1953 – 1993: Forty Inglorious Years

Forty Inglorious Years, PDF format

Four Decades of Deepening Royal Apostasy and Vatican Intrigue

By Peter Trumper

INTRODUCTION

by Shaun Willcock

The Romanization of the House of Windsor is something very few people understand; but it has very grave consequences.  Let it be clearly understood that in no sense is Anglicanism a true church; nor does the true Church of Christ need the protection of a country’s monarch; nor is all that is “Protestant” Christian; nor is the British monarch truly “the Defender of the Faith” or the head of a denomination of Christian churches.  The idea of a “national church”, ruled by a political sovereign, is entirely contrary to the New Testament.  Anglicanism is a corrupt, worldly, Popish system, a daughter of the Mother of Harlots (Rev. 17:5).  But it is certainly true that a country, knowing the awful nature of Popery, can and should pass laws forbidding any Papist to ascend the throne.  And there is no doubt whatsoever that this prohibition was a great blessing to true Christians in Britain ever since the Reformation, for it meant that no persecuting Papist could ascend the throne and wage war against true Christians.  The Vatican, of course, has always hated this prohibition.  And ever since the Reformation Rome has done its utmost to destroy the British throne, and to once again subjugate the people of that once-blessed land to the feet of the Roman pontiff.  What has happened to the British Royal Family over many decades is the culmination of centuries of Vatican intrigue, and this article, published in 1993, is extremely valuable for revealing Popery’s intrigues with regards to the British Royal Family.  Just how successful the Vatican has been can be seen in all that has transpired in Britain since 1993, politically and religiously.

_____________________________

“… And whereas it hath been found by experience that it is inconsistent with the safety and welfare of this Protestant kingdom to be governed by a popish prince or by any king or queen marrying a papist… Every person who is or shall be reconciled to, or shall hold communion with, the See or Church of Rome, or shall profess the popish religion, or shall marry a papist shall be excluded and be for ever incapable to inherit, possess, or enjoy the crown or government of this Realm and Ireland… and in every such case the people of these realms shall be and are hereby released of their allegiance…”

…Act 1, William and Mary, cap.2.sec.8/9.  Bill of Rights and Act of Settlement, 1689 and 1701…

THE PRELUDE

16TH AND 17TH CENTURIES

  In 1567, Pope Pius V sent two Jesuits (Parsons and Saunders) to England.  They contacted and stirred up the Roman Catholic minority in their opposition to Queen Elizabeth I.  Parsons and Saunders were executed, for being traitors not Roman Catholics (they faced a civil, not an ecclesiastical court), and are now official Vatican “saints” to whom deluded catholics “pray”!  Three years later, 3 May, Pope Pius V issued his “Damnatio et Excommunicatio Elizabethae Reginae Angliae”, which is self explanatory!  The decree added, “…and those who shall do the contrary, we do strike with the like sentence of Damnation…”  In 1580, Humphrey Ely arrived in Spain from England, seeking papal nuncio Sega.  He represented certain English noblemen, influenced by the two Jesuits, who desired the pope’s advice.  Would Pope Gregory XIII consider them sinful if they plotted to kill Queen Elizabeth?  The pope replied (the letter is in the Records Office in London, the Roman transcripts 77 to 105), “whosoever sends her out of the world… not only does not sin but gains merit.”  The letter to Ely ends: “…in case you have incurred any irregularity, the Pope bestows on you his holy benediction…” (Albert Close, Rome's Fight for the British Throne, p.69)  In April, the pope sent a message to the secret society in England led by Anthony Babington, encouraging his people and promising them protection and maintenance for the spies.  Four days later, twenty Jesuit priests left Rome for our shores.  Edmund Campion was one of the leaders.  At his eventual trial, it was proved he had “received money from the pope.” (ibid., p.94)  In 1583, plans were laid in “most Catholic” Spain for an invasion of the British Isles, but were shelved because of Spain’s internal problems.  Five years later, King Philip II of Spain sent the Armada to invade Queen Elizabeth’s Realm, and Pope Sixtus V promised a million ducats once success had been achieved.  Praise God, the cash was not required!  At the commencement of the 17th century (1605) a Roman Catholic gang, led by Robert Catesby, sought to assassinate King James I and members of his family.  Guido Fawkes was the “fall guy”!  The Gunpowder Plot failed.

