HOW DID THE BIBLE COME IN EXISTENCE?

PROTESTANTS THINK THE BIBLE CAME FROM THIN AIR... -CD2000

Source: SVMMA APOLOGIA

In the one-hundred-year period extending roughly from AD 50 to 150, a number of documents began to circulate among the churches, including epistles, gospels, memoirs, apocalypses, homilies, and collections of teachings. While some of these documents were apostolic in origin, others drew upon the tradition the apostles and ministers of the word had utilized in their individual missions.

For more than 300 years of Christianity, there was no definitive compilation yet into a single book of these ancient documents like what is known to the world at present. From the beginning it was expected that certain of these documents would be read in the public gatherings of the church, though there were disputes and questions over the authenticity of certain documents like the Letter to the Hebrews, Letter of James, Second Letter of Peter, Second and Third Letters of John, Letter of Jude and the Revelation, known as the Antilegomena. At that time, these materials were accepted by some local churches and others did not. However, because of the increase in the amount of documents being circulated (whether authentic or not), the Church found it necessary to discern and choose which of these materials are inspired by the Holy Spirit. How was it done? Below is the timeline of the compilation of the Holy Bible:

70 BC: The translation of the Old Testament books from Hebrew to Greek known as Septuagint (LXX) by the 70 Jewish scholars for the Jews in Diaspora in Alexandria. This is the Old Testament version used by the apostles and early Christians.

50-150 AD: The writing of the New Testament books and the circulation of other apocryphal documents.

96 AD: Some letters of Paul were known to Clement I, bishop of Rome, together with some form of the “words of Jesus”; but while Clement valued these highly, he did not regard them as “Scripture” (“graphe”), a term he reserved for the Septuagint.

100 AD: The Council of Jamnia, held in Yavneh, was a Jewish council at which the canon of the Hebrew Bible had been finalized. It excluded the seven books of the Old Testament which are part of its Greek version, the Septuagint. These books are regarded by the Church as inspired and are known as the deuterocanonical.

130-140 AD: Marcion of Sinope, a bishop of Asia Minor who went to Rome and was later excommunicated for his views, was the first of record to propose a definitive, exclusive, unique canon of Christian scriptures. He taught that there were two Gods: Yahweh, the cruel God of the Old Testament, and Abba, the kind father of the New Testament. Marcion eliminated the Old Testament as scriptures and, since he was anti-Semitic, kept from the New Testament only 10 letters of Paul and 2/3 of Luke’s gospel (he deleted references to Jesus’ Jewishness). His gospel is called the Gospel of the Lord.

145-163 AD: Justin Martyr, an early Christian apologist, mentioned the “memoirs of the apostles”, which Christians called “gospels” and which were regarded as on par with the Old Testament. In his works, distinct references are found to Romans, 1 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, and 2 Thessalonians, and possible ones to Philippians, Titus, and 1 Timothy.

160 AD: Tatian the Assyrian, an early Christian theologian, composed a single harmonized “Gospel” by weaving the contents of the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John together along with events present in none of these texts. The narrative mainly follows the chronology of John. This is called the Diatessaron [“(Harmony) Through Four”] and it became the official Gospel text of the Syriac church, centered in Edessa. He rejected Paul’s Letters and Acts of the Apostles.

185 AD: Irenaeus, bishop of Lugdunum in Gaul, in his Adversus Haereses, denounced various early Christian groups that used only one gospel, such as Marcionism which used only Marcion’s version of Luke, or the Ebionites which seem to have used an Aramaic version of Matthew, as well as groups that used more than four gospels, such as the Valentinians (A.H. 1.11). Irenaeus declared that there can’t be either more or fewer than four, presenting as logic the analogy of the four corners of the earth and the four winds (3.11.8).

ca. 200 AD: Origen Adamantius, early Christian theologian, accepted 22 canonical books of the Hebrews plus Maccabees plus the four Gospels but Paul “did not so much as write to all the churches that he taught; and even to those to which he wrote he sent but a few lines.”

ca. 200 AD: The periphery of the canon was not yet determined as of this time. According to one list, the Muratorian Canon (named after Fr. Ludovico Antonio Muratori who discovered it at the Ambrosian Library in Milan in the 18th century), which was compiled at Rome, the New Testament was comprised of the 4 gospels; Acts; 13 letters of Paul (Hebrews is not included); 3 of the 7 General Epistles (1-2 John and Jude); and also the Apocalypse of Peter. Each “city-church” (region) still has its own Canon, which is a list of books approved for reading at Mass (Liturgy).

ca. 215 AD: Titus Flavius Clemens (Clement of Alexandria), an early Christian theologian, made use of an open canon. In addition to books that did not make it into the final 27-book New Testament but which had local canonicity (Barnabas, Didache, I Clement, Revelation of Peter, the Shepherd, the Gospel according to the Hebrews), he also used the Gospel of the Egyptians, Preaching of Peter, Traditions of Matthias, Sibylline Oracles, and the Oral Gospel. He did, however, prefer the four church gospels to all others, although he supplemented them freely with apocryphal gospels. He was the first to treat non-Pauline letters of the apostles (other than II Peter) as scripture-he accepted I Peter, I and II John, and Jude as scripture.

ca. 300 AD: The Alogi, an early Christian group, rejected the Gospel of John (and possibly also Revelation and the Epistles of John) as either not apostolic or as written by the Gnostic Cerinthus or as not compatible with the Synoptic Gospels.

300 AD: The Old Syriac was a translation of the New Testament documents from the Greek into Syriac. In the Coptic Versions, Coptic was spoken in four dialects in Egypt and the materials were translated into each of these four dialects.

ca. 303 AD: The making of what is currently known Codex Claromontanus canon (named after the town of Clermont-en-Beauvaisis in France from where it was procured by the Calvinist scholar Theodore Bezza in the late 16th century), a page found inserted into a copy of the Epistles of Paul and Hebrews, has the Old Testament, plus Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, 1–2,4 Maccabees, and the New Testament, plus 3rd Corinthians, Acts of Paul, Apocalypse of Peter, Barnabas, and Hermas, but missing Philippians, 1–2 Thessalonians, and Hebrews.

330 AD: Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea, recorded his own New Testament canon which includes the holy quaternion of the Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, the epistles of Paul, the epistle of John, the epistle of Peter, the Apocalypse of John, the epistle of James and that of Jude, also the second epistle of Peter, and the second and third epistles of John.

331 AD: Roman Emperor Constantine I commissioned Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea, to deliver fifty compiled Scriptures for the Church of Constantinople. Athanasius (Apostolic Constitution 4) recorded Alexandrian scribes around 340 AD preparing the Canon for Constans. Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus are among of these ancient compilations together with the Peshitta and Codex Alexandrinus.

350 AD: Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, included in his Catechetical Lectures (4.36) the Gospels (4), Acts, James, 1-2 Peter, 1-3 John, Jude, and Paul’s epistles (14), but listed the Gospel of Thomas as pseudepigrapha.

