Volume 2: The Spirit of the Church

by Ricardo B. de los Santos

Can you tell if one is the true church?

Yes, because God has given it his telltale signs.

Can you enumerate the most important signs which we can not miss (about the true Church)?

Yes, here are some:

1st, it is founded on the humble person of Peter (upon this rock).

2nd, the gates of Hades will not permit against it.

3rd, it has the continuity that is unbroken beginning its founding (the apostilic succession since 33AD must not be disrupted by any “falling away” or any event that causes a break)

4th, by their fruits you shall know them. This church must have sanctifying graces that would produce saints.

How are these telltale signs evidently not met?

When there is no link with the person of Peter, then it is not Christ’s church, as he was the pre-eminent apostle
When evil powers are not able to suppress this church, then it must be the church built by Christ
When there is no break since it was built by Christ in 33AD
When it does not produce saints then it must be inutile for it has not borne fruits of holiness

May we have specific examples without naming them so as not to offend?

A church, even though not established personally by Peter has still links with him if one of the eleven historically has nurtured it.
A church never suppressed since it was nurtured by one of the twelve.
A church which confirmed to exist historically since 33AD as attributed to Christ. Hence, a church built in 43AD or 430AD show discontinuity and could not account for the souls before they are built (especially if claimed much later)
A church which could not claim sanctity or holiness because of its founders, leaders and members

Then you must be alluding to the Roman Catholic Church?

But the establishment of Christ’s church is not based on a locality but on a person. This occurred when St. Peter promised the Christ to feed His flock. Even if the apostle was martyred in Rome, his flock, the early Christians were already spread in the ancient world as in the diaspora. Archaeologically proving his grave to be beneath St. Peter’s basilica only proved his remains are there. But where the faith he taught flourished was not only in Rome.

Why, what could be wrong if the Catholic Church is Roman-based?

The very adjective catholic, used by St. Ignatius of Antioch to refer to the church, meant it should be universal and not limited by spatial considerations. Even the Creed which is the main feature of Catholic faith as taught by the apostles, article by article, did not include the mention of Rome. The Church does not have to die or become sedentary on the bones of a martyr, no matter how holy these relics are, but on the living nourishment of his ideals, examples and teachings.

Supposing the church will continue to be based in Rome, what could be the implications? The Church with such great hierarchy and responsibilities must have a seat of governance.

The church is not just an organization. It is a living mystical body. Its faculty and heart should never be contained by mere men because its Head is Christ. Prophecies concerning Rome and Vatican, itself manifest that its seat of power, the Papacy, may be used by the adversary.

Then, you contradict yourself because you were quoting that the gates of Hell will not prevail over it (the church Christ built)

There is no contradiction, the gates of Hades will not really prevail over the church that Christ built because it is a living mystical body. One must not equate this church with a material church which would be rebellious enough to revolutionize its essential teachings. When a pope or actually an anti-pope betrays the church’s basic tenets then let us remember that Christ, indeed, is the Head of the Church.

It's very confusing, we discuss about the pre-eminence of Peter (upon this rock; cephas) and the apostolic succession and then are we to say that the Papal seat which is supposed to be protected by the Holy Spirit can be used against the Church itself?

But history is replete with lessons of the past. Cephas, the High Priest was the one who persecuted the Messiah. Vatican suffered the governance of the anti-popes. But the Church prevailed and continued to thrive even if it was forced to transfer to Avignon because of the anti-Christ Napoleon Bonaparte.

It is clear now, so because the Pope transferred to Avignon, the Church prevailed so we are only talking about the change of locus for the seat of power of the Pontiff.

The seat of power is not as important as material men think. In fact, when Jerusalem denied the early Christians, they settled in Antioch and the diaspora was effected. Rome only resulted from this spread. The Church is where the mystical body goes to continue living.

Do you think that after the safeguards made through centuries, the Papacy could still be influenced by the Anti-Christ? You, yourself identified Napoleon Bonaparte, as an anti-Christ so don't you think the so-called danger is past?

And yet, Adolph Hitler was an anti-Christ, too. And we have men now who hate the Church and the Christians so much that they resort to all forms of evil. The situation of the world is now at its WORST. The Papacy did not only fail to safeguard itself from harm, it has even invited evil to enter the church.

I think that such is stupendous and horrendous claim. How can the Papacy, which is Christ's Vicar on earth invite evil to enter the church?

In fact, John XXIII (Angelo Roncalli) did just that when he opened Vatican II for the reforms to be made. There is only one Vatican and to have a second one is ominous as having a second John XXIII. This calls to mind the activities of Viaticanaus Hill before Christianity took over because it was a hill for divinations that augurs devil worship.

Naku, wag mo naman sirain ang pananampalataya namin.(please don't destroy our faith). Are you some kind of the so-called rabid _______ Christians who have nothing to do but attack Catholics?

We are not trying to destroy anyone’s faith. If one is really constant with her faith, then there is nothing wrong when such faith is discussed or even challenged. We assure you that we are not one of those so-called rabid _______ Christians, If you are somehow scandalized, so are we, because we also love the Church that Christ built. That is why we are scandalized if it is being hammered in its very foundations.

