Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Taking his seat in the temple of God
triablogue ^ | December 10, 2014 | Steve Hayes

Posted on 06/21/2015 8:10:26 AM PDT by RnMomof7

Taking his seat in the temple of God


For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, 4 who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God…9 The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders (2 Thes 2:3-4,9). 
There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ; nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalts himself, in the Church, against Christ and all that is called God (WCF 25.6).

1) Traditionally, Protestants identified the papacy with the Antichrist. This post is not defending that identification. I think various individuals and institutions can exemplify the "spirit of the Antichrist" (1 Jn 4:3). 

My immediate point is not to discussion the traditional Protestant view of the papacy, but to discuss some allegations from Catholic sources–allegations which, ironically mirror the traditional Protestant identification.

In his homily given on the Feast of Saints Peter and Paul on June 29, 1972, Pope Paul VI made a famous remark about the “smoke of Satan” entering into the temple of God. The full text of the homily was not reproduced in the Vatican collection of Paul VI’s teachings (Insegnamenti di Paulo VI Vol. X, 1972). Instead, a summary of the homily was given. Within the summary, however, there are some direct quotes from the Pontiff. Two of these are memorable for their references to Satan and the preternatural. 
The Holy Father asserts that he has the feeling that “from some fissure the smoke of Satan has entered into the temple of God” (da qualche fessura sia entrato il fumo di Satana nel tempio di Dio (Insegnamenti [1972], 707). 
Later, he is quoted as saying: “We believe … that something preternatural has come into the world specifically to disturb, to suffocate the fruits of the Ecumenical Council, and to prevent the Church from breaking out in a hymn of joy for having recovered in fullness the awareness of herself (Crediamo … in qualcosa di preternaturale venunto nel mondo proprio per turbare, per soffocare i frutti del Concilio Ecumenico, e per impedire che la Chiesa prorompesse nell’inno della gioia di aver riavuto in pienezza la coscienza di sé (Insegnamenti [1972], 708).
(notes and translations by R. Fastiggi) 
In his general audience of Nov. 15, 1972, Paul VI addressed in more detail the reality of the Devil. He stated that one of the greatest needs of the Church today is the defense against that evil we call the Devil. (Insegnamenti [1972], 1168-1173). 
http://pblosser.blogspot.com/2009/02/paul-vi-on-smoke-of-satan-june-29-1972.html

Taken in isolation, the first statement about "Satan's smoke" could be purely figurative. However, the subsequent reference to "something preternatural," as well as his general audience about the reality of the devil, suggests that his statement about "Satan's smoke" did have reference to Satanic activity. 

And what's the sphere of Satanic activity? He glosses that in terms of opposition to the Vatican II Council. That might also explain the reference to the "temple of God," since formal sessions of the Council took place in the native of St. Peter's Basilica.

Obviously, Paul VI isn't suggesting that Satan is the real power behind the papal throne. Nevertheless, this is an oddly self-incriminating statement for the pope to make about the headquarters of his own denomination.  

Are there men of the curia who are followers of satan? "Certainly there are priests and bishops. I stop at this level of ecclesiastical hierarchy - (Archbishop Milingo) said - because i am an archbishop, higher than this I cannot go." 
http://www.fatimacrusader.com/cr54/cr54pg11.asp
Emmanuel Milingo became an embarrassment to the Vatican. I believe he was subsequently excommunicated and laicized. Due to the prevalence of witchcraft in Africa, he was a strong proponent of exorcism or "deliverance ministry." 
One can certainly question his credibility. However, I'm not the one who made him an archbishop of the Roman Catholic church. To the extent that he's a quack, that reflects poorly on the discernment of the Magisterium, which elevated him to its own ranks. 

Next, let's consider some statements by the late Martin Malachi. He had an impressive resume: 