360 AD: The making of the so-called Cheltenham/Mommsen Canon (named after German classical scholar Theodor Mommsen who discovered it in 1886 from a 10th-century manuscript belonging to the library of Thomas Phillips at Cheltenham, England), which contains the 24-book Old Testament and 24-book New Testament that provides syllable and line counts but omits Hebrews, Jude and James, and questions the epistles of John and Peter.

363 AD: The Synod of Laodicea was one of the first synods that set out to judge which books were to be read aloud in churches. It canonized 22-book Old Testament and 26-book New Testament (excludes Revelation).

367 AD: In his Festal letter, Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, gave a list of exactly the same books as what would become the 27-book New Testament canon, and he used the word “canonized” (kanonizomena) in regards to them. He also listed a 22-book Old Testament and 7 books not in the canon but to be read: Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Sirach, Esther, Judith, Tobit, Didache, and the Shepherd of Hermas.

374-377 AD: Epiphanius, bishop of Salamis, listed the following canon in his Panarion 76.5: Gospels (4), Paul’s epistles (13), Acts, James, Peter, 1-3 John, Jude, Revelation, Wisdom, Sirach.

380 AD: The redactor of the Apostolic Constitutions attributed a canon to the Twelve Apostles themselves as the 85th of his list of such apostolic decrees: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John; the fourteen Epistles of Paul; two Epistles of Peter; three of John; one of James; one of Jude; two Epistles of Clement; and the Acts of the Apostles.

382 AD: The Synod of Rome (presided by Pope Damasus) started the ball rolling for the definition of a universal canon for all city-churches. It listed the New Testament books in their present number and order.

ca. 382 AD: Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus (Jerome), a Roman presbyter, was commissioned by Damasus I, bishop of Rome, to revise the Vetus Latina (“Old Latin”) collection of Biblical texts in Latin then in use by the Church. Once published, it was widely adopted and eventually eclipsed the Vetus Latina and, by the 13th century, was known as the “versio vulgata” (the “version commonly-used”) or, more simply, in Latin as vulgata or in Greek as βουλγάτα (“Vulgate”).

385 AD: Gregory of Nazianzus, bishop of Constantinople, produced a canon in verse which agreed with that of his contemporary Athanasius, other than placing the “Catholic Epistles” after the Pauline Epistles and omitting Revelation. This list was ratified by the Synod of Trullo of 692 AD.

inter 386-388 AD: John Chrysostom, bishop of Constantinople, was the first (in his Homilies on Matthew) to use the Greek phrase “ta biblia” (the books) to describe both the Old and New Testaments together.

393 AD: The Synod of Hippo Regius in North Africa accepted the present canon of the New Testament.

394 AD: Amphilochius, bishop of Iconium, in his poem Iambics for Seleucus, nephew of St. Olympias, discussed debate over the canonical inclusion of a number of books, and almost certainly rejects the later Epistles of Peter and John, Jude, and Revelation.

397 AD: The third Synod of Carthage, which refined the canon for the Western Church, sent it to Innocent I, bishop of Rome, for ratification. Its list is similar to the present canon of scriptures. In the East, the canonical process was hampered by a number of schisms.

ca 405 AD: Innocent I, bishop of Rome, in ratification of the canon defined by the Synod of Carthage, sent the list of the sacred books to Exsuperius, Gallic bishop of Toulouse, which was identical with that of the Ecumenical Council of Trent.

419 AD: The fourth Synod of Carthage reaffirmed the canon defined by the previous synod in its present number and order (similar to the Ecumenical Council of Trent).

551-62 AD: Flavius Magnus Aurelius Cassiodorus Senator, Roman statesman and writer, in his Institutiones Divinarum et Saecularium Litterarum, omitted 2 Peter, 2-3 John, Jude and Hebrews.

787 AD: The Second Ecumenical Council of Nicaea, which adopted the canon of Carthage. At this point, both the Latin West and the Greek / Byzantine East had the same canon. However, the non-Greek, Monophysite and Nestorian Churches of the East (the Copts, the Ethiopians, the Syrians, the Armenians, the Syro-Malankars, the Chaldeans, and the Malabars) were still left out. But these Churches came together in agreement, in 1442A.D., in Florence.

1199 AD: Innocent III, bishop of Rome, banned unauthorized versions of the Bible as a reaction to the Cathar and Waldensian heresies. The synods of Toulouse and Tarragona (in 1234 AD) outlawed possession of such renderings. But there is evidence of some vernacular translations still being permitted while others were being scrutinized.

ca. 1245 AD: Stephen Langton, archbishop of Canterbury, and Hugo Cardinal de Sancto-Caro, dominican titular bishop of Santa Sabina, developed different schemas for systematic division of the Bible. It was the system of Archbishop Langton on which the modern chapter divisions are based.

1380 AD: The first English translation of the Bible was by John Wycliffe, the founder of the anti-Catholic group named Lollardy. He translated the Bible into English from the Latin Vulgate. This was a translation from a translation and not a translation from the original Hebrew and Greek. Wycliffe was forced to translate from the Latin Vulgate because he did not know Hebrew or Greek.

1442 AD:  At the Ecumenical Council of Florence, the entire Church recognized the 27 books. This council confirmed the Roman Catholic Canon of the Bible which Damasus I, bishop of Rome, had published a thousand years earlier. So, by 1439 AD, all orthodox branches of the Church were legally bound to the same canon. This is 100 years before the Reformation.

1448 AD: The Hebrew Old Testament was divided into verses by a French Jewish philosopher and controversialist by the name of Isaac Nathan ben Kalonymus (Mordacai Nathan).

1456 AD: Johannes Gensfleisch zur Laden zum Gutenberg, a German publisher and inventor of a movable type printing, produced the first printed Bible in Latin. Printing revolutionized the way books were made. From now on books could be published in great numbers and at a lower cost.

ca. 1500 AD: The first person to divide New Testament chapters into verses was an Italian Dominican biblical scholar Santi Pagnini, but his system was never widely adopted.

1514 AD: The Greek New Testament was printed for the first time by Erasmus. He based his Greek New Testament from only five Greek manuscripts, the oldest of which dated only as far back as the twelfth century. With minor revisions, Erasmus’ Greek New Testament came to be known as the Textus Receptus or the “received texts.”

1522 AD: Polyglot Bible, in which group of editors was led by Diego López de Zúñiga and funded by Jiménez Cardinal de Cisneros, was published. The Old Testament was in Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, and Latin and the New Testament in Latin and Greek. Erasmus used the Polyglot to revise later editions of his New Testament. Tyndale made use of the Polyglot in his translation on the Old Testament into English which he did not complete because he died in 1534 AD.

1536 AD: In his translation of the Bible from Greek into German, Martin Luther, a former Catholic monk and priest who became the primary figure of the Protestant Reformation, removed four New Testament books (Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation) and placed them in an appendix treating them as less than canonical as well as the seven Old Testament books (Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch plus the additional texts in Esther and Daniel) labelling them as apocryphal.

1546 AD: At the Ecumenical Council of Trent, the Catholic Church reaffirmed once and for all the full list of 27 books. The council also confirmed the inclusion of the Deuterocanonical books which had been a part of the Bible canon since the early Church and was confirmed at the councils of 393 AD, 373 AD, 787 AD and 1442 AD. At Trent, the Church of Rome actually dogmatized the canon, making it more than a matter of canon law, which had been the case up to that point, closing it for good.

1551 AD: Robert Estienne, a French printer and classical scholar, created an alternate numbering in his edition of the Greek New Testament which was also used in his 1553 publication of the Bible in French. Estienne’s system of division was widely adopted, and it is this system which is found in almost all modern Bibles.

1566 AD: Sixtus of Siena, a dominican theologian, coined the term “deuterocanonical” to describe the seven Old Testament books that had not been accepted as canonical by the Protestants but which appeared in the Septuagint; and defined for the Roman Catholics of the terms “protocanonical” and the ancient term “apocryphal” in his work Bibliotheca Sancta ex Præcipuis Catholicæ Ecclesiæ Auctoribus Collecta (Venice 1566). 

16th century to present AD: The HOLY BIBLE composed of 73 canonical books (46 in the Old Testament and 27 in the New Testament) based on the infallible decree of the holy Catholic Church. Thus, the great Tridentine Council declared: “But if any one receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church, and as they are contained in the old Latin vulgate edition; and knowingly and deliberately contemn the traditions aforesaid; let him be anathema.”

THE TIMELINE of the development of the biblical canon is the living proof that the holy Bible was not handed down by Christ to His apostles as it is. The Bible did not even come down from the heavens as what it looks like at present. The truth is:

IT WAS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH WHO CHOSE WHICH BOOKS ARE INSPIRED AND COMPILED THEM INTO A SINGLE BOOK WHICH SHE CALLED THE BIBLE. THUS, IT IS THE BIBLE WHICH CAME FROM THE CHURCH AND NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

However, despite this historical fact, the holy Church did not claim authorship on those divine scriptures. For her, “God is the author of Sacred Scripture” (CCC 105). And, she added: “To compose the sacred books, God chose certain men who, all the while he employed them in this task, made full use of their own faculties and powers so that, though he acted in them and by them, it was as true authors that they consigned to writing whatever he wanted written, and no more” (CCC 106).

Remember, “the Christian faith is not a religion of the book but of the Word of God, a word which is not a written and mute word, but the Word is incarnate and living” (cf. CCC 108).

A 2.5 MILLION (ONLY) MEMBERS OF THE IGLESIA NI CRISTO® NOW A COLLONIAL SUPREMACIST WHICH IS AN AFFRONT TO DEMOCRACY AND THAT IS UN-FILIPINO!

Iglesia ni Cristo: From Colonial-Ecumenical to Supremacist

Buddy Gomez
Source: ABS-CBN

Truly impressive, the devotion and discipline displayed by the individuals who responded to matters taken up in my last blog. (READ: 2015: Iglesia ni Cristo’s Year of Errors?) Never have I received such ‘patronage’ albeit mostly masquerading as brickbats. The fervor, almost bordering on the fringe of ferocity, along with an in-your-face expression of unflinching devotion to Iglesia ni Cristo (INC) indoctrination are indeed admirable. In fact, awesome. Were I a dictator desirous of assembling an army of loyally blind adherents, such is the behavior I would exact. Somewhat scary, yes? Happily, I received no threats of eternal damnation. Nonetheless, one responder called me an over-the-hill pedophile!

Much of the ‘fan mail’ centered on what they uniformly denounced as rumors and gossip. Their collective anger and discomfort have been stoked by the reported purchase of an Airbus jetliner (plus an executive jet, not mentioned in the last blog) and a Forbes Park mansion for the Executive Minister, expenditures all drawn from Iglesia ni Cristo community funds. This now public information was originally sourced from two items written by veteran newspaper columnist Emil Jurado of the Manila Standard and by the late able and credible Rufo Aries (bless his soul) for an investigative report in the Rappler, a Philippine-based news website. Both appeared in late July this year and remain unrefuted in mainstream media.

I enjoy sharing verified information, fruits of readings and research, commenting upon them in essays. Of course, just like you folks, unless you are candidates for beatification, I also enjoy gossip, rumor and conspiracy theories. However, when I publicly utilize these, they are always labeled as such. I am entitled to my opinion but never to my own made-to-fit facts.

Of the jets and the mansion, there has been no official denial, much less a demand for an apology and retraction, from the leadership of the Iglesia. Gossip? Rumor? Or, Truth. Perhaps, a strategic decision from up high was taken. Do not rock the boat. Do not aggravate. Do not exacerbate. Enough already! “Silence is golden….” But, wait, that’s not biblical. So, how is this then: “…blessed are the meek…” (Matthew 5:5) or “…..turn the other cheek….” (Luke 6:29 and Matthew 5:39)

As a Filipino, I am proud of the expertly accomplished rise of Felix Y. Manalo in his chosen field and the ensuing organizational success of INC today which he trailblazed. Who would not be? Kadugo natin! (Our blood kin.) From just thousands in the 1940s, they now call upon 2.5 million congregants worldwide housed in about 1300 chapels, home congregations and cathedrals, with the vast majority being in the Philippines, naturally. INC is now also in the lucrative business of education, information, entertainment and amusement.

Felix Y. Manalo, the Iglesia’s founder, is unquestionably a Philippine social phenomenon that deserves to be recognized for the physical and material advance of INC as a Filipino organization and religious institution. I am not qualified to speak of spiritual salvation and theology. Let the clerics, ministers, pastors, mullahs and lamas joust and tussle over life’s imponderables. I simply happen to be one with the rest of our multitudes who exult and jubilate at sterling international accomplishments of fellow Pinoys ---blood kin-- regardless of fields of endeavor. As we all know, recently these have been mostly in the field of sports and music. Well, here is one truly outstanding Filipino who has made it to the world stage of religious organizations. Let us rejoice and be proud!

This does not mean, however, that we ought to be in consonance with and accept Manalo’s/INC’s interpretative teachings and parochial dictat especially those that infringe upon freedom of conscience, to which all humanity is heir. Blatant examples that sorely stick out are the INC’s anti-labor union membership rule; the herded collective bloc voting as a practice of political leverage, and the supremacist “no salvation” outside the realm of the INC doctrine. And the unforgettable chauvinist declaration: “….we now ought to reject… …the Catholic Church and the different protestant churches, for they are not of God, but of Satan and the devil.” (from ‘Pasugo,’ Aug. ‘61--an INC doctrinal tract, meaning ‘Message.’)

The control exercised over INC members’ political and economic rights are neither Christian nor democratic. Supremacism is an affront to democracy. In fact, as a citizen governed, not by the Bible nor by the Quran, but by his Constitution, by its civil and criminal codes, one has to realize that the INC restrictions are un-Filipino!

Iglesia ni Cristo did not start that way. The journey of the INC’s success as astutely steered by its founder, the incremental, developmental and innovative adjustments in doctrine and religious practices that Felix Y. Manalo took and directed will all be worthy of academic investigation and documentation. How such edifying endeavor can ever be achieved, however, will depend upon the Iglesia. And that ain’t gonna happen anytime soon, brethren.

Succinctly. At birth, a colonial legacy. With baby steps, ecumenical. Today, a supremacist.

History has an irreversibility clause to its contract with society. The beginnings of Felix Y.Manalo and of the Church he spawned and nurtured is now indelible. He was born a Catholic towards the sunset of Spain in the Philippines (1886). The new colonial master, the United States of America, took over the islands and allowed/encouraged the entry of Protestantism. As a young apostate to the religion of his birth, Felix had dalliances at the smorgasbord table of newly available religious persuasions. Before deciding that he wished to and could “preach” on his own, he had religious internships with American mentors. First with the Methodists. This was followed by a stint with the Presbyterians, until he actually preached for the 7th Day Adventists. This is not religious promiscuity, silly! It is ardent search for the convenient and useful truth. Iglesia ni Cristo was the personal epiphany of Felix Y. Manalo after a span, calculated to be at least some 10 years, of sitting at the feet of colonial American Protestant tutors.

Imagine, had Commodore Dewey sailed away from Manila Bay and President McKinley washed his hands of the Islands, Protestantism would not have come at all, at the time that it did. But America kept the new territorial possession. (Don’t we know it!) Then came the non-Catholic Christian pastors and ministers. Isn't it easy to see that without America, there would have been no Felix Y. Manalo and no Iglesia ni Cristo?

Prodded by a sense of gratitude for his earlier multi-church peregrinations as well as a need for acceptance within the Christian community, the self-declared “last messenger” of Christianity decided that he will of assume his church’s leadership in a public ceremony. Invitations were issued for the event of his official assumption as “Pastor and Administrator” of INK (Cristo was initially spelled with a K). The ceremony took place morning of Christmas Day of 1918 at Cine Gloria in Calle Sande, Tondo, Manila. (Btw, INC does not recognize and observe Christmas). Very noteworthy, as we look back, is that this landmark ceremonial solemnity was officiated by invited “Bishops and pastors of the different churches established in the islands.” (“mga Obispo at mga Pastor ng mga iba’t ibang mga Iglesia na natatatag sa Kapuluan,” so the invitation printed in Tagalog says.) They were even enumerated: Alejandro Reyes, Victoriano Mariano, Gil Domingo, Guillermo Zarco, Nicolas Fajardo, Emiliano Quijano and Roque Bautista. (The wonders of the Internet and Google! How else would I have known the foregoing!)

Inarguably, Christmas Day of 1918 was an ecumenical assembly for Felix Y. Manalo and his Iglesia! But wait, didn’t the INC ‘Pasugo’ clearly state that these guys “are not of God…but of Satan and the devil”?

As Yul Brynner sang in the musical “The King and I” -- ”A puzzlement!”

Rappler: Sister of INC head stopped from testifying

Source: Rappler

Months since the Iglesia ni Cristo (INC) controversy erupted, the estranged sister of Iglesia ni Cristo head Eduardo Manalo appeared in public for the first time. On Monday, Lolita "Lottie" Manalo-Hemedez appeared before a Quezon City court to testify, but was unable to present her testimony. The INC, represented by lawyer Serafin Cuevas Jr, asked to defer the proceedings. Cuevas argued that the Manalos' answer to the INC petition should not be admitted into records of the case because it was filed 8 days from the due date. She is set to testify on the next hearing date on December 16. Lottie, her brother Angel, and their mother were expelled from the church last July by their elder brother after they claimed that their lives were in danger. Angel later spoke out against corruption within the church.

Read More: Sister of INC's Eduardo Manalo appears in court, stopped from testifying

Blogger ‘Ebangelista’ writes Inquirer, warns Iglesia elders -Inquirer

Inquirer.net - Beware, you’re being watched, blogger “Antonio Ramirez Ebangelista” has warned Iglesia ni Cristo (INC) leaders who carry on with irregularities in the homegrown, 101-year-old Christian sect.

Ebangelista is the pseudonym of a blogger who not only exposed what he called irregularities in the sect, but also dished out timely updates on expelled INC ministers who were allegedly illegally detained or kidnapped.

So the minute a Sanggunian member is in another country [perpetrating] money laundering or lavishly squandering church funds for their personal whims, or if any corrupt minister is harassing or coercing brethren anywhere in the world, or if any of the Sanggunian [ministers] even stink of corruption such as attempting to smuggle cash (from our offerings) outbound from other countries, they will be reported to us and we will fiercely expose them,” he said in an open letter to the Inquirer.

“Unfortunately, Sanggunian ministers arrogantly still think that they are above the law, that they can muscle their way through the current mangled government of our country, and that they can bribe any official there is to make all of these go away,” he said.

Several other bloggers, going by the names of Sher Lock, Nina Agiluz, Katnize Everdene, Benito Affleck, Danica Rosales, Alexander Tobias and Kelly Ong, have emerged to expose corruption and abuses in the sect, Ebangelista said.

They are now part of a growing number of “defenders” around the world out to restore scandal-rocked INC to its “unblemished state,” he said.

“None of us knew each other, none of them knew who I was, yet we were banded together under the same divine goal: To eradicate the corruption inside the church by exposing atrocities of the Sanggunian and their cohorts,” he said, referring to the INC governing council.

“And with the rapidly increasing number of defenders every day, coming from every locale of every district of every country, we are now everywhere,” he said. (CONTINUE READING HERE!)

Iraqi Christians Story on How they Escaped Muslim Terrorists

It's Imminent, Islam will Rule the United Kingdom unless....

The British Anglican Church has corrupted it's religion from the core by importing pagan practices such as homosexual consenting adults to be Ministers, women priests and worse ordained as bishops, married and divorced priests. As an anti-dote, Islam is offering an spiritual extreme alternative such as opposing homosexual union (not even allowing both sexes to legally marry them), women's rights, their role in public and strictly implementing religious piety.  While Islam is gaining its ground, UK's Prime Minister Cameron still cannot name it's enemy disassociating Muslim Extremists and Muslim Terrorists from ISLAM itself. WAKE UP PEOPLE or you will be DOOMED! -CD2000

Church of England 'one generation away from extinction' after dramatic loss of followers
Source: Independent

The choir process through York Minster during a Eucharist Service attended by the Church of England Synod (Photo by Christopher Furlong/Getty Images) (Photo by Christopher
Furlong/Getty Images)

The Church of England has lost nearly two million followers in the last two years and is on the brink of "extinction", it has been warned.

The number of people in the UK who describe their beliefs as being Church of England or Anglican dropped from 21 per cent to 17 per cent between 2012 and 2014- a loss of around 1.7 million followers. The number of Anglicans in Britain is now thought to stand at around 8.6 million.

The former Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey, has warned that unless urgent action is taken, the organisation is just “one generation away from extinction.”

The figures have been revealed as part of the NatCen’s British Social Attitudes Survey, the UK’s longest running poll of public opinion.

Over the same period, the poll found that the number of Muslims in Britain grew by close to a million making it the fastest growing religion in the UK. 4.7 per cent of Britons now describe themselves as Muslim, amounting to 2.4 million.

When asked about their religious belief, the survey found that the most common response was having no religion. 49 per cent of people do not describe themselves has having any belief.

Peter Brierley, a former Government statistician who advises religious groups, said of the new figures: “It is very serious for the Church of England and they know it.”

“The problem is that it has a lot of elderly members, but when they die off there aren’t enough younger people to replace them.”

Holy Mass with the Pope in Central African Republic

POPE FRANCIS WELCOME CEREMONY IN UGANDA, AFRICA

CET: Where Did the Bible Come From?

Source: Diocese of Tyler

The following article by Father Joshua Neu of the Diocese of Tyler appeared in the September-October edition of the Catholic East Texas magazine.

Catholics in the Bible Belt often feel as if somehow the Bible belongs to non-Catholic Christians. Although we read the scriptures at Mass, everyone else seems to be more comfortable with the Bible than Catholics. In reality, the Bible is a very Catholic book. It comes from within the Church, was discovered and protected by the Catholic Church, and every Christian today who proclaims that it is the Word of God affirms this teaching of the Catholic Church.

The Bible comes from the Catholic Church.

Ask any East Texan if they own a Bible, and the overwhelming majority will answer “yes.” Ask them if the Bible is true, and again nearly every single one will say “yes.” Ask them who authored it, and almost every man, woman, and child will say “God.” We can see that in all things Biblical our neighbors have a great faith. Now ask, “How was this book assembled, and by what process did it come to be in your hands?” You won’t get many answers at all.

Living in the “Buckle of the Bible Belt,” Catholics often have a vague feeling of inferiority about the Bible. Perhaps it seems like a non-Catholic book, quoted so frequently and so extensively by non-Catholics in our part of the world that it can seem like “their” book, not “our” book.

The Bible is, in fact, a very, very Catholic thing. It was written within the Catholic Church, and its assembly was entrusted to the Church. Every time a Christian person, anywhere, uses the Bible and testifies that it is in fact the word of God, they are placing their faith in Catholicism, whether they realize it or not.

Not a Book, A Library

The Bible is not really a book, but a library. Usually it is bound together in one volume so you can keep it with you and use it often-Catholics should do this-but in fact it is more of a library, a compilation of 73 separate books. Composed over the course of a thousand years or more, these books come in several types: narrative history, poetry, prophecy, and even letters from one person to another. The library is of course divided into the Old and New Testaments, the Old being the holy books received from Judaism and the New being the holy books specific to Christianity.

As Christians, we believe these books to be inspired by God. “Inspiration” comes from the same root as “respiration” and concerning Scripture means “God-breathed.” When we state that a book of the Bible is inspired, we mean that God is ultimately the author. A human person held the pen and used his own language and style of writing to compose the book, but he wrote what God intended him to write without error. This is the claim Catholics make about the Bible, and why we hold the books of the Bible in such high regard – they are, in fact, the written Word of God.

POPE FRANCIS in KENYA (AFRICA)

KATHRYN BERNARDO, TIWALAG NA BA SA IGLESIA NI CRISTO®-1914?

FELIX MANALO the MOVIE: Why his self-proclaimed Title "God's Messenger in These Last Days" was deliberately omitted?

Iglesia Ni Cristo® not bowing down Against expelled Iglesia Ni Cristo® members

Eduardo V. Manalo registering the all-Filipino church Iglesia ni Cristo® (Church of Christ) in Rome, Italy in 1997

Known for their sneaky strategy, anyone who picks a fight against the sect founded by Felix Manalo in 1914 the Iglesia Ni Cristo®, is met with bullying, coercion and oppression to pressure him/her to withdraw the case. To such desperate extent, they would mount massive paid-rallies to ensure everyone gets the message “DO NOT MESS WITH THE IGLESIA NI CRISTO®”. But who is afraid of them anyway? The lawyer of the expelled INC™ members will not be cowed even Ka Eduardo V. Manalo would face them squarely mano y mano!
Source: Inquirer.net

Iglesia counsel hits back at Angel Manalo lawyers

A COUNSEL of the Iglesia ni Cristo (INC) has turned the tables on the lawyers of expelled member Felix Nathaniel “Angel” Manalo, blaming them for the recent death of Manalo’s driver.

Wilfredo Santos, who also represents the INC in another case against the expelled siblings of INC executive minister Eduardo Manalo, sued Trixie Cruz Angeles and Ahmed Paglinawan for criminal negligence over the death of Benjamin Arellano Jr.

Before his death, the driver was staying with Angel at No. 36 Tandang Sora, Quezon City, where Angel and sister Lottie Hemedez had been holed up since July, when the religious group’s leadership crisis became public. The INC has a pending petition in court seeking to bar unauthorized persons from entering the property.

In a complaint filed in the city prosecutor’s office on Tuesday, Santos said Angeles and Paglinawan apparently knew as early as Oct. 17 about Arellano’s condition but did not report it to the court or other authorities.

The complaint noted that the respondents went to the compound on Oct. 17 together with two doctors, but were prevented from entering as Santos told them to first seek permission from the INC or the court.

Santos recalled: “Considering the lack of prior notice to the INC as owner of the property, the very unusual time of their visit, and the failure of the alleged doctors to present their PRC (Professional Regulation Commission) ID to prove their medical qualification, I told attorney Trixie and company that they could not enter the INC property at that time.’’

On Nov. 9, an unconscious Arellano was brought out of the compound and was later pronounced dead.

“In a span of three weeks, no attempt was made to bring Arellano to the hospital for checkup and appropriate medical treatment,” Santos said in the complaint.

“No occupant of the INC property has ever been prevented or barred from going out,” he said. “(They) did not call an ambulance when he was taken out and did not bring him to the nearest hospital.”

In an interview, Santos said he had not spoken with Arellano’s family members, who were also tightlipped about his death when approached by the Inquirer during his burial.

Angeles earlier blamed the INC leadership for denying medical attention to Arellano when it barred visitors. She said the driver collapsed and was later pronounced dead in a hospital—a narrative now disputed by Santos who said he was taken directly to a funeral home.

She deferred comment on Tuesday regarding Santos’ complaint, saying would want to see a copy first.

KATHRYN BERNARDO-- an Iglesia Ni Cristo® member wearing a cross?

Kathryn Bernardo, ABS-CBN actress, an Iglesia Ni Cristo® member wearing what her church hated most -- THE CROSS!
Source: TheSplendorOfTheChurch Blog

Christmas song recording with Kathryn Bernardo, an Iglesia Ni Cristo® member, doing what her church forbid its members to participate -- |"PAGAN" CHRISTMAS CELEBRATION. Pure HYPOCRISY!

And ANTHONY TABERNA, another Iglesia Ni Cristo®, member!

The Accountability of the first Black [Muslim] American President Obama for the Extermination (Genocide) of Christians in the Middle East has been Laid Bare

27 Iraqi Christians face deportation in U.S. while Obama offers asylum to thousands of Muslims from Syria
Source: Christian Today

Displaced Iraqi Christians who fled from ISIS militants in Mosul, pray at a school acting as a refugee camp in Erbil on Sept. 6, 2014. (Reuters)

A small group of Iraqi Christians persecuted in their homeland are wondering why they are being deported from the U.S. while the Obama administration is trying its best to justify giving asylum to thousands of Muslim refugees from Syria.

A total of 27 Chaldean Christians who have been driven from their homeland by Al Qaeda and ISIS militants managed to enter the U.S. from Mexico in April and May this year, Fox News reported.

The Chaldeans are trying to join the thriving Iraqi Christian community in and around San Diego, California, but now they face an uncertain future as their applications for religious asylum have been rejected by U.S. authorities allegedly due to "technicalities."

"These are families who were split up because of religious persecution, and now the government – which we love – is preventing them from being reunited," said Fr. Michael Bazzi, of St. Peter Chaldean Catholic Cathedral, in El Cajon, California. "We wonder why, for thousands of Muslims, the door is open to America, yet Christians are not allowed to come."

The Chaldeans are among tens and possibly hundreds of thousands of Christians from Iraq and Syria who have been displaced by fighting in their respective countries and persecuted by Al Qaeda, Islamic State (ISIS) and even the Iraqi government, the Fox News report said.

Because they were considered illegal immigrants, the 27 men, women and children were held at the Otay Detention Center in San Diego while their asylum applications were being considered. So far, 22 of them have their asylum applications marked "rejected" and have been ordered out of the U.S. The other five face a similar verdict. However, they remain in the centre as detainees while U.S. authorities look for a country to accept them.

Their supporters are questioning why U.S. immigration authorities are being so hard on the Chaldean Christians whose only "mistake" was their failure to strictly follow the U.S. immigration process. On the other hand, the Obama administration appears determined to fast-track the resettlement of 10,000 mostly Muslim refugees from Syria.

Moreover, supporters said the Chaldean Christians will not be a burden to the U.S. government since they have family members in San Diego willing to take them in. San Diego is home to one of the largest Chaldean populations in the U.S.

Republicans and Christian leaders say persecuted Christians should be afforded extra protection.

"If the particular security threat you are concerned about is jihadist terror, there are no Christian jihadist terrorists," said Andrew McCarthy, the former assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York. "But for the purpose of asylum analysis, the question is likelihood of persecution. There is no question that Christians face more persecution in Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East than Muslims do. We should acknowledge that Christians are being subjected to genocide and take steps to protect them," he told Fox News.

Kalat na: Kathryn matagal nang umalis sa INC kaya inendorso si Mar -Bandera

Source: Bandera-Inquirer

Isang netizen ang nag-post sa social media tungkol sa diumano’y pagtiwalag ni Kathryn Bernardo sa Iglesia Ni Cristo kaya raw napapayag na itong i-endorse si Mar Roxas para sa 2016 presidential race.

Kinontra nito ang lumabas na balitang may basbas daw ng INC ang pagsuporta ng Teen Queen kay Mar, wala raw itong katotohanan ayon sa nasabing netizen na diumano’y isang INC minister.

Hindi raw totoong nagpaalam si Kathryn sa INC para iendorso ang kandidatura ni Mar, sariling desisyon daw ito ng dalaga at walang kinalaman ang Iglesia Ni Cristo sa isyung ito.

Wala rin daw naganap na meeting sa pagitan ng mga INC executives at sa pamilya ng Kathryn tulad ng napapabalita. Ayon sa nasabing netizen, matagal na raw wala sa INC ang ka-loveteam ni Daniel Padilla na hayagan na rin ang pagsuporta sa kandidatura ng mister ni Korina Sanchez.

Ilang patunay dito ay ang pagsusuot ng dalaga ng Mrs. Santa Claus outfit at ng kuwintas na may crucifix pendant. Samantala, mariing pinabulaanan ng kampo ni Mar Roxas na binayaran nila ng milyun-milyon sina Kathryn at Daniel para lang iendorso ang dating kalihim ng DILG.

Huwag naman daw sanang kuwestiyunin ang paninindigan ng dalawang bagets pagdating sa isyu ng politika. Suportado naman ng KathNiel fans ang naging desisyon ng Teen King & Queen.

SVMMA APOLOGIA: Did the Pope claim to be 'God'?

Excellent apologetics by SVMMA APOLOGIA against anti-Catholic rhetorics by 'Born Again' groups from some Evangelicals who, until now are very harsh against the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ and its doctrines, and the Pope the Successor of St. Peter! -CD2000

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DID THE POPE CLAIM TO BE GOD?

In a more aggressive effort by the anti-Catholics to destroy the Holy Catholic Church, they accused the Pope Himself, the Successor to St. Peter, claiming to be God. Below are the quotations they used which are taken from an alledged Catholic sources:

1. “The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in Heaven and earth.” Pope Pius V, quoted in Barclay, Chapter XXVII, p. 218, “Cities Petrus Bertanous”.

2. Pope Nicholas I declared: ” the appellation of God had been confirmed by Constantine on the Pope, who ,being God, cannot be judged by man.”(Labb IX Dist.: 96 Can 7 Satis Evidentur Decret Gratian Primer Para)

3. The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, He is Jesus Christ himself, hidden under the veil of flesh.” Catholic National July 1895

4. “We hold upon this earth the place of Almighty God” Pope Leo XIII Encyclical Letter of June 20,1894

5. ”All names which in the Scriptures are applied to Christ, by virtue of which is established that He is over the church, all the same names are applied to the Pope.” On the authority of the Councils, book 2, chapter 17

6. These words are written in the Roman Canon Law 1685: "To believethat our Lord God the Pope has not the power to decree as he is decreed, is tobe deemed heretical."Father A. Pereira says: "It is quite certain that Popes have neverapproved or rejected this title 'Lord God the Pope,' for the passage in thegloss referred to appears in the edition of the Canon Law published in Rome in1580 by Gregory XIII."

HOWEVER, are those claims really true? Well, to be presented below are the responses taken from authentic sources. It's time for the truth to be revealed:

⚫ACCUSATION 1:

"The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in Heaven and earth."

-Barclay, Chapter XXVII, p. 218, "Cities Petrus Bertanous," attributed to Pope Pius V.

RESPONSE:

As for the identity of this mysterious 'Petrus Bertanous', this author personally tends to believe that this refers to a certain 16th-century Dominican named Petrus Bertanus Fanensis (aka Pietro Bertano; November 4, 1501, Nonantola-March 8, 1558, Rome), who once served as bishop (later cardinal) of Fano in Italy -- the present-day diocese of Fano-Fossombrone-Cagli-Pergola — and who, among with other Dominicans, was apparently one of the leading prelates at the council of Trent and was an orator and advocate at that same council.

However, Michele Ghislieri, O.P. only ascended to the Chair of Peter in January 7, 1566, about eight years after Pietro Bertano died. How could someone who is not then a pope make a statement about the papacy, much less someone who was dead at the time Ghislieri became pope?

The Australian: Church fear over Syria refugee intake

The Australian
November 21, 2015 12:00AM
Dennis Shanahan

Archbishop Anthony Fisher: ‘Groups like the Yazidis, Christians and Zoroastrians are at peril of extinction in the Middle East at the hands of Daesh.’

The Turnbull government’s plan to take a majority of the 12,000 extra Syrian refugees from persecuted Christian groups and other religious minorities in the ­Middle East is in danger of being derailed.

Christian leaders fear they are being blocked from recommending persecuted people to be part of the Australian intake ­because of confusion over the ­Immigration Department’s selection process and the selection rules of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees.

Government sources believe drafting of the September 9 decision has undermined the clear intention of cabinet, which was to concentrate on the most persecuted groups who could not return to their homes in Syria. These included Christians, Yazidis and Jews, who would form the bulk of the extra refugees accepted.

A requirement included in the decision — that the UNHCR had to register the refugees — meant those who are displaced in Syria or living in tents or with family members outside the official UN camps were not registered.

The Catholic Archbishop of Sydney, Anthony Fisher, who has written to Malcolm Turnbull about the issue, expressed concern yesterday that the bulk of the ­refugees would be Muslims rather than the persecuted non-Muslim groups the government ­indicated in September, such as Christians, Yazidis, Zoroastrians and Jews.

“The community and the Oriental Christians are feeling very anxious and can’t get clarity on what the Australian government is trying to achieve,” Archbishop Fisher told The Weekend Australian last night.

The Archbishop said Islamic State, also known as Daesh, wanted to “exterminate or enslave” Christians as part of its belief in the terrorist Caliphate.

“Groups like the Yazidis, Christians and Zoroastrians are at peril of extinction in the Middle East at the hands of Daesh,” Archbishop Fisher said.

Church concerns about the Australian intake emerged as the US House of Representatives voted to suspend a program giving Syrian refugees safe haven in the US, a move Democrats slammed as giving in to xenophobia after the Paris attacks. The vote yesterday on the Republican legislation, which seeks to impose more stringent security provisions on screening of Iraqi and Syrian refugees, easily had the required support to pass. The bill now heads to the Senate, where its fate is uncertain.

Archbishop Fisher said there were mixed messages coming from the federal government and the Immigration Department, which put in doubt the government’s initial request at a meeting on September 9 for all the churches to nominate refugees who were persecuted and “ready for family reunion or quick integration into Australian society”.

The Immigration Department has received several thousand ­applications and a handful of families, including Muslims and Christians, have already arrived in Australia.

In the wake of the latest Islamic State terror attacks in Paris, including attackers who flowed in to France with Syrian refugees, there have been public calls to stop the intake completely or limit it to Christians.

Concern among Christian groups, particularly the Oriental Christian churches, which include the Copts, Melkites, ­Antiochian Orthodox, Maronite and Assyrians, has spiked as evidence flows from the US that the UNHCR will not give Christians priority, and has indicated a majority of the refugees going to the US will be Muslim.

Eastern Christian Welfare Australia, which represents 12 churches and is trying to identify genuine refugees, said last night it believed the current system was failing to target “vulnerable minorities who cannot obtain UNHCR registration; who do not live in refugee camps; and who do not have immediate family members to propose them”.

In a statement to The Weekend Australian, the welfare group said Christians were afraid to go to the official refugee camps because they were predominantly filled with Muslims and had also been infiltrated by the terror fighters.

“Vulnerable Christian and minority refugees who are not registered with the UNHCR or who do not have immediate family members in Australia are caught up in the bureaucracy,” the statement said.

“We believe a new visa subclass is needed to cater for minority applicants, as the current humanitarian visas fail to do this.”

The requirement for refugees to be registered with UNHCR is causing concern. There is a strong view within church groups that the government should use the Special Humanitarian Program, which has previously been used to relocate Copts from Egypt, more widely.

Scott Morrison, who was immigration minister before being appointed Treasurer, said this week Christians would make up a “very large component” of the 12,000 refugee intake in response to reports of 25 US states moving to stop all Syrian refugees being accepted.

“We are focusing on those persecuted minorities and that obviously includes a very large Christian component — in fact the majority, I would expect,” Mr Morrison said.

Immigration Minister Peter Dutton, who has visited Jordan and Lebanon in recent weeks and this week welcomed the first Sunni Muslim family to Australia from the Syrian intake, said the government would not discriminate and was concentrating on taking women, children, persecuted groups and families.

A spokesman for Mr Dutton said the Immigration Minister had made it clear Australia would take refugees not only from the UNHCR program but also under the Special Humanitarian Program. He has previously said the Australian government will not be told by the UNHCR who to take, and Australia will make the decision on who is accepted.

Islamic Refugee Crisis: Good Samaritan or Maccabean Response? Or both What would Thomas Aquinas Say? By Dr. Taylor Marshall

My admiration for the wisdom of Dr. Taylor Marshall has never waned. With his Catholic insight on the topic of (Muslim) Refugee Crisis, it is very timely how he clarified what position we Catholics and Christians should take.  And rightfully so, Dr. Marshall hit it right on its head when he said "We are not required by Christ to take victims that oppose our faith and our way of life and make them into our political heirs. We are not required to take them into our homes." And for Leftists, please do not stop here. Read before you fret! -CD2000

Source: Dr. Taylor Marshall

What would Saint Thomas Aquinas say about the Refugee Crisis?

We as Christians are debating among ourselves about whether or not we have a moral duty to receive refugees fleeing Muslim nations.

This article is politically incorrect and says things that might shock you. Please read the entire article until the very last two paragraphs before making a judgment or writing incendiary comments. This might be one of the clearest things you’ve read on the topic, because it draws on virtue ethics of Thomas Aquinas – something generally ignored in our day and age. – Godspeed, Taylor Marshall

Are We Good Samaritans?

As Christians we remember Our Lord’s parable about the Good Samaritan recounting how the outwardly religious clerics (the priest and the levite) passed the injured man in the road, but how the Samaritan proved to “be his neighbor” and care for him. Christ rebukes the outwardly religious hypocrites and commends the good Samaritan.

