chose the perfect date -- May 31, 2009. In the old liturgical calendar, May 31 is the feast of Our Lady of Mediatrix of All Graces. As we all know, the Carmelite Monastery in Lipa is also the place where the Blessed Mother is believed to have appeared to a young local girl who was newly admitted in that monastery.

The Fabregas family together with Bro. Marwil Llasos on their way to Lipa

And so that day, the Fabregas Family together with Bro. Marwil Llasos, a close friend who also happens to be the spiritual director of the praesidium in the Legion of Mary where sis Zelfa belongs to, headed to Lipa to accompany sister Zelfa in her admission to the Monastery. Bro. Mars asked me if I could join them and I readily agreed. At first, I thought it was just another pilgrimage to a Marian site that their praesidium is making but when bro. Mars told me that sister Zelfa is entering the monastery that day, I became even more excited to come. I went to Lipa as quickly as I could. I arrived there shortly after the Fabregas family, just in time for lunch. We were delighted over the sumptuous meal that the monastery staff prepared. Bro. Mars asked me if I brought my camera --- Oooops! I forgot. Hmmm, I had a funny feeling that bro. Mars already sensed that we will be needing a camera for a very important event that was yet to unfold before all of us. Good thing bro. Joel brought his’.

Sister Zelfa and family having lunch at the monastery's refectory

After lunch, we hurried to the Church to attend Mass. It was celebrated by Fr. Melvin Castro, a prominent figure in the Pro-life Advocacy movements and one of the leading proponents of the Apparition in Lipa. After the Mass, I and bro. Mars approached Fr. Melvin for a souvenir picture taking. Fr. Melvin whispered to Bro. Mars that the visionary of the Lipa apparitions is present that day. We were surprised to know that the Visionary, Sr. Teresing Castillo, was the little charming lady behind us! Our eyes opened wide and we were speechless the moment we knew of her presence. She was right there behind us! It felt like the heavens opened and the angels started to blow their trumpets in a heavenly harmony!

Me, Fr. Melvin Castro, Sr. Teresing Castillo, and Bro. Mars

So that’s what the camera is for. We took some pictures with her, said a little prayer, then waved goodbye to her. That was really wonderful! I told Bro. Mars that it was like seeing the seers of OL of Fatima or St. Bernadette in person! He joyfully nodded in agreement.

The time came for sister Zelfa to enter the Monastery. We anticipated it to be a dramatic event so I and Bro. Mars decided to give the family a little privacy by staying outside. To our surprise, Sister Zelfa requested us to be present in the event. We went inside to witness that painful but fulfilling episode of her life. We were happy to know that the whole family, by then, was ready to give their blessing to Zelfa. The Mother Prioress opened the door to the convent to receive their new observer. It was a double jackpot for us because as we were rejoicing for sister Zelfa’s entry to the monastery, we were also lucky to have the chance to view once more the apparition site. The last time we went to carmel, we were also given the chance to see the garden where the Blessed Virgin appeared but only from afar.

Sister Zelfa when she was being admitted by the Mother Prioress of the Monastery. Notice the garden at the background. It is the place where the Blessed Virgin appeared to Sr. Teresing.

We quickly took a picture of it, although the mother prioress was a little bit uneasy with the idea. The picture was too dark that the garden was merely visible. This time, the view was much clearer and the grills were opened. Bro. Joel prepared to take a picture of sister Zelfa’s reception to the convent with the apparition site as the background but suddenly --- toot toot toot, battery empty. Of all the shots, why in this one did the battery go empty?? Bro. Joel tried again but to no avail. Maybe it’s the Blessed Virgin’s way of telling us that she prefers everything about the apparitions to be private to the nuns until the church finally approves of it. And I think that's not very far from now. We said our goodbyes to sis Zelfa then we left Carmel, Lipa.

On our way home, we decided to drop by at a Capuchin-run retreat center also in Lipa.

It is also where a capuchin seminary is located. You can see there its distinctly Franciscan touch because of the emphasis in nature. The garden there is a paradise on earth! Unfortunately, it was raining hard so we weren’t able to stroll around the park. We visited the chapel instead.