18TH CENTURY

  During the 18th century, two major events prevented the Vatican from continuing in her ambitions to overthrow the Protestant throne of England.  First, was the remarkable work of the Spirit in the Great Awakening. Popery never thrives when God is powerfully active.  Why should it?  When sinners taste the glory of the living God, and are redeemed through Christ’s precious blood, the last thing they want is dead religion!  The French Revolution was the other hindrance to papal designs, in which the people turned against religion as well as the monarchy.  In fact, more priests were guillotined than aristocrats.  As a result, the Vatican was too caught up with events in France to concern itself with Britain.

19TH CENTURY

  If the Protestant monarch in England was titular head of the Established Church, what better way was there to influence affairs that for popery to enter it?  Thus, on the 31 August 1833 John Henry Newman was able to write to J.M. Bowden, “We are setting up here Societies for the defence of the church.  We do not like our names known, but we hope the plan will succeed.”  On the same day, writing to Lord Blachford, Newman hinted darkly, “We have set up Societies over the kingdom in defence of the church.  We do not like our names known.”  A few days later, the 3 September, Professor Mozley wrote to his sister: “But for the present you must remember all these details I have been going through are secret.” (Walter Walsh, The Secret History of the Oxford Movement)  In other words, the “Society of the Holy Cross” consisted of clergymen of the Church of England (and the hymns of Newman, Faber, Keble and Pusey are still in our hymn books!) who were secretly doing the pope’s dirty work from within their church.  They were encouraged in their deceit and lies by the introduction of the Catholic Emancipation Bill four years earlier.  The Vatican plan had taken root.  The Emancipation Bill provided the Vatican with renewed vigour, and breathtaking nerve.  In 1859, at Westminster in London Cardinal Manning, Hume’s predecessor, before an assembly of priests including Cardinal Wiseman, prepared for the battle which lay ahead.  Within yards of Buckingham Palace, under Queen Victoria’s nose, he declared menacingly: “If ever there was a land in which work is to be done, and perhaps much to suffer, it is here.  I shall not say too much, if I say that we have to SUBJUGATE and SUBDUE, to CONQUER and RULE, an imperial race.  We have to BEND or BREAK that will which nations and kingdoms have found invincible and inflexible.  Were heresy conquered in England, it would be conquered throughout the world.  All its lines meet here, and therefore in England the Church of God (i.e. popery!) must be gathered in its strength.” (italics mine)  That year God graciously granted Britain a mighty revival, to the exclusion of Roman Catholicism, but the Vatican defied both God and the monarch in its determination to destroy the Protestant crown and throne.  Eight years later (1867) a jubilant Manning wrote, “The Royal Supremacy has perished.  The undying authority of the Holy See is once more an active power in England.  The shadow of Peter has once more fallen upon it.” (Essays on Religion)  Towards the close of the 19th century, popery was feeling maliciously aggressive.  In the Catholic Standard and Ransomer for the 30 August 1894 it was stated, “It is a time of war, remember!  We have set ourselves to win back England to Rome.  This means war.  Protestantism, whether high, low, broad, or dissenting, is the enemy, and we must oppose it.”  In the following account, bear those words in mind.

1953 -1993: FORTY INGLORIOUS YEARS

1953

  The Princess Elizabeth was crowned Queen.  It had taken 120 years since Newman’s treachery but the Vatican must have been encouraged in the knowledge that her Consort the Duke of Edinburgh was not a Protestant, having been reared as Greek Orthodox.  The Duke has been a “millstone” around his family’s soul ever since.  As a result Pope Pius XII, who as Cardinal Pacelli of Munich called upon the Germans to vote for Hitler and was his supporter throughout World War II, believed that it was opportune for the new queen to be manipulated.  The pope also knew that weak Archbishop Fisher would be the ideal instrument to use.

1960

  The archbishop visited John XXIII, and prepared the way for the first official visit to the Vatican of a British monarch since the Reformation.  The vow he encouraged Elizabeth to make in Westminster Abbey seven years earlier, before almighty God and her subjects in Great Britain and the Commonwealth, was conveniently forgotten.  Popery’s net was cast!