He received doctorates from the universities of Louvain and Oxford and from Hebrew University in Jerusalem…he became Professor of Palaeontology and Semitic Languages at the prestigious Pontifical Biblical Institute in Rome and was a theological adviser to Cardinal Augustin Bea, the head of the Vatican's Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity. 
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/obituary-malachi-martin-1110905.html
Among other things, he said: 
A. Windswept House is a novel. But it is 85 percent based on actual fact, and most of the personages appearing in it are real even though I have given them fictional names. 
Q. Your book [Windswept House] begins with a vivid description of a sacrilegious "Black Mass" held in 1963 in Charleston, South Carolina. Did this really happen? 
A. Yes it did. And the participation by telephone of some high officials of the church in the Vatican is also a fact. The young female who was forced to be a part of this satanic ritual is very much alive and, happily, has been able to marry and lead a normal life. She supplied details about the event. 
Q. In addition to the "Cardinal from Century City," you depict numerous other cardinals and bishops in a very bad light. Are these characterizations based on fact? 
A. Yes, among the cardinals and the hierarchy there are satanists, homosexuals, anti-papists, and cooperators in the drive for world rule. 
The Catholic Church in Crisis,” The New American, June 9, 1997. 
http://www.fisheaters.com/forums/index.php?action=printpage;topic=2940508.0 
Indeed Paul [Pope Paul VI] had alluded somberly to ‘the smoke of Satan which has entered the Sanctuary’. . . an enthronement ceremony by Satanists in the Vatican. Besides, the incidence of Satanic pedophilia—rites and practices— was already documented among certain bishops and priests as widely dispersed as Turin, in Italy, and South Carolina, in the United States. The cultic acts of Satanic pedophilia are considered by professionals to be the culmination of the Fallen Archangel’s rites. The Keys of This Blood.
This requires some sifting. With reference to the Black Mass in South Carolina, I believe he's alluding to an allegation concerning Bishop Russell and Joseph Bernardin. There is some partial, independent corroboration of this incident:
Among the hundreds of clerical sex abusers is one Msgr. Frederick J. Hopwood, a priest of the Diocese of Charleston, S.C., whose early career was closely linked to Bernardin's; and when Hopwood's sex abuse victims pressed damages against the Diocese of Charleston, attorneys for the Archdiocese of Chicago, during Bernardin's tenure, worked out the terms of settlement.
In March, 1994, six months before a former Cincinnati seminarian named Steven Cook publicly accused Bernardin of sexual abuse, newspapers in South Carolina reported that nine men had come forward to accuse Hopwood of sexual abuse in cases dating back to the 1950s.
On March 21st, 1994, Hopwood pleaded guilty to one charge of sex abuse, performed on a minor while Hopwood was rector of the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist sometime in 1970-1971, in a plea agreement that put him in a therapy program instead of jail.
About the same time that Hopwood was making the news in Charleston, The Wanderer received an anonymous "fact sheet" (subsequently investigated and substantiated) that drew connections between Bernardin and Hopwood.
Both men, who were roommates at the Charleston seminary, were ordained by the late Bishop John J. Russell of Charleston (1950-1958), later bishop of Richmond; Hopwood in 1951, Bernardin in 1952. Bishop Russell was himself accused of sexual abuse.
Immediately upon Hopwood's Ordination, Russell appointed him chancellor of the diocese, a post at which he served for a few years, with Bernardin coming on as assistant chancellor in 1953, and replacing Hopwood as chancellor in 1954.
For much of the time until Bernardin was named in 1966 as an auxiliary bishop of Atlanta under his mentor, Archbishop Paul J. Hallinan, who had been bishop of Charleston from 1958-1962, Bernardin and Hopwood resided together at the cathedral rectory.
What made the Hopwood pedophilia case of more than just passing interest was the involvement of attorneys from Mayer, Brown, and Platt, the Archdiocese of Chicago's law firm, which brokered the settlement for some of Hopwood's victims.
According to an attorney familiar with the cases against Hopwood, "he was not your ordinary pedophile. He did hundreds and hundreds of boys, and I can't imagine Bernardin not being aware of it, since they lived together for such a long time.”
http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news/1998_06_18_Likoudis_EpiscopalScandal.htm
The allegation of a satanic enthronement ceremony at the Vatican occurs in both his nonfiction book (The Keys of This Blood) and his historical novel (Windswept House). As a Vatican insider, who worked there from about 1958 until 1965, he might well be in position to know about Satanists at the Vatican conducting blasphemous ceremonies. 
However, I have reservations about the details of Malachi's allegation:
i) The allegation about the South Carolinian incident seems to trade on the craze of recovered memories involving ritual satanic abuse and/or sexual abuse. So I find that suspect. 
ii) Sodomy and heterosexual rape are hardly interchangeable. But perhaps the motivation wouldn't be so much sexual as sacrilegious.
iii) There's the question of relative chronology. Were these in fact simultaneous events, or does his synchronization reflect artistic license in writing a historical novel? 
Finally:
In a book of memoirs released in February, the noted Italian exorcist Fr. Gabriele Amorth affirmed that "Yes, also in the Vatican there are members of Satanic sects." When asked if members of the clergy are involved or if this is within the lay community, he responded, "There are priests, monsignors and also cardinals!" 
The book, "Father Amorth. Memoirs of an Exorcist. My life fighting against Satan." was written by Marco Tosatti, who compiled it from interviews with the priest. 
Fr. Amorth was asked by Tosatti how he knows Vatican clergy are involved. He answered, "I know from those who have been able to relate it to me because they had a way of knowing directly." 
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/spanish_exorcist_addresses_claims_of_satanic_influence_in_vatican/

As the long-time (but now retired) Chief Exorcist of Rome, I'd expect Amorth to have extensive inside information about clerical satanism, both inside the Vatican and in the city of Rome, where many priests live and work. By that I mean, if it exists, he ought to know better than anyone. 

