Their Covert Activities Are No Longer Hidden

by Matthew J. Browning from Wake Up!

The continuing malaise within the United Kingdom and among her kindred people, which focuses attention on the subtle and pernicious alien forces - so often in recent years appearing in the flawed advice given to Her Majesty and her ministers - intent on unseating the House of David that the usurper rule in his stead, prompts us to reprint this article.

When we are thinking about a change in the way we do things it may be useful - it may even be wise - to determine what the immediate effects would be. Obviously, if it means a deterioration in standards, we would be sensible to take it no further. Of course, the change may bring immediate benefit and encourage its implementation for a trial period at least.

However, things might not lend themselves to reversal once begun, so it would seem to be necessary in such a case to determine what the long term effects of the change would be, so as to avoid disappointment and perhaps even calamity. Thinking about it one might reasonably conclude it might be prudent to learn first of all what is the reason for the change. In The Daily Telegraph, 20th August, 1996, Clifford Longley wrote under the title "A Protestant wind's still blowing," His opening words were:

"Would a wise householder, G.K. Chesterton once asked, cut through a beam in his loft just because he could not see what it was for? It is a question that needs to be asked whenever reformers want to hack away at the historical anachronisms of the British constitution. There is a risk that the whole British roof might fall in."

But the real question to be answered arises out of Chesterton's question, and it is this: What is it for? It is the question that Clifford Longley seems unable - or perhaps unwilling - to answer. This is made clear in his second paragraph, where he claims that the prohibition against a Roman Catholic occupying the throne of the United Kingdom is an anachronism:

"It means nothing. Worse, if it did mean something, what it meant would be an offence."

Reading on through his remarks it becomes apparent that Mr. Longley is afraid that it really does mean something, and that it is an offence to him; just as the removal of the prohibition would be an offence to the faithful ones among God's People. So long as Romanism exists the prohibition remains a necessity. The circumstances which gave rise to the Act Of Settlement 1701 are again in the making, for the subversive activities of Rome in all its societies have operated covertly since the days of the Reformation and are now overtly, as with Mr. Longley, pushing at the bastions of our security and liberty. The aim is as it has always been, the overthrow of God's People.

When we read further we come to another version of that odd fallacious statement which has been thrown at us for a great number of years, in the hope that we would be foolish enough to believe it:

"Britain has an unwritten constitution. We have either lost the plans of the house or we never had any.. In place of a written constitution we have a coronation... a moment of mystery, crucial to national identity."

A moment of mystery indeed, for it was then, on that second day of June, 1953, that Her Majesty, Elizabeth 11, our undoubted Queen, received into her hands the British constitution - as did her forebears over many generations. And this was done in sympathy with the injunctions enshrined within the pages of the same (Deuteronomy 17:18) - the Royal Law, wherein is written the Commandments, Statutes and Judgments of Almighty God.

Not only do we have in the Holy Bible our written constitution, which anyone can acquire - though some will unwisely suggest a modern version with changes that are misleading - its pages also carry the warranty that in His New Covenant with Israel and with Judah He will put His Law in our inward parts and write it in our hearts (Jeremiah 31:-33-; Hebrews 10:-16-).

That really is all that is needful, and Mr. Longley and those of his school of thought would be wise to recognize that it is written and constitutional - just as his DNA is imprinted in his very being. Moreover, we know what that Rock is for, and it shall not be moved. Neither shall the fabric of that House which stands upon it suffer to be pulled apart.

Further on in his article Mr. Longley reveals great confusion of thought:

"But the anomaly is now glaring. An heir to the British throne could marry a Jew, Muslim, atheist or Methodist without a penalty, but still cannot marry a Catholic."

Do not be deceived by this. The fact that a statement of prohibition is not made regarding these does not mean that such a marriage is permissible. Moreover, there is a clear distinction between the Christian faith and those of the Jew, the Muslim and the atheist, and a Christian monarch is unlikely to enter into union with any of them or one of another faith. But Roman Catholicism is apostate and an attempt by the arch?deceiver to usurp the Throne of God in the hearts of the faithful. But:

"Why, in a tolerant society, should anyone want to prevent a Roman Catholic, eventually coming to the throne?" asks Mr. Longley.

Because: it would mean that the authority of Christ would be usurped by that ruler of His people giving allegiance to an alien court. And, finally, we must always bear in mind that tolerance of things which are not of God must never be allowed to come between ourselves and our loyalty to Him and His Christ.

* * * * *

"Those intrigued by Bible Prophecy might be interested in a curious passage in the Book of Revelation, Chapter 8, Verse 11, speaking of a flaming substance called "wormwood" falling from the heavens and poisoning the waters of the world causing many deaths. Curiously enough, the Ukrainian words for "wormwood" are "polyn" or "chernobyl".

The National Message

* * * * *

Sir William Osler was a great physician, teacher and humanist. Medical science has progressed far beyond the knowledge of his era but his teachings hold wisdom for us today.

In 1913, he gave an address to the students of Yale University titled "A Way of Life". His words might well have been directed to any of us, in fact they are timely food for thought for all of us. The following are excerpts from this address:

"Every man has a philosophy of life, in thought, in word, or in deed, worked out in himself unconsciously ... As it grows with the growth, it cannot be taught ... Character ... is long-standing habit. Now the way of life that I preach is a habit to be acquired gradually by long and steady repetition. It is the practice of living for the day only, and for the day's work - life in day-tight compartments...

... The chief worries of life arise from the foolish habit of looking before and after ... Shut the door on dead yesterdays, drop a curtain before the unborn tomorrows - then you are "safe for today"... The load of tomorrow, added to that of yesterday, carried today, makes the strongest falter. Shut off the future as tightly as the past... The day of a man's salvation is now - the life of the present, of today, lived earnestly, intently, without a forward?looking thought, is the only insurance for the future. Let the limit of your horizon be a twenty?four hour cycle...

Waste of energy, mental distress, nervous worries, dog the steps of a man who is anxious about the future... Prepare to cultivate the habit of a life of day-tight compartments. Do not be discouraged like every other habit the acquisition takes time,... (but) the quiet life in day-tight compartments will help you to bear your own and others' burdens with a light heart..."