1961

  Fisher, having heard Elizabeth’s public profession of “utmost” loyalty to the “Protestant Reformed Religion” on Coronation Day (“all this I promise to do”), then encouraged the young queen to hypocritically break her solemn vow by directing her towards Rome.  On the 6 May, she and her “unprotestant” Consort visited the Vatican.  She wore black, a matter of no importance to most of her gullible subjects.  In fact, for Britain and the Commonwealth the colour of her dress was one of the darkest hues of the 20th century.  The pope and his children worldwide rejoiced.  The representative head of a quarter of the world’s inhabitants was observed returning, in spirit at least, to the fold as a penitent.  There was no referendum.  In the Queen, we all went to Rome whether we wanted to go or not.  Thus a mere eight years after she ascended to the Protestant throne, short of one month, Her Majesty had incurred God’s displeasure.  The decline in the “fortunes” of the Royal Family as a whole had set in.

1962

  In August, Archbishop Ramsey welcomed Cardinal Bea, the President of the Vatican Secretariat for Christian unity, to Lambeth Palace.  Something was stirring.  Certainly, after the visit Ramsey was seen wearing a cardinal’s ring.  We were not surprised, for during his thirteen years as archbishop he had done more to bring Britain to the Vatican door than any other charlatan since Newman.  Probably one of the issues discussed between Ramsey and Bea was an eventual papal visit to the British Isles, an idea much discussed at that time, but it was shelved in 1969 when ironically the present troubles in Ulster erupted.  The politico-religious climate was obviously thought to be too inflammable.

1970

  By this time, the influence of the Vatican over the Queen was becoming ever more pronounced, as was her departure from biblical truth and the coronation vow.  In January, she gave permission for a meeting between Roman and Anglo Catholic clergy in St. George’s chapel, Windsor Castle.  It was in this chapel the recent fire started!  A few weeks later, she had a private audience at Buckingham Palace with Cardinal Marty of France.  Although considering herself “Defender of the Faith”, as if to emphasize her apostasy and that of her church and nation, a Roman Catholic mass was held at Canterbury Cathedral to mark the 800th anniversary of Thomas a’ Beckett’s murder at its altar.  It was the first time since the Reformation that a mass had been held there.  The treachery deepened, when in October Pope Paul VI “canonized” the “forty English and Welsh martyrs”.  These were the priestly traitors (among them Campion, Parsons and Saunders mentioned above) who had sought the assassination of the Queen’s ancestor and the overthrow of her Realm.  It revealed the contempt the Vatican already had for Her Majesty and her family.  Even worse: it equally manifested the traditional hatred the Vatican has for her Realm.  The year before, as we have already noted, the current troubles began in Ulster.  Cynically, using the Civil Rights Movement as a cover for their subversive activities, the IRA (Irish Republican Army) marched with their priests and people seeking to gain sympathy in high places for the poor “down-trodden” Catholics!  The ruse worked.  Popery in Ulster and Eire, and New York! were appeased.  They still are.  By “canonizing” the Vatican “martyrs”, Pope Paul was passing on a message to his children in Ulster: “emulate the example of your forefathers”.  The bombings and killings in Ulster, and now on the British mainland, are the results of that deliberate encouragement.  With supreme irony, by allowing herself to be manipulated from Rome, the Queen finds herself aiding the destruction of an important part of her own kingdom – Northern Ireland, where many of her most loyal subjects live.

1981

  The House of Windsor faced a turning point, one which the Vatican was likely to exploit to the full.  Who was the Heir Apparent likely to marry?  The European princesses, such as Astrid of Luxembourg, were Roman Catholics and therefore by law (thankfully!) had to be excluded.  Instead, Prince Charles married Lady Diana Spencer.  She who was to be our future queen was not for vocal protestants ideal, but we believed it could have been worse.  I wrote at the time: “We must commit the Prince and Princess of Wales to the King of kings, for salvation and protection.  There are elements in the land which seek their harm, both spiritually and physically.”  I little realised how quickly, and with what subtlety, the Vatican would respond.  This was also the year of the notorious Ulster hunger-strikers.  Between May and August, nine IRA prisoners starved themselves to death as a protest.  Underlining the pope’s disdain for the Queen’s wishes, and his support for his vicious children whom he has always refused to excommunicate, John Paul II sent gifts to them via his Irish secretary.  Upon the bodies of the wicked IRA men when they were buried were crucifixes, given them by the priest from Rome.  Neither the House of Windsor, nor the House of Commons, bothered to raise an objection to this blatant intrusion into British affairs.  By this time, such was the Vatican’s influence over them all, it was too late anyway.

1982

  The expected papal visit to Britain was preceded by trickery of enormous proportions.  The British people were assured the visit was merely pastoral, the opportunity for Roman Catholics to see the pope at close hand.  In no way would the visit be political, and to illustrate this fact his “courtesy” call upon the Queen would take place at Windsor Castle and not at Buckingham Palace her official residence.  Vocal protestants refused to believe it.  Suddenly just prior to the pope’s arrival, the third item on the 1.00 pm news bulletin, it was announced there had been a change in the diplomatic relations between the Vatican and Britain.  Just like that!  Sir Mark Heath was no longer Minister at the British Legation in Rome, but was now the official ambassador.  In turn, Mgr. Bruno Heim had been elevated as the new Pro-nuncio in London.  It was then announced, that because of the closer ties the pope when he arrived would after all be visiting Her Majesty in Buckingham Palace!  There was not even a parliamentary debate, and certainly no referendum, the British were forced to comply with the Vatican plan.  Nero fiddled while Rome burned, in 1982 vocal protestants burned (with rage) while Rome fiddled!  Still, almighty God intervened.  The pope’s visit was accompanied by an embarrassing irony.  He arrived in May with Britain engaged in a war with Roman Catholic Argentina, whom we later learned had bought exocet missiles with Vatican money!  Thus, instead of Pope John Paul II wooing the British as was expected, he arrived as a supporter of our enemy!  The Falkland islanders had been only 15% papist, but once invaded Roman Catholicism was made the state church.  The new Argentinian governor was officially “blessed” by Roman Catholic bishops when sworn in to his office.  It was therefore clear to those willing to admit it, that Britain and Argentina were participating in something more than a squabble about sovereignty over the Falklands.  It was a struggle between popery and Protestantism – and the pope was in Britain at the time!  Furthermore, the newspapers needless to say were far more interested in the battle than in the papal visit.  More embarrassment followed.  Archbishop Runcie and Cardinal Hume were obliged to stand next to one another at the Thanksgiving Service following Britain's victory, Roman Catholics having invaded part of the diocese of Canterbury 8000 miles away!  Their position was amusing in its awkwardness, both revealing themselves as traitors.  Hume, although British, must have secretly supported papist Argentina.  Runcie, not wanting to offend Hume (“never claim Him [God] as an asset for one nation… rather than another”), refused to publicly admit a British victory.  The monarch’s Archbishop was revealed as being friendly towards her enemy, and that of the state.  Both the Queen and the Prime Minister (Margaret Thatcher) were furious.  Nearly 300 of Her Majesty’s forces had laid down their lives “for queen and country”, and the Primate was 50% in favour of those who killed them!  Hume on the other hand, deliberately and arrogantly, insulted the Queen’s protestant vows.  He not only took part in the proceedings, but prayed for the dead of both countries.  The occasion in St Paul’s Cathedral revealed the contempt with which these men held both Parliament and the Crown.

1985

  By this time, not only had Vatican Influence entered the church over which the Queen was titular head, it was occupying her hearth!  One wonders who introduced Prince Michael of Kent to the Roman Catholic aristocrat passing herself off as Austrian.  Whoever it was, Vatican plant or not, the Family popery has been seeking to radically change or destroy has now one of its own children inside it.  Strangely enough, in a frank (unusually frank) TV interview Prince Michael confessed that had the Queen refused permission he would not have married a Roman Catholic!  Perhaps, that is why when they attended mass at the Vatican Prince Michael was reported as appearing ill-at-ease.  Nevertheless, the Prince and Princess left the pope’s presence describing him as a “most remarkable man”.  In April, a remarkable mystery was unveiled which shocked the nation.  It was revealed that Princess Michael was not an Austrian after all, but a German!  Worse: her father had been a major in Hitler’s SS.  The Queen must have known this but was willing to fool her subjects.  If Roman Catholicism was about to break new ground in Britain, even reaching inside the Royal Household, her people were not to be told the truth about this newcomer.  After World War II, the thought of a Nazi officer’s daughter sitting close to the throne would have turned the national stomach!  Now, exactly forty years after the war ended, the Palace took the risk of revealing the truth.

1986

  By this time the pope’s silhouette over the House of Windsor was spreading effectively, especially over those who featured most prominently in the Vatican's plans – Charles and Diana.  Since their marriage in 1981, the obvious spiritual vacuum of their lives (in what we now know was a loveless marriage) made them vulnerable to Roman Catholic subtlety.  Charles, a veritable Mr. Facing Everywhere, was revealing signs of a conflict with his Protestant upbringing.  In September whilst on holiday in Yorkshire, Charles the Heir to the Protestant throne attended a Roman Catholic service.  Perhaps this was why he often left his wife to go fishing in Scotland.  He had much to ponder.  Diana on the other hand had been introduced to the work of hospices run by nuns, and this in turn introduced her to Mother Teresa.  This old woman is a sinister influence over Diana, whom apparently she treats as a substitute mother.  This being so, the future queen (perhaps!) is very close indeed to being a Roman Catholic.  Her regular visits to papist priests, which began at about this time, appears to point to this.  The conversations were surely not just about her children and the weather!  Has she been receiving secret instruction in preparation for a future conversion to Roman Catholicism?  Whatever the truth of the matter, something of grave importance has been in the air for years, in more ways than one.  The effect of all this was startling.  On a visit to the Vatican, Charles and Diana actually asked the pope to celebrate mass in their presence!  The situation was far more alarming than we were led to believe, because the Roman Catholic influenced media quickly dampened down the fires of controversy.  The Queen, not wishing to have a constitutional crisis on her hands, sternly opposed the idea.  However, the news was out.  I wrote in my booklet, EARNESTLY CONTEND FOR THE FAITH, published that year: “I believe the Heir to the throne and his wife, the Prince and Princess of Wales, are secret papists already…”  Here lies the root of the present constitutional dilemma the House of Windsor faces.

1989

  Three years earlier (October 1986), the pope set the trends for what has since become a tragic but regular feature of Britain’s religious unregenerates.  He opened up the way for multi-faith gatherings, by calling together at Assisi in Italy heathen leaders of various kinds that they might “pray” for peace.  This ungodly example served to deepen the apostasy in Britain.  In September 1989, an unusual concoction was brewed in Canterbury Cathedral.  The “Festival of Faith and the Environment” was the prelude to the multi-faith worship which has succeeded it.  The posters told the tragic tale: “Pilgrimage, music, art, exhibitions, worship, a conference, prayer, dance, liturgy, workshops, vigils… For the pilgrimages, up to 150 people drawn from many faiths and environmental organisations will take one of three walking routes lasting 8-12 days… The cathedral will open its doors and grounds to the largest ever celebration of religion and ecology… Throughout the Festival, Buddhists, Muslims, Christians, Baha’is, Jews, Sikhs and Hindus will celebrate, each in their own way with their care for nature through special acts of worship and prayer… On Sunday morning an ecumenical liturgy will be celebrated at the Cathedral by the Archbishop of Canterbury, assisted by members of all the main Christian denominations.”  Archbishop Runcie lied about the event.  Upon enquiry, his chaplain wrote on Runcie’s behalf: “There is no multi-faith worship taking place in the cathedral over the course of the weekend.”  In fact there were two multi-faith pilgrimages, one led by Baha’i and the other from the Hindu temple.  During the service which followed there was no reference to Jesus at all!  Evidently, on such apostate and blasphemous occasions, all are welcome – except God the Son and His elect people!  The presence of the Queen, the supposed “Defender of the Faith”, at these ungodly events (in the following three years) indicates her support of the general apostasy.  On behalf of the VPIF I wrote to Her Majesty reminding her of the uniqueness of Christ.  He is the only way to the Father (John 14:6), the only mediator between God and man (1 Timothy 2:5) and the only way of salvation (Acts 4:12).  I received no satisfactory reply, just the usual bland response.

1992

  The Queen admitted publicly that 1992 was a “horrible year” for her family, surely the understatement of her reign, but she appears not to know why almighty God has dealt her such a blow.  In March her second son’s marriage collapsed, following the publication of photographs of his wife acting like Nell Gwyn in the South of France.  Within weeks her daughter was divorced, and the separation of Charles and Diana brought the year to a suitable close.  “Annus Horribilis” indeed!  However, even such tragic events paled against the backcloth of intrigue in which Diana was the central character.   During the summer, a book was published claiming to accurately portray the disastrous state of her marriage to the Heir Apparent.  The book received maximum publicity throughout the world.  Usually such publications are not treated too seriously, but as the weeks passed with headlines screaming, it became more and more apparent that the author was correct – Diana herself was behind the book!  What deadly game was being played?  Whatever the facts, there is no doubt that by her action Diana (single handed?) has brought the entire House of Windsor to its knees.  Not even Mrs. Simpson did that in the 1930's at the time of the Abdication.  The risks she faced were enormous (the Duchess of York having already been banished from the Royal Family for her misdeeds), when one realises the awesome influence of the Establishment.  Besides, her duties brought her into regular contact with Charles’ family.  She must have taken these matters into consideration when she determined to ruin her husband, who just happened to be Heir to the throne.  Three things bolstered her courage.  First, was her astonishing international popularity.  Diana is the most popular personality in the world, her photogenic charm and beauty have seen to that.  She knew she could do no wrong in the eyes of millions.  In any case, if the people failed her she had an ace up each sleeve.  She literally possessed the future king.  Thirdly, if by some unspeakable disaster she was robbed of him, she also has influence over her other son Harry the next in line to the throne after William!  Diana knew, that even if she lost the throne as well she might, she can still exercise power behind it through either of her sons, and at the same time be secure from royal ire.  The Establishment is powerless to deal with her.  But did she act alone?  One doubts whether even Diana could muster the nerve to take on the monarchy by herself, a veteran of a thousand years of backstairs intrigue.  So who is behind her, and was her unhappy marriage the sole reason for it all?  The impact of Andrew Morton’s revelations had not subsided when a fresh scandal erupted.  A snooper overheard an intimate telephone conversation between Diana and a male admirer.  It later transpired he is a member of a well known Roman Catholic family, and that his uncle is a high ranking Jesuit priest of the old traditional school!  As they say in law courts, I rest my case!

1993

  The year opened with a great deal of discussion about the so-called “Camillagate” tape.  This time Charles’ telephone conversation was overheard, to a friend of many years (Camilla), and its contents by all accounts brought blushes to the cheeks of those who should not have been reading the transcript of the conversation.  However, whatever the story behind this particular scandal it has nothing to do with the main gist of this feature, except to add to the persistent suggestion that the Prince of Wales is unfit to be a future king.  Now we can understand why his mother has steadfastly refused to abdicate in his favour, despite the persistent pressures of the media with a papist axe to grind.  Queen Victoria did likewise.  Her ne’er-do-well son Edward (VII) was sixty nine before becoming king upon her death.  In the meantime, everyone in Britain, and also no doubt the Commonwealth, has been left battered and baffled by events of the past year and is asking, Where does the House of Windsor go from here?  Even Constitutional experts are uncertain.  As long as the Queen remains healthy the status quo can be maintained, but what then?  The Protestant throne, which has held firm for centuries, is rattling in the winds of change.  It is a scenario the Vatican has been painting throughout that period.  However, the plan has yet to be fully realised.  Popery waits patiently for the vacation of the throne, having already infiltrated the Royal Family and the church over which it wields an influence.  Charles and Diana will eventually be divorced, and the Constitutional crises resulting will be the Vatican’s opportunity to control affairs.  Diana is already fascinated by papal claims (there is talk of “canonizing” one of her ancestors!), a divorce from Charles and his family and what they represent would provide her with the opportunity to officially convert to Roman Catholicism.  Subtle attempts have already been made, which would explain her friendships with priests and Mother Teresa.  In other words, the guiding hands upon Prince William’s shoulders are not only those of his mother.  Diana’s mark in history will prove more significant than anyone could possibly have envisaged.  Either foolishly, or wilfully, she has allowed herself to be a tool in the hands of vastly experienced knaves.  Perhaps, one day she will appreciate how she and her personal unhappiness were cynically manipulated by subtle messengers from Rome.  Too late!  The burning of Windsor Castle was a symbol of our tragic times.  One could see the Protestant crown and throne reflected in the glow.

Peter Trumper (1934-2015) was a Gospel minister in the United Kingdom.  He was a Presbyterian minister before seceding from that denomination.  He founded and pastored an evangelical church in Wales, and later pastored a church in another part of Wales.  Although suffering from Multiple Sclerosis, he established the Vocal Protestants’ International Fellowship (VPIF) in 1987.  A firm Bible-loving Protestant, he faithfully stood against Popery.  The article above was taken from 1521 (the VPIF organ), No. 13.  We first republished it in The Bible Based Ministries Magazine, issues 75 and 76, 1995, by permission of the author.

Bible Based Ministries
info@biblebasedministries.co.uk
www.biblebasedministries.co.uk

WORLDWIDE CONTACT FOR BIBLE BASED MINISTRIES:
Contending for the Faith Ministries
695 Kentons Run Ave   Henderson, NV 89052   USA
BBMOrders@aol.com