2) Whether or not we credit these specific allegations, we might assess their antecedent likelihood. If Satanists had access to venerable Christian shrines, it would not be surprising if they practice their rites there. The very point of the Black Mass is to defile sacred space. 

3) In addition, this concretely illustrates how something analogous to 2 Thes 2 could happen in modern times. The point is not whether a Catholic shrine is, in fact, the "temple of God," but to play on the symbolism, to offend traditional reverence, to use that as a foil to defile everything it represents–in the eyes of "the faithful." It could be the Vatican, Mount Athos, Santa Katarina, Canterbury cathedral, the Temple Mount, the Church of the Nativity, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the Hallgrímskirkja, &c. 


TOPICS: Apologetics; Evangelical Christian; History; Theology
KEYWORDS: catholicism; hermeneutics; martinmalachi; papacy; prophecy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-74 next last

1 posted on 06/21/2015 8:10:26 AM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy; bkaycee; blue-duncan; boatbums; CynicalBear; daniel1212; Gamecock; HossB86; Iscool; ...

Ping


2 posted on 06/21/2015 8:12:02 AM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

Catholicism spins a deceitful web.


3 posted on 06/21/2015 8:33:23 AM PDT by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

Jesus dealt with the Pharisees and Sadducees of his era. Hypocrites and wolves in sheeps clothing looking and dressing outwardly devout but inside were prideful, unreptentant sinners But not all—e.g. Nicodemus.


4 posted on 06/21/2015 8:36:12 AM PDT by tflabo (Truth or tyranny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear
Catholicism spins a deceitful web.

Yes they do, along with the Mormons, JWs, and a host of others.

5 posted on 06/21/2015 8:43:07 AM PDT by Mark17 (Take up they cross and follow me. I hear the blessed savior call. How can I make a lesser sacrifice?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear; RnMomof7
Catholicism spins a deceitful web.

Indeed it does. Frighteningly so.

Hoss

6 posted on 06/21/2015 8:59:02 AM PDT by HossB86 (Christ, and Him alone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

And that web has many filaments added over the ages. Like the changing of meaning by shifting one phrase in 2Thess2:3, to read ‘revolt’ in the Rheims bible. It had been The Departure in the first five or six bibles, until the Rheims bible changed it to read ‘a revolt’. The definite article was changed, the meaning of the word ‘apostasia’ was changed from departure to revolt, and presto, the catholics condemn the reformation. Then the Protestants repeat the error but change it slightly to take the sting our of the catholic rebuke, calling it ‘a falling away’ in the King James bible. Interesting how God has been able to use even these changes.


7 posted on 06/21/2015 8:59:04 AM PDT by MHGinTN (Is it really all relative, Mister Einstein?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

Kwestion: Who is this Steve Hayes? Might he be the Steve Hayes on Brett Baer’s 6:30 P.M. panel on Fox Evening News? I salute him for posting this.


8 posted on 06/21/2015 9:04:39 AM PDT by Tucker39 (Welcome to America! Now speak English; and keep to the right....In driving, in Faith, and politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

I’m surprised you aren’t delighted that there are people within the highest ranks of the Catholic Church who hate her as much as you do.


9 posted on 06/21/2015 9:26:59 AM PDT by Campion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
This goes way back. It started with Judas Iscariot.

Doesn't it cause you pause that Satan is desperate to infiltrate the Catholic Church with his own soldiers, and desperate to mock the (supposedly "blasphemous") Mass with a ritual dedicated to exalting him?

The Presbyterians aren't nearly as interesting to him. In fact, they seem not to be interesting to him at all.

Why do you suppose that is?

10 posted on 06/21/2015 9:30:55 AM PDT by Campion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Campion

I’m thinking you have a lot of surprises coming.


11 posted on 06/21/2015 9:32:17 AM PDT by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear
Pope Francis Blazing a trail in defiance of God.....

One could easily say...Who is schooling Who? "Who's submitting here????

Francis ..'took off his shoes...' as he entered the huge mosque before ...'bowing his head facing Mecca in prayer..." standing next to Istanbul’s Grand Mufti Rahmi Yaran.

God tells us that ...."the sacrifices of pagans are offered to demons, not to God, and..." I do not want you to be participants with demons". .....You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons too; you cannot have a part in both the Lord’s table and the table of demons. (I Cor 10:20)

The Vatican City spokesman described it as a gesture of inter-religious 'harmony' and a joint moment of silent adoration of God.

God tells us ..."What 'harmony 'is there between Christ and Belial? Or what does a believer have in common with an unbeliever?....Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?" (2nd Cor. 6)


12 posted on 06/21/2015 9:42:08 AM PDT by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: caww

Well said! The Catholic Church aligning itself with Muslims and Catholics aligning themselves with the Catholic Church.


13 posted on 06/21/2015 9:48:54 AM PDT by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

14 posted on 06/21/2015 10:05:43 AM PDT by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7; CynicalBear
Traditionally, Protestants identified the papacy with the Antichrist.

Well, considering what this current pope is up to, it looks like they nailed it, much to the dismay of Catholics everywhere.

Heck, THEY'RE even beginning to suspect it.

You know it's bad then.

So it looks like we *Prots* were right about something after all. Must be a bitter pill for all those Catholics to swallow.

15 posted on 06/21/2015 10:14:39 AM PDT by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Campion
satan is not desperate, he is served in every catholic Eucharist, by insisting the literal blood of Jesus is in the cup offered by the catholic priests. In this absolute violation of God's Command to not eat the blood, not drink the blood for the LIFE is in the blood, the blood to be spread upon the Mercy Seat not trickled down Campion’s throat, in this ritual satan has catholics mocking God every time they have a Eucharist.
16 posted on 06/21/2015 10:24:46 AM PDT by MHGinTN (Is it really all relative, Mister Einstein?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

Slipping in a pretrib rapture on a thread that is about the antichrist taking his seat in the temple of God?

No apologist for the RCC, but we can’t lay this one on them. When they put “revolt” in the Rheims, it wasn’t an innovation. No commentary on this verse by anybody in church history, prior to the Rheims, understood “apostasia” to mean anything else.

Take Justin Martyr for example, he called the man of sin in verse 4, who would sit in the temple of God shewing himself God, “the man of apostasy.” Similarly, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Cyprian, Lactantius, Victorinus. They knew the Greek well! Yet not a one of these noted scholars interpreted “apostasia” to mean a pretrib “departure.”

You don’t even have to be a scholar to see what the word meant. The context literally bristles with proof of what Paul intended “apostasia” to mean. The man of the “apostasia” would oppose all that is called God - sounds like a revolt, or rebellion, against God to me. “That wicked” in verse 8, a man of “strong delusion” in verse 11, deceiving the world that they should believe “the” lie, he being that lie.

Enter MHGinTN, some 2,000 years later, to correct Paul, Justin Martyr, etc. “No, no, no, you are all wrong,” he tells us, we are supposed to understand “apostasia” to mean a pretrib rapture.

Incredible, I tell ‘ya, what hoops pretribs will jump through to push their pretrib rapture.


17 posted on 06/21/2015 10:38:35 AM PDT by sasportas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: metmom
So it looks like we *Prots* were right about something after all. Must be a bitter pill for all those Catholics to swallow. I remember it well. We were inundated with thread after thread here on the RF, Catholics exalting this Pope to the max, while a great many of us non-Catholics, including myself, warning that this man was a Marxist deceiver of the first order.
18 posted on 06/21/2015 10:48:17 AM PDT by sasportas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

the word apostasia is also used in Acts 21:21. I don’t know which word but the context is very clear.

Also, for all Christians in all churches, Satan is in each. I believe 2 Thes 2:3 is disregarded by the pre-trib theory, interesting enough, and may in fact be the cause of the loss of faith due to the resurrection of the dead and the return of the Messiah not occurring until after the anti-messiah proclaims he is god.


19 posted on 06/21/2015 10:48:49 AM PDT by huldah1776
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: sasportas

You asserted, “No commentary on this verse by anybody in church history, prior to the Rheims, understood “apostasia” to mean anything else.” But the previous Bibles ALL translated apostasia as THE Departure. IF you read the passages prior to and the passages following verse 3, you will see the meaning of the apostasia Paul wrote of. Do I really need to post those following passages to align your vision?


20 posted on 06/21/2015 10:56:00 AM PDT by MHGinTN (Is it really all relative, Mister Einstein?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-74 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson