Anglican bishop compares Rio de Janeiro Islamic murderer to Catholic and Evangelical pro-lifers
By Julio Severo
Satan, the Supreme Blamer, was the first to rise up with accusations against the children of God.
Centuries later, Nero, an insane emperor, rose up. He had Rome torched and blamed Christians.
Centuries still later, Satanist Karl Marx arose. He was a former Protestant and blamed God, family and Christians for the evils in the world.
Today, the Supreme Accuser uses not only people like Nero and Marx, but also nominally Christian individuals who, while claiming to despise Nero, are lovers of Marx. Among those there are Catholic and Protestant leaders who use* Christ’s Gospel merely as a stump for Marxist ideas.
In their hands, the Kingdom of God is a mere façade for a socialist theocratic kingdom*, where “kingdom” ideology imposes a Gospel molded in the image and likeness of Karl Marx to rule this world.
Everything opposing the socialist “kingdom” agenda is treated as… apostasy.
Even Christian opposition to abortion and sodomy agenda raises the socialists’ ire, and their faithful Catholic and Protestant lovers prefer alignment with… their ideological siblings.
Any crime, regardless of how distant from Christians, is used as an excuse for them to take revenge on Christians.
In the recent case of an Islam sympathizer who murderedstudents in a Rio de Janeiro school, a progressive (or “kingdomist”, or Marxist, or socialist, or whatever) evangelical leader compared* the murderer to Catholic and Evangelical Christians who oppose abortion.
In another text, in his routine reasoning poisoned by ideological malice decorated and topped with “Christian love,” this same “kingdom” evangelical, who is an Anglican bishop, declares* in regard to abortion,
“Anyone who thinks, for instance, that by banningabortion he is going to restrain the growth of this nefarious practice, is mistaken. Clandestine clinics express gratitude for any attempt to hinder abortion from being regulated in Brazil.”
Coming from an ordinary individual, this would be an irresponsible and stupid statement. But coming from an Anglican bishop, can one say that these are pure and innocent words?
Such schizophrenic linguistic gymnastics are reminiscent of what Lula once said: “I am against abortion, but I support its legalization.”
These schizophrenic linguistic gymnastics also remind us of Caio Fábio, who says that he is against abortion, but he counsels* its practice — an inconsistency as flagrant as his views and counseling about homosexuality. Not coincidentally, both progressive evangelicals figure prominently in the sensationalist tabloid Genizah.
The fact is, abortion is homicide. My friend Fr. Luiz Carlos Lodi da Cruz, who has a degree in law and is a prominent Catholic pro-life leader, said this about the Anglican bishop’s thinking: “An individual person has an intrinsic value, a certain dignity owing to the simple fact that he is a person. The human person’s dignity is one of the foundations of the Federal Republic of Brazil (first article, III, Federal Constitution). Therefore, what matters is not to know if the overall number of abortions will decrease through its ‘legalization.’ What matters is to know if this human individual in this woman’s womb will or will not be protected if abortion is ‘regulated’.”
The “kingdom” evangelical might have tried to hide his intentions, but the obvious implications of his reasoning are easy to discern if we apply his “logic” to other equally horrendous situations,
“Anyone who thinks, for instance, that by banningrape he is going to restrain the growth of this nefarious practice, is mistaken. Clandestine rapists express gratitude for any attempt to hinder rape from being regulated in Brazil.”
“Anyone who thinks, for instance, that by banningmurder he is going to restrain the growth of this nefarious practice, is mistaken. Clandestine murderers express gratitude for any attempt to hinder murder from being regulated in Brazil.”
“Anyone who thinks, for instance, that by banningpedophilia he is going to restrain the growth of this nefarious practice, is mistaken. Clandestine pedophiles express gratitude for any attempt to hinder pedophilia from being regulated in Brazil.”
I had already refuted at length that kind of thinking in my article on an evangelical leader who attacked Christian activism against a Brazilian anti-“homophobia” bill and homosexual “marriage”. Nowadays, that leader writes, together with the aforementioned Anglican bishop, in the sensationalist internet tabloid Genizah.
Inconsistency and paradox dominate the Anglican bishop’s words, which purport to oppose abortion, but display clear indifference to its legalization. In the same breath, he shows favoritism for Marxist ideas while claiming to have no sympathy for Marx. And in a letter on so-called Christian love, he had the chutzpah to say that he doesn’t make use of snide language, but in the same letter, insulted Brazilian philosopher Olavo de Carvalho. He is a silver-medal schizophrenic linguistic gymnast, trailing his gold-medal friend Caio Fábio.
What about PLC 122, the anti-“homophobia” bill threatening religious freedom in Brazil? Anglican bishop Hermes Fernandes laughs* derisively as if Christians opposing the gay agenda were paranoid.
But if I were in his shoes, I would be crying. The Anglican Church is demolishing itself with the advance of the gay agenda in its midst, having already ordained gay and lesbian bishops. And its “more conservative” representatives, like Robinson Cavalcanti, a Brazilian Anglican bishop, are wallowing in a bottomless pit of inconsistencies. Cavalcanti, for instance, founded the Progressive Evangelical Movement, which helped elect socialist Lula to the Brazilian presidency years ago. In turn, Lula put the gay agenda on the pedestal during his administration. Even at the end of his administration, Lula, the champion of gay activists and progressive Christians, gave numerous gifts to gay activists.
Today, with his typical schizophrenic linguistic gymnastics, Bishop Fernandes, who lives in the US, is a devout backer of Dilma Rousseff and Barack Obama, both followers of the Marxist religion of abortion and sodomy. Might the Anglican bishop blame Dilma and Obama for the promotion of that religion in the Brazilian and American society? No, he simply couldn’t do that. He was trained only to blame conservative Christians.
Whether opposed or not to abortion and the sodomist agenda, what progressive evangelicals do and say eventually contributes to the advance of the socialist agenda, although they swear they want nothing to do with socialism. The many contributors include Ariovaldo Ramos, who traveled* to Venezuela to lend his support to Marxist dictator Hugo Chavez; and Caio Fábio, whoadmitted* that for years he had worked for a rapprochement between Brazilian evangelicals on the one hand and Lula and his socialist party on the other. Other prominent Evangelical socialists in Brazil are Ricardo Gondim, Paul Freston and Ed Rene Kivitz.
They wreak untold havoc on the spreading of the Gospel by perverting it and making it serve an ideology alien to Jesus Christ. Every attempt to build a human kingdom on that ideology has brought about the manifestation of the kingdom of darkness: slaughter, genocide, lies, destruction and horrendous persecution to Christ’s true followers.
When society is destroyed by the fire of their ideology, Marxists, in the tradition of Nero, are quick to blame pro-life and pro-family conservative Christians, who thus must also suffer the accusations of progressive Catholics and Evangelicals.
If someone says that this is the spirit of Nero among Christians, “kingdomists” and progressive Christians quickly deny it, saying, “We prefer the religious descendants of Marx!” or in the style of the schizophrenic linguistic gymnastics, “We want to bring out the best in them!”
It doesn’t matter. Ultimately, the result is the same.