“Since August, there are officially more [illegal aliens] arriving each month than there are children being born to American mothers.
And these are just the official encounters — we don’t know how many avoided detection.”
My comment: Rome’s illegal alien assault on America is shocking in scale yet largely suppressed by the media. “Your land, strangers devour it in your presence” wrote Isaiah to the unfaithful nation of Judah. Strangers likewise are quickly devouring America in our presence at the urging of the Roman Catholic Church-State. Could this calamity be due to the unfaithfulness of the American Protestant church?
One of the fascinating aspects of the manufactured illegal alien crisis on our southern border is that, while the Roman Church-State and the Jesuits are openly promoting the deluge, almost no mention of their role is ever made, even by organizations opposed to Biden’s and the Vatican’s border policies. Here’s one article exposing Antichrist’s’ role in the illegal alien assault on America.
Of course, the southern border disaster is not a bug, it’s a feature. That is to say, it is not mistake but rather a deliberate policy. The Roman Catholic Biden Regime continues its assault on the historic, Protestant American nation. This will not go away on its own. It must be stopped.
More than 276,000 asylum seekers hoping to cross the US-Mexico border have been encountered by US Customs and Border Protection agents in December, the highest number for a single month in history.
— Read on nypost.com/2023/12/29/news/record-setting-276k-migrants-cross-southern-border-in-december-and-it-isnt-over/
The complete absurdity of granting citizenship to the children of illegal aliens should be evident to all, yet Americans have put up with this nonsense for decades. Demanding and end to this abusive practice is the single most important step Americans can take to regaling control of their nation. The globalists in the Roman Catholic. Burch-State and elsewhere know this, which is why they fight so hard against it.
MSNBC reporter amazed at the illegal alien hordes invasion our nation. This is an everyday occurrence and it’s getting worse. Antichrist (the papacy) is destroying the United States and everyone yawns. Is there any hope for America?
Pope Francis stands on an altar facing the U.S. before celebrating Mass during a February 2016 trip to Juarez. The papal visit was one of the El Paso Times’ top stories of 2016. Robin Zielinski/Las Cruces Sun-News
There are a few items I’d like to address before wrapping up this treatment of Exsul Familia Nazarethana (EFN), the Apostolic Constitution that provides the theoretical framework for the Roman Church-State’s massive and ongoing illegal alien assault on the United States of America.[1] The first of these is Rome’s “welcome the stranger” argument.
Pope Francis stands on an altar facing the U.S. before celebrating Mass during a February 2016 trip to Juarez. The papal visit was one of the El Paso Times’ top stories of 2016. Robin Zielinski/Las Cruces Sun-News
In his book Ecclesiastical Megalomania, John Robbins quoted Roman Catholic historian Brian Tierney’s comment on Rome’s doctrine of the of the two swords. This doctrine, which asserts that God had delegated both spiritual and temporal power to the bishop of Rome, is based on Luke 22:38 “And they said, Lord, behold here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough.” Wrote Tierney, “A whole inverted pyramid of political fantasy was erected on the basis of this one verse.”[1]
In much the same way as with the doctrine of the two swords, Rome likewise has erected a whole inverted pyramid of immigration fantasy on the basis of three verses in the second chapter of Matthew that record the flight into Egypt.
Now when they had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream, saying, “Arise, take the young Child and His mother, flee to Egypt, and stay there until I bring you word; for Herod will seek the young Child to destroy Him.”
When he arose, he took the young Child and His mother by night and departed for Egypt, and was there until the death of Herod, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, “Out of Egypt I called My Son” (Matthew 2:13-15).
This flight, according to Pope Pius XII’s[2] 1952 Apostolic Constitution Exsul Familia Nazarethana,[3]the Émigré Family of Nazareth, hereafter EFN, is the “archetype of every refugee family.” In the words of Pius XII,
The émigré Holy Family of Nazareth, fleeing into Egypt, is the archetype of every refugee family. Jesus, Mary and Joseph, living in exile in Egypt to escape the fury of an evil king, are, for all times and all places, the models and protectors of every migrant, alien and refugee of whatever kind who, whether compelled by fear of persecution or by want, is forced to leave his native land, his beloved parents and relatives, his close friends, and to seek a foreign soil.[4]
Clearly, Joseph and his family were refugees under any reasonable definition of the term. Had they remained in Bethlehem, it is certain that Jesus would have been executed by King Herod, who “sent forth and put to death all the male children who were in Bethlehem and in all its districts, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had determined from the wise men” (Matthew 2:16) in his attempt to kill the newborn King of the Jews. Webster’s Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary gives the definition of refugee as, “one who flees to a foreign country or power to escape danger or persecution.” According to the 1951 UN Convention and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, the term refugee applies to “any person who…owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.” [5] The definition of “refugee” in US law is essentially the same as that of the 1951 UN Convention.
Pope Francis stands on an altar facing the U.S. before celebrating Mass during a February 2016 trip to Juarez. The papal visit was one of the El Paso Times’ top stories of 2016. Robin Zielinski/Las Cruces Sun-News
In his book The Incarnation, Gordon Clark criticized the Council of Chalcedon for its failure to define the terms it used in the famous creed it produced. “Discard or define,” was Clark’s slogan.
John Robbins put the same thought this way, if you define your terms, you don’t know what you’re talking about.
So in the spirit of Gordon Clark and John Robbins, I’d like to take time to define the terms used in the title of this talk.
Antichrist
My definition of Antichrist is that which was accepted by nearly all Protestants before the 20th century. Antichrist is the office of the papacy. The original language of the Westminster Confession of Faith summed up this view quite nicely in Chapter 25.6. It reads, “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 exalteth himself in the Church against Christ, and all that is called God.” But this language was altered in the 1903 revision of the Confession by the Presbyterian Church USA to remove the language identifying the pope as “Antichrist,” “man of sin,” and “son of perdition.”
Two of the best Presbyterian theologians of the 20th century did not offer much in the way of objection to the removal of this language from the Confession. Writing in the November 28, 1936 issue of the “Presbyterian Guardian,” J. Gresham Machen commented that the edition of the Confession adopted by the Presbyterian Church of America[1] was the same as the doctrinal standards that existed in 1902, “except that two brief statements – one declaring the Pope to be Antichrist and the other declaring it to be sinful to refuse an oath when the civil magistrate requires it, are omitted.”[2]
B.B. Warfield noted in his article “The Confession of Faith as Revised in 1903” that “The motive of the revisers seems to have been to avoid calling the Pope of Rome ‘that antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the church against Christ and all that is called God” – which does seem rather strong language. Why the revisers wished to avoid applying these terms to the Pope of Rome we can only conjecture. But their avoidance of it need not imply that they – some or all of them – felt prepared to deny that the Pope of Rome is the Antichrist of Scripture.”[3] As do many Bible-believing Presbyterians, I count myself an admirer of B.B. Warfield, but these comments from him are disappointing. The most likely reason that the revisers excised the language identifying the Pope of Rome as Antichrist, man of sin, and son of perdition is the very one Warfield denies was their motive, that they – some or all of them – were prepared to deny that the Pope of Rome was the Antichrist of the Scriptures. The history of the American Presbyterian church since 1903 substantiates this reasoning, as even highly educated Presbyterians from that day to the present have become increasingly willing to deny that the Pope of Rome is the Antichrist of the Scriptures, something that was once clearly understood even by the plowboy with a Bible.
But what the revisers did by striking the Confession’s language about the identity of Antichrist was something far worse than merely sowing confusion about who Antichrist is. By denying that the Pope of Rome is the Antichrist, the revisers of the Confession also denied the entire Protestant system of prophetic interpretation known as historicism, of which system the identity of Antichrist as the papacy is a key component.[4]
It seems to this Presbyterian in the Year of Our Lord 2023 that the removal of the Confession’s language on the identity of Antichrist, while it may have appeared minor to observers at the time, opened the floodgates for the false Jesuit eschatologies of Preterism and Futurism – both of which deny a present Antichrist, instead placing him far in the past or at a time still to come – to come pouring into Protestant church, thus blinding, as it were, even the elect to the work of Antichrist taking place right in front of their noses.
One of these works, I argue in this paper, is the flooding of America with illegal aliens, many of them Roman Catholics, for the purpose of subverting our Protestant Republic, capturing the nation for Rome, and incorporating it into Rome’s planned system of world government.
Pope Francis stands on an altar facing the U.S. before celebrating Mass during a February 2016 trip to Juarez. The papal visit was one of the El Paso Times’ top stories of 2016. Robin Zielinski/Las Cruces Sun-News
Your land, strangers devour it in your presence.
Isaiah 1:9
“It’s a total free for all in Eagle Pass right now. Mass illegal crossing taking place for over an hour and a half. Almost 2 years to the day we saw 15,000+ Haitians under the bridge in Del Rio, we now have thousands of predominantly Venezuelans gathering under Eagle Pass bridge.”
That was a recent post on X[1] (formerly Twitter) from Fox News’ Bill Melugin, one of the few, perhaps the only, legacy media reporters who has consistently covered the illegal alien disaster taking plan on America’s southwest border. A disaster, the proximate cause of which is the policies of the current presidential administration.
A New York Times article[2]written the same day as Melugin’s post, September 20, 2023, reported that “Thousands of migrants crossed into the small city of Eagle Pass, Texas, from Mexico on Wednesday, crowding onto the bank of the Rio Grande and under an international bridge in what officials describe as an unfolding crisis.”
In a town hall on September 6, 2023,[3] New York mayor Eric Adams caused quite a stir when ripped the Biden Administration for providing “no support” to the city for the burgeoning illegal alien crisis and said, “This issue [the illegal alien crisis] will destroy New York City. Destroy New York City.” Given the scale of the illegal alien crisis in his city, it’s hard to argue with Mayor Adams’ assessment.
Mayor Eric Adams at a town hall event on the Upper West Side. Wednesday, Sept. 6, 2023. Photo Credit: Benny Polatseck/Mayoral Photography Office
New York Mayor Eric Adams caused quite a stir last week with his address to a town hall meeting in which he proclaimed “This issue (the illegal alien crisis) will destroy New York City.
Adams isn’t wrong about this. Obviously, when an infinite number of migrants illegal aliens are paired with finite economic resources to take care of them, something’s got to give.
“I’m gonna tell you something, New Yorkers, never in my life have I had a problem that I didn’t see an ending to. I don’t see an ending to this. This issue will destroy New York City. Destroy New York City.”
Superman isn’t coming to save Metropolis. Batman isn’t there to bail out Gotham City.
What comic book supervillains couldn’t do, destroy New York City, is being done by the Biden Regime’s migrant hordes.
But while some immigration reformers have praised Eric Adams’ speech as evidence that even liberals are waking up to the dangers of the migrant crisis, I beg to differ.
Lux Lucet 