But St. John XXIII is a canonized saint. How can you accuse him of such?

He was canonized quite fast, that’s true. But it doesn’t change the fact that he has instituted “reforms” that are grave especially on the perpetual sacrifice or the Mass. He did this by even inviting Protestant Charismatics to undermine the essence of the Eucharistic celebration. You must be young so that you do not know the difference between what between what used to be the Mass which was very solemn and faithful as compared to the New Order.

Aren't you contradicting yourself? You were even calling the martys and saints His jury when He comes back as our Judge.

We haven’t changed our position. But it’s unlikely that this pope belongs to that august body. What better way to perpetrate continuously perform a crime but to declare the former perpetrators not only as innocent performers of duty but excellent achievers, holy, in fact. Just like now, you are already arguing that he couldn’t be as I claim he is because he is already declared a saint. After Vatican II, a time must be coming that you take a picture of a person, using one kind of camera and he is at once, canonized.

No. seriously, the lady is already in distress. Why don't you give her a reason hy you do ot like he new order of the Mass? If you can just give one reason then you might be able to help us.

Yes, and then may I invite you to learn on your own the other things about Novus Ordo so that I will no appear as scandalizing your faith. In the consecration, it used to be said that “the cup of the new and everlasting covenant” will be shed for “many”. Now, in the new mass, the most precious blood of Jesus is shed for “all”. If the impact does not hit you yet, elementals were not included in the consecration, but now “all” have been given the right.

My God! That for you is problem. Isn't that a fact of more charity being practiced by your church when it does not only pray for "many" but for "all"?

In fact, Jesus’ most precious blood should not be shed for “all” so that their “sins must be forgiven”. When we do this memorial, one must remember that He shed His blood for many to benefit from it but He knows that not everyone (all) are worthy of His sacrifice. To go beyond the old formulae is to undermine His will. It’s not your blood nor the Pope’s blood being shed here His will must be respected or we should not say Amen.

I think that you guys should leave religion a while because debates on religious matters are endless. Can we discuss lycanthropy again? Why is it called lycanthropy?

Lycanthropy definitely is from the word meaning “wolf” but applied also to the transformation of men into other carnivores; weretigers in China and Sri Lanka, etc. Interesting, too in the study of feral children like Lucan, who were raised by wolves. This would remind us of Romulus and Remus who were nursed by a she-wolf when they were abandoned and grew up as founders of Rome according to the legend.

Is the Tikbalang unique only to the Philippines?

The Tikbalang or tigbalang is an elemental with the head, feet and tail of the horse but with arms and hands of a human. The closest link is the Greek centaur which is better known in mythology. Our word for bad dreams is nightmare of British origin because those who were still able to wake up tell of a furious horse with hooves pounding on them. Elsewhere, the old woman pulling the feet is the phenomenon. However, in the Philippines the Batibot is the culprit.

Batibot? Ano ba ito naglolokohan na tayo?(What Batibot? Are we playing games now?) Ang Batibot ay titulo ng isang programang pambata na pinapanood ko pa noon. (Batibot is the title of a children's program I used to watch before).

Tama naman. Batibot nga rin ang titulo ng isang programang pambata pero ito rin ang tawag sa matabang mala-aninong pumapatay sa mga binabangungot, lalo ang mga busog na di nagdarasal bago matulog, sa pagdagan sa kanila. (Also correct. Batibot indeed is the title also of a children’s program but it is also the name of the fat shadow figure that kill those who are too full (of food intake) who fail to pray and who die in their sleep by sitting on them while asleep.)

This may be slanderous to the creators of the program.

We can’t help it Miss Guadalupe, the monster indeed is called Batibot, too. I hope that this does not offend anyone but it just happens perhaps because the devil is also clever. For instance, by the way it twists the meaning of things in culture currents, for example:

Cephas (Aramaic for Peter)- kepyas (cunt)

Bobola, Bobo (name of saints) – bobo (dimwit)

Thecla (name of a saint) – tekla (feces)

John (name of saints) – john toilet)

I hope I did not offend your sensitivities.

The Roots

For years, I have served as a useful source to those seeking inspiration, help, or advice. I finally decided to own that role and be intentional about it. I started writing about my passions, my thoughts, and curious wonderings about our world. I founded In Factum with a mission to give others a taste of what goes on in my mind, and I have been at it ever since.

Dr. Ricardo B. de los Santos

The In Factum subjects may fall under the following categories:

Miracles of Saints, Angels and Demons, The Elementals: Nature Spirits, Transformers and Shape Shifters, Magicians and Psychic Healers, Ancestral Worship and Shamanism, Church Reforms, Divinations and Omens, Parapsychology and Metaphysics, Ghosts and Ghouls, Herbolarios and Herbalism and others topics which may relate to faith and religion.

Note: The articles here are highly opinionated and are therefore very subjective. Therefore, we do not want to impose these subjective experiences to the reader and would like their to exercise extreme caution.