The Mama's boys

We prayed there for a while, took picture, then we went back home. It is really wonderful to experience Lipa.

Thursday, April 30, 2009

Mary Worship Angers God!!! -by. Bro. Marwil LLasos

Mary Worship Angers God!!!

The article The Pagan Origin of Mary Worship which appears in a virulently anti-Catholic website ( asserts that Mary worship angers God.

I agree. Indeed, to worship Mary or any other creature is hateful to God – that would be rank idolatry, plain and simple. That’s why we Catholics don’t worship Mary. We simply honor her.

Last time I checked Church History, the Catholic Church excommunicated a group that worshipped Mary – the Collyridians. I will discuss this extensively later.

The writer of the article comments that as far as Catholic theology is concerned, it is technically impossible for Catholics to "worship" Mary. He says that "worship" has been defined as applying only to "God.” He adds: “the worship of Mary is termed "hyperdullation" (sic) or "veneration," and of the Saints, "dullation.”

The ignorance of the anti-Catholic writer with regard to Catholic teaching is clear as daylight. What on earth is “hyperdullation” and “dullation”? Perhaps, the writer meant hyperdulia and dulia. He didn’t get it right.

Notice, too, that the writer does not provide the definition of hyperdulia and dulia (which he erroneously called hyperdullation and dullation, respectively). Yet, he attacked the Catholic veneration of Mary even if he doesn’t know what is exactly meant by veneration. Nevertheless, he states that “Catholics do not ‘pray to’ Mary,” rather “they ‘ask Mary to pray for us.’” And his conclusion: “But to any non-Catholic, this is exactly the same as praising and praying to someone, i.e., worshipping them.” His basis? Shakespeare’s famous cliché: "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet."

For the anti-Catholic writer, “praising” and “praying” mean “worshipping.” This is clear Biblical illiteracy. While it is true that we praise God when we worship Him, it is equally true that we can praise fellow human beings. That is certainly not against the Bible as it clearly shows that humans may be praised. And Mary herself is praised in the Bible: “Of all women you are the most blessed, and blessed is the fruit of your womb. Why should I be honoured with a visit from the mother of my Lord?” (Lk. 1:42-43, JB). Applying the (false) logic of the anti-Catholic writer, it would seem that the Bible itself encourages the worship of Mary because it praises her!

Praying also doesn’t always mean worshipping. To “pray” only means to “ask,” “beseech” or “request.” For instance, we read in Acts 8:34: “And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? of himself, or some other man?” In the Old Testament, we find the patriarch Jacob addressing the angel: “And Jacob asked him, and said; Tell me, I pray thee, thy name. And he said, Wherefore is that thou dost ask after my name? And he blessed them there” (Gen. 32:29).

The original meaning of prayer as “request” survives to this day in legal jargon. A lawyer ends his pleading with a “prayer” where he requests the Court to give his client the relief sought. The lawyer pleads: “Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed unto this Honorable Court…” Does this mean that the lawyer worships the Court by praying to it? I don’t think so.

Praying to Mary, the angels and the saints is talking to them as our intimate friends and family members and asking them to pray for us to God. After all, we belong to the same “household of faith” (Gal. 6:10) and we are “but fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God” (Eph. 2:19).

Placed against the backdrop of Sacred Scripture and plain common sense, the Catholic bashing of the anti-Catholic yet Biblically illiterate author holds no water.

The Queen of Heaven

The anti-Catholic writer quotes Jeremiah 7:18: “The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the QUEEN OF HEAVEN...that they may provoke me to anger.” He uses this verse to assail the title with which Catholics call Mary – The Queen of Heaven. He argues –

Let's continue our look into darkness - the worship of Mary as the queen of heaven and CO-REDEEMER with JESUS CHRIST [Lord have mercy, Jesus].

The statement is riddled with errors and false accusations against the Catholic Church. First, Catholics don’t worship Mary as the Queen of Heaven and Co-Redeemer with Jesus Christ. While we do use these titles in reference to Mary, still these do not mean that Mary is in equal footing with Christ. We are clear about what the titles of Queen of Heaven and Co-Redemptrix signify. They don’t make Mary a goddess.

First of all, the Mary of the Catholic religion is NOT the Mary of the Bible. They have simply taken her name and superimposed it on top of a pre-existing goddess.

This is a baseless assertion. The Catholic Mary is the Mary of the Bible, and not the Mary of sola scriptura. Catholic teachings on Mary are all Bible-based and are taught either explicitly or implicitly in Scripture.

I have already discussed and refuted the oft-recurring canard that our Mary is a superimposed pagan goddess in my article “Pagan Goddesses and Mary.” You may read it here:

The above passage from Jeremiah was written hundreds of years BEFORE Mary was born – the queen of heaven was already being worshipped and the people were making God mad.

The Queen of heaven surrounded by a legion of Angels

The “Queen of Heaven” in Jeremiah 7:18 and 44:17 actually refers to the pagan goddess Ishtar or Astarte, a near-Eastern goddess of fertility. God had all the reason to get mad at what the people are doing – they were worshipping a false god! Look at what they were doing –

The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger (Jer. 7:18).

But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incense unto the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, as we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings, and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem: for then had we plenty of victuals, and were well, and saw no evil (Jer. 44:17).

So, the people really worshipped Ishtar by making cakes to her and pouring out drink offerings to her. Do we do that to Mary? No. In fact, as I said, the last time I checked Church History, the Catholic Church condemned and excommunicated those who did. St. Epiphanius of Salamis condemned the Collyridians in the 4th-century Arabia who worshiped Mary. He writes:

Certain women there in Arabia have introduced this absurd teaching from Thracia: how they offer up a sacrifice of bread rolls in the name of the ever-Virgin Mary, and all partake of this bread (Panarion 78:13)… It is not right to honor the saints beyond their due (Ibid. 78:23) … Now the body of Mary was indeed holy, but it was not God; the Virgin was indeed a virgin and revered, but she was not given to us for worship, but she herself worshiped him who was born in the flesh from her.... Honor Mary, but let the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit be worshiped, but let no one worship Mary, . . . even though Mary is most beautiful and holy and venerable, yet she is not to be worshiped (Ibid. 79:1, 4).

Catholics do refer to Mary as the Queen of Heaven but in a much different sense than the pagan goddess Ishtar. Our position is quite simple: Mary is Queen because Jesus is King. Mary is Queen of Heaven because her Son is the King of Kings whose “kingdom is not of this world” (Jn. 18:36).

The fact that a title is improperly and erroneously applied to a pagan deity does not mean that it cannot be properly and validly applied to someone else.

The title “King of Kings” was a pagan title applied to Artaxerxes in Ezra 7:12. However, the same title is applied to God in 1 Timothy 6:15 and to Christ in Revelation 17:14 and 19:16. The same title was used for Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel 2:37. Of course we know that Jesus Christ is the true King of Kings and Lord of Lords (Rev. 17:14; 19:16).

Another example is the title “Morning Star.” The title was used for Lucifer in Isaiah 14:12. The angels of God are also referred to as “morning stars” in Job 38:7. In Revelations 22:16, Jesus is called the “bright morning star.”

It is clear that a title wrongly applied in one case can be used correctly and validly in the proper case.

Catholics are not the only ones who use the title of Queen of Heaven to Mary. The founder of Protestantism, Martin Luther, considers the title “Queen of Heaven” as “true enough name and yet does not make he a goddess” (Luther’s Works 21:327).

Evangelical scholars admit the validity of Mary’s title of Queen of Heaven. In his survey of Johannine literature, Prof. Tim Perry concluded: “In the Gospel, Mary symbolizes God’s people. In Revelation, at least in its canonical context, she retains her corporate referent and is exalted as the Queen of Heaven” [Tim Perry, Mary for Evangelicals (Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 2006) p. 113].

This is the Bible talking, we're not looking at history books, we are looking at God's holy word. Blessed be the Lord Who hath preserved His word so that we don't have to be deceived.

The Coronation of the Blessed Virgin Mary as Queen of Heaven and Earth

God’s Holy Word – the Bible – do points out to Mary’s role as the true Queen of Heaven. Thus, Mary is the true Queen of Heaven because her Son is King whose kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36).The Seer of Patmos discloses that he saw that there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars” (Rev. 12:1). This Woman who wears a crown of 12 stars is none other than Mary, the Mother of the King who is destined to rule the world with an iron rod (Rev. 12:5; cf. Ps. 2:9). Evangelical Prof. Tim Perry states that “[f]or the seer, she [Mary] is the exalted Heavenly Queen who is Eve and the persecuted faithful at once” [Tim Perry, Mary for Evangelicals (Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 2006) p. 114].

Let us indeed thank the Lord for preserving His Word. And He made use of the Catholic Church, His Church, to precisely do that task!

I’ve heard Catholics say things like, "I don't really pray to Mary, I just talk to her. She helps me and she can talk to Jesus for me." What is praying but talking to the Lord?

This is Scriptural blindness, pure unadulterated prejudice and absolute ignorance. Yes, praying is talking to the Lord. But it doesn’t mean we can talk (call, or pray) to our brothers and sisters to ask for their prayers to the Lord.

As early as Old Testament times, there have been holy people – servants of God – who invoke or pray to the saints or holy ones of God. One such example was Job, a righteous and honest man who feared God and shunned evil (Job 1:1). The Bible tells us that he invoked the saints as in fact he was taunted for this by his friend Eliphaz saying, “To which of the saints will you call?” (Job 5:1). This only reveals that Job had the constant practice of invoking God’s saints. We are certain that Job was doing the right thing considering that he was a righteous man compared to his evil friends. The anti-catholic writer is like Eliphaz who taunts Catholics who, like Job, invoke the saints.

Where do you read in the Bible that you are supposed to ask Mary for anything? You can't find that command anywhere in the Bible because we are supposed to ask Jesus Christ Himself.

This is the height of sola scriptura. It is not necessary for us to read in the Bible to ask Mary for anything. It is enough that the Bible commands us: “First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men” (1 Tim. 2:1). We must ask others to pray for us - it is a Biblical imperative. Asking Mary (the angels and the saints) fulfill that command.

Yes, Mary can hear our request. She may not be omniscient as God, but certainly she is aware of what is happening to us in this world. The testimony of Scripture is clear: the saints in heaven, including Mary, are aware of what is happening here below and they are able and willing to help us through their prayers. Our Lord taught us to pray that the will of the Father be done on earth as it is in heaven (Mt. 6:10). Since it is the will of the father that we pray for each other on earth, we are assured that it is also the will of the Father that we pray for each other even in heaven.

While it is true that we can ask Jesus Christ Himself, yet it is also perfectly alright to ask the righteous to pray of our behalf because “prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects” (James 5:16).

But then I get an answer like, "Well, it doesn't exactly say that we have to pray to her, but ...If it don't (sic) say it, then we don't have the liberty to add it in!

There’s absolutely no way for us to validate the anti-Catholic author’s claim that he received an answer from a Catholic who allegedly said that the Bible doesn’t exactly say that we have to pray to Mary. Yes, but we’re not adding to what the Bible says when we pray to Mary. We simply follow what the Bible means when it enjoins every Christian to pray for each other (1 Thes. 5:25; James 5:16; 2 Thes. 3:1; Acts 8:24; Col. 1:9, 4:3, 12; 2 Thes. 1:11; Rom. 15:30; Eph. 6:18-19; Heb. 13:18). The point is clear: we need to pray for each other. And we ask Mary (and the saints), our fellow Christian, to pray for us when we pray to her.

This IS what the Bible says: "For there is one God, and ONE MEDIATOR between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." - 1st Timothy 2:5

Indeed, that is what the Bible says. I just don’t think that the anti-Catholic writer knows what the Bible means.

1 Timothy 2:5 should not be isolated from the context. The verse does not refer to exclusivity of mediation of Jesus Christ. It does not rule out other mediators with Christ. The Bible testifies that God allows his creatures to participate in His scheme of salvation.

Contrary to what the anti-Catholic writer had done, 1 Timothy 2:5 should not be singled out of Chapter 2 of the First Letter of Paul to Timothy. The entire chapter actually deals with our participation with the mediatorship of Christ. If we start reading from verse 1 on to verse 7, we realize that Paul is actually commanding Christians to be mediators and intercessors for all because God is one God for all, and Christ is Mediator for all. Again, it should be emphasized that 1 Timothy 2:1-7 must be read as a unit. We must not isolate the text in 1 Timothy 2:5 from the rest of the chapter.

It is clear from the original Greek text that “heis” in 1 Timothy 2:5 means “pre-eminence” or “primary.” It suggests inclusiveness. It admits other mediators with Christ. In fact, 2 Timothy 2:1 commands all Christians “that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men.” Praying for someone is an intercessory prayer, which is an act of mediation.

"But tradition and Pope Pious the so-and-so says..." Hold it right there. Let's break it down to see what Jesus Christ thinks about the tradition of men:
And he said unto them, "Full well ye REJECT the commandment of God, that ye may KEEP your own tradition ... Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye." - Mark 7:9, 13.

Is there any question about what the Lord thinks of tradition?

In my reply above, I haven’t quoted any papal document or even cited the Tradition of the Church. And by the way, was there ever a Pope “Pious the so-and-so” in the catalogue of the Popes? The anti-Catholic writer’s ignorance and prejudice rear its ugly head all too often.

At any rate, let me respond that the anti-Catholic writer misused Mark 7:9, 13 in attacking Sacred Tradition. Misuse of God’s Holy Word is sacrilege, sin.

Does Mark 7:9,13 condemn all traditions, as the anti-Catholic writer would have us believe? No.

Jesus condemns human traditions that void God’s Word. The anti-Catholic writes uses this to condemn all tradition. He fails to realize, however, that these verses have nothing to do with the tradition we must obey that was handed down to us from the Apostles. The Pharisees, in their human tradition of the Corban, gave goods to the temple to avoid taking care of their parents. This voids God’s law of honoring one’s father and mother as pointed out by Our Lord in verses 7:10-11 and also in Matthew 15: 4-5.

The Bible does not condemn all traditions. In fact, it unequivocably commands us to obey Sacred or Apostolic Tradition:

“Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle” (2 Thes. 2:15).

“Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us” (2 Thes. 3:6).

“Now I praise you that ye remember me in all things, and hold fast the traditions, even as I delivered them to you” (1 Cor. 11:2).

“But the new catechism has changed things." No it hasn't. The Catholic religion is the same heretical cult, leading its followers straight to hell with its false sacramental gospel--incidentally, there is no purgatory and no outward activity like belonging to an organization can save your soul. According to the 1992 catechism, Mary is sinless, a perpetual virgin, the mother of God (God ain't got no mother!), queen of heaven and co-redemptrix with Jesus Christ [Lord, have mercy, Jesus] (see articles 491,494,495,508,964,966,968,969)--the same ol' stuff.

Of course, the Catechism doesn’t change the consistent teachings of the Church. Truth does not change.

The above statement from the anti-Catholic writer if full of regurgitated accusations against the Catholic Church. Notice that the anti-Catholic writer, froth in the mouth, has not proven anything against the Church’s doctrines on purgatory, the sacraments and the Church’s teachings on Mary as the Mother of God, the Immaculate Conception of Mary and her Perpetual Virginity. We have already answered the attack on Mary’s title as Queen of Heaven above. We shall also explain Mary’s role as Co-Redemptrix below.

What surprises me is that the anti-Catholic writer merely rehashes old, long-answered and already-debunked accusations. Now wonder, the anti-Catholic writer takes his cue from his father and master, the accuser of the brethren in Revelations 12: 10: “the accuser of our brethren has been thrown down, who accuses them day and night.”

How can she be co-redeemer with Jesus Christ when the Bible says (speaking of Jesus): Neither is there salvation in ANY other: for there is NONE other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. -Acts 4:12. You can't get clearer than that.

Here, the anti-Catholic writer bashes a Catholic doctrine he doesn’t know anything about. Notice that he does not even define what is meant by Co-Redemptrix. Neither does he even bother to check on what we Catholics mean by that title.

We don’t deny that Jesus is our one and unique Savior. Without Jesus no one can be saved, including Mary. Truly, the redemptive sacrifice of Our Savior Jesus Christ was completed in Calvary (objective redemption). The application of the redemptive sacrifice, however, will continue in history (subjective redemption). St. Paul clearly emphasizes this point in Colossians 1:24: “Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church.”

By the solemn words of Our Lord Jesus, we can all participate and cooperate with Him in the salvation of souls as He said, “I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me, you can do nothing” (Jn. 15:5). Thus, we too can save (Jude 24; James 5:20; 1 Tim. 4:16). Jesus Christ, the God-Man, is the sole Principal Cause of salvation by His life, passion, death and resurrection. We who belong to His Mystical Body who cooperate with Him in saving our fellowmen are but “instrumental causes” of salvation.

Truly then, we are co-redeemers with Christ. But Mary’s co-redemption is qualitatively distinct because of its maternal dimension. As the Mother of the Redeemer, she suffered most with Him. Her suffering as the one most intimately related to Christ was prophesied by holy Simeon, “Yea, a sword shall pierce through thy own soul also, that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed“ (Lk. 2:35). The ultimate fulfillment of that prophecy was in Calvary where the Savior redeemed us by His Cross. And at the foot of the Cross there stood His Mother (Jn. 19:25). If St. Paul could say: “I am crucified with Christ” (Gal. 2:20), how much more Mary? She was there at the foot of the Cross witnessing the suffering of her Son.

"But, the immaculate conception..." That's not in the Bible. "But she was sinless..." That's not in the Bible. "But she is our intercessor to Jesus..." That's not in the Bible. "But she's the mother of God..." That's not in the Bible.

These are all in the Bible. It’s just that the opaque blindness, prejudice and bias of the anti-Catholic writer prevent him from seeing the truth even if it is right there in his very Bible. The problem with the anti-Catholic writer is that his sole authority in matters of faith is his own personal and private interpretation of the Bible. And that is not in the Bible!

"But she suffered as much as Jesus did on the cross..." That's not in the Bible. "But she's more compassionate than God--like your mom is more compassionate than your dad..." That's not in the Bible.

This is a red herring. Catholics don’t believe these things. So, it is clear that the anti-Catholic writer is bashing Catholics for something that they don’t believe. What can be more unjust than that?

"But my family is catholic..." Your family does not determine your eternal salvation--your relationship with Jesus Christ does: “Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you. And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.” -2 Corinthians 6:17-18

Indeed, but the Lord Jesus Himself commands us to honor our father and our mother (Mt. 15:4-6). And He condemned the Corban rule because it nullifies this Commandment (Mt. 15:6, Mk. Mk. 7:9-11).

Notice also that the verse (mis)quoted by the anti-Catholic writer has nothing to do with rejecting the family per se. It refers to fleeing from iniquity: “Do not be mismated with unbelievers. For what part have righteousness with iniquity? What fellowship has light with darkness? What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever? (2 Cor. 6:14-15).

The chopping of Biblical passage by the anti-Catholic writer is meant to deceive. Worse, it is sacrilegious misuse of God’s Sacred Word.

Jesus said, "They that worship the Father must worship him in spirit and in TRUTH." God will not accept your worship based on a lie. Repent or perish.

Yes, truly. God will never accept worship based on a lie. That’s why he will not accept any worship from the anti-Catholic writer and his ilk. We have proven that all the accusations of the anti-Catholic writer are false, hence, blatant lies. The Bible says: “Do not spread false reports. Do not help a wicked man by being a malicious witness” (Exo. 23:1). Beyond doubt, the anti-Catholic writer did bear false witness against his neighbor in gross violation of God’s commandment (Exo. 20:16; Dt. 5:20).

The Queen Mother crushes the head of the serpent.

“You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desire. Was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies!” (Jn. 8:44).