When it comes to the refugee crises, none of us wants to be the hypocrite who turns his steps to the opposite side of road to avoid caring for an injured victim.

Or Are We Good Maccabeans?

Meanwhile, if you are Catholic, you’ve been listening to the book of Maccabees this week in the daily Mass readings. These biblical lessons approvingly recount how Mattathias along with his Maccabean sons and companions rightfully used physical violence against their political oppressors the Seleucid Greeks who were actively using force to undermine the conscience and convictions of the People of God.

So which are we?

Are we the caring Samaritans or the crusading Maccabeans?

The Catholic political theology of Saint Thomas Aquinas can help us with this question:

Let’s first suspend all emotional appeals, and set down a few logical and calm points of agreement to get us all on the same page:

• In the Summa theologiae, Thomas Aquinas places politics under the civic virtue of patriotism which is itself a sub-virtue of justice. Our discussion is ultimately not about “politics” but the virtuous duties of justice toward God, our families, our nations, and all of humanity (in that order).

• For Thomas Aquinas, all political human laws must be: 1) in accord with reason; 2) published or promulgated; 3) by rightful political authority; and for the common good (See STh q. 90, aa. 1-4). If a political law is lacking in any of these four attributes, it is for Thomas, not a law at all.

• The duty of the political magistrates (the Republic or Kingdom) are by the virtue of justice different than the duty of the civilian person. Citizens are not de facto judges, soldiers, police officers, or legislators (STh q. 90, a. 3).

• Muslims explicitly affirm that Muhammad is the Last Prophet of God.

• Muslims explicitly affirm that Our Lord Jesus Christ is certainly not the Son of God.

• These two Muslim affirmations place all Muslims in implicit or explicit theological contradiction with Christians who profess Jesus Christ as the Son of God and consequently conclude that Muhammad was a false prophet.

• For Sunni Muslims (the majority of global Muslims), the mandate to erect Sharia law in every human government is a doctrine of faith. Muslims must in accord with their conscience pursue this theological belief that Sharia law must be promulgated in every human society (England, France, Poland, USA, Mexico, etc.)

So how does this apply to Refugees from Islamic nations?

When we move through the logical points above, we begin to discover a few logical conclusions:

1. Muslims are bound by conscience to erect Sharia law in your nation. This is a bad thing for baptized Christians. At best it means being taxed at a higher rate (the Muslim jizya tax for Christians). At worse it means death.


2. If you live in a democracy, a 51% political Islamic majority will allow “we the people” to promulgate Sharia law. They are following their conscience and religious beliefs in this matter. They will do this just as they have done in any other community where they captured the majority (Mecca, Palestine, Egypt, Syria, etc.)


3. It is a duty of of justice for Christian people to strive to prevent the promulgation of false laws (i.e. those contrary to reason or the common good). Christians are called to be politically active and advocates for the common good and natural law.


4. While we have the Christian duty to care for the refugee, the sick, the victim, and the injured, we have a greater common duty by justice to preserve the state of law and our religious liberty first and foremost.

We see this principle in our Scriptural readings. When it comes to the Samaritan, he rightfully cares for the victim. However, when it comes to the nation and the threat of terrorism (Seleucid Greeks), false laws, and the danger of our children, military, and civic peace, we (like the Maccabees) are politically obliged to resist, protect, and expel…for the common good.

The Analogy of the Familial Home

I am the head of a household. I earn an income to feed my wife and my children. With my surplus, I care for orphans, widows, the church, pro-life causes, single-mothers, and other apostolates that I feel God has called me to support.

Justice and charity demand that I care for the less fortunate and it is a Catholic belief that our salvation depends on how we treat the hungry, the naked, the homeless, and the sick.

MOREOVER….

I am not obliged to take the homeless into my house and have them sleep in my daughter’s bedroom at night. I am not obliged by justice or charity to give the homeless a vote over my financial decisions. He does not have the right to choose what’s for dinner. The homeless man does not (by my charity) receive a right to my continued support. The homeless man cannot share a bed with my wife when I am traveling. Nor may he presume a right over my children’s belongings.

Since we live in a democracy (“we the people”), political refugees de facto gain a measure of political authority over our laws, taxes, finances, military, religious holidays, and legislative bodies.

This principle applies to refugees universally. It applies even more so when the refugee in his conscience believes that he is morally obligated to introduce and vote for the enshrinement of Sharia law.

There is also the further problem that 5%-20% of global Muslims are considered to be “radicalized,” which means that they are consciously willing to use terrorist tactics to advance their Muslim worldview against the West. If you knew that 10% of your child’s Halloween candy was poisoned, would you allow your child to consume any of it?

So what would Thomas Aquinas say?

I’m afraid that Thomas would be much harsher than most of us would feel comfortable with.

Thomas prizes the “common good” so highly under the virtue of political justice that he openly promotes arms and capital punishment against those who are publicly “dangerous and infectious.”

The common good is the peace of society so that life and faith can thrive. Babies can be born and have a happy life. Grandparents can grow old together. Anyone who seeks to destroy the common good should be, according to Thomas, destroyed.

Thomas Aquinas also taught that anyone that fomented “danger to the community” or heretical movements is worthy of the death penalty:

“Therefore if a man be dangerous and infectious to the community, on account of some sin, it is praiseworthy and advantageous that he be killed in order to safeguard the common good.” STh II-II q. 64, a. 2.

It is permissible to kill a criminal if this is necessary for the welfare of the whole community. However, this right belongs only to the one entrusted with the care of the whole community — just as a doctor may cut off an infected limb, since he has been entrusted with the care of the health of the whole body. STh II-II q. 64, a. 3.

Have no doubt that Thomas Aquinas would have stated that Christian nations should receive Christian refugees but refuse Muslim refugees for the sake of national justice and the common good. The Muslim’s official declaration of faith denies natural law (eg, polygamy), religious liberty (eg, Sharia), and implicitly Muhammad’s doctrine and example of political violence.

What’s our Catholic Response? The Samaritan Uses the Hotel

We Christians should be generous with humanitarian aid toward Muslims and all people. We should send money and resources to those who have been dispossessed. We should be loving and generous with Muslims. Kindness brings about conversion and understanding. We should also try to topple the Islamic State and eradicate terrorism in our lands and in the Islamic lands.

Remember the Good Samaritan! He did not take the roadside victim home with him. Rather, the Good Samaritan put the victim up in a hotel and paid for him to get better. The Good Samaritan was good and commended by Christ. The Good Samaritan did the right thing: humanitarian aid.

We are not required by Christ to take victims that oppose our faith and our way of life and make them into our political heirs. We are not required to take them into our homes.

But we are obliged to help them. And if terrorists use our charity as a pretense to hurt us, then, as Thomas Aquinas says, they should be swiftly destroyed.

Saint Thomas Aquinas, pray for us.

Godspeed,

Taylor Marshall

Would this help people you know? If so, please share this in your Facebook by clicking here: