Reading Mark Mendiola's Article, Allies or Adversaries? A Unique Alliance Imperiled (2001)

The twelfth issue of LCG's recruitment magazine, Tomorrow's World (January-February 2001), featured an article by Mark Mendiola of Pocatello, Idaho entitled "Allies or Adversaries? A Unique Alliance Imperiled." (pp. 20-24.) This was the tenth of several articles Mendiola would write for this recruitment magazine. Here Mendiola discusses relations between the United States and Britain to scare monger that these nations would soon endure military subjugation by a future European power.

Mendiola talks of the United States as being created miraculously linking respect for the sacrifices of the American revolutionaries with his religion.

Through a series of obvious miracles and decisive victories, Americans were able to defeat the red-coated British troops, overcoming incredible odds and predictions of imminent defeat. Following British General Charles Cornwallis’ surrender at Yorktown, Va., in October 1781, British regimental bands appropriately played the tune—“The World Turned Upside Down.” Indeed, it was! (p. 21.)

He talks of the current friendly relations between the United States and Britain despite the history of war during the founding of the United States.

Despite what British officials considered brazen armed rebellion against royal authority, the two nations since developed a fraternal closeness unparalleled in history. That affinity has flared to prominence during times of crisis, when, invariably, Britain and the United States have come to each other’s defense like brothers. (p. 21.)

He insists that the political power of the United States and Britain is to be explained by their ancestry.

The extraordinary surge of the United States and British Commonwealth to economic and military global preeminence during the 1800s and 1900s can be explained by understanding their ancestral origins. (p. 21.)

But both nations also contain many peoples who happen to have no such blood relationship with those claimed to be modern Israelites among the Americans and the British. This problem is conveniently overlooked. Also other factors contributing to their political power are marginalized.

The United States and Britain have fulfilled remarkably God’s promise that Ephraim would develop into a multitude (a company, group or commonwealth) of nations, and Manasseh into a great superpower. History confirms unmistakably this incredible fulfillment. Collectively, the United States and Britain are modern Israel, and have been a blessing to people of all races, backgrounds and nationalities, as God promised, helping maintain peace, prosperity and civility throughout the world. (p. 22.)

Problems associated with territorial expansion of these nations are ignored. Due to the tragic fact that the Native Americans had no immunity to numerous diseases that existed among Europeans many Native Americans were killed by introduced diseases that reduced their population and rendered them unable to prevent being conquered by Europeans. Were these mass epidemics part of (LCG's) God's alleged miraculous fulfillment of this promise to Abraham as interpreted by British Israelism?

Also the conquest and dispossession of the Native American peoples are overlooked. The British Empire expanded by conquering the peoples of the territories upon which it expanded. Africans were abducted from the continent and kept as slaves in parts of the United States. These problems tend to be ignored among the Armstrongite COGs in favor of the discredited dogma of British Israelism.

Chronologically, the British Empire reached its zenith before the United States achieved its ascendancy, but just as the sun has set on that once-proud empire, the United States is now in decline, giving way to an empire forming on the European continent. ... Britain’s decline, from the most powerful nation in the world to a small offshore European island, was as swift as the rise of the United States. (p. 22.)

But why did the British Empire end? It is often assumed in COG writings that (their) God just ended it but this ignores what really happened. One of many reasons why it collapsed was that the colonized peoples could no longer believe in its claimed legitimacy. As the colonized peoples ruled over the British Empire gained more education and learned more about their colonial rulers they perceived that there was no kind of superiority that entitled the British to rule over the colonized peoples. Once a critical mass of the colonized peoples perceived this fact British colonial rule became nonviable and eventually the British government cut their losses and granted independent to the colonies in response to the widespread calls for independence. De-colonization was, among other things, a pragmatic concession to the fact that British colonial rule could no longer justify itself to the colonized.

Mendiola then talks of the various aligned interests between the United States and Britain in the 20th Century. But since this is an Armstrongite publication Mendiola then scare mongers that a future European Empire threatens Britain and the United States. He also stirs up crude sectarian hostilities by presenting this threat as part of a wider clash between Protestants and Catholics.

Since King Henry VIII’s split with the Roman Catholic Church in the 1530s, the British defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588 and the Protestant Reformation of the 16th century, British-descended nations have been bastions of Protestantism, most directly challenging Catholic religious supremacy throughout Europe and the western world. 

Just as the 20th century has been called the American century, the 19th century was the British century. As we enter the 21st century, the international dominance of those primarily Protestant peoples is being challenged by a resurgent Roman Catholic Europe, which for centuries has been at odds with British and American interests. (p. 23.)

HWA and many of the COG splinter groups teach that in the near future a European Empire will arise and militarily conquer the United States and Britain.

Mendiola then presents Britain as facing a choice aligning its political interests with the United States or the European Union. Note the crass appeal to anti-Catholic paranoia.

Queen Elizabeth II swore at her 1953 coronation “to govern the peoples of the United Kingdom according to their laws and customs” and “to maintain the Protestant Reformed religion established by law.” [A eurosceptic author] points out these pledges are being negated by Britain’s deeper integration with the European Union. Relations between the Vatican and London have become increasingly close in recent decades. (p. 23.)

He then scare mongers that the Britain under Prime Minister Blair was aligning itself with the European Union by helping to place some of the British armed forces under the command of the European Union. This claim is somewhat unusual among the COGs as they tend to assume that Britain and the United States will remain aligned with each until both nations are conquered by the future European Empire.

[Margaret] Thatcher has exchanged sharp words with Blair over the direction Britain should take. She favors maintaining a close relationship with the U.S., while he supports a pro-European course. Baroness Thatcher denounced Blair’s decision to commit troops to a European rapid deployment force apart from the U.S.-dominated North Atlantic Treaty Organization, which has maintained peace in Europe for more than 50 years. She called it “monumental folly.” (p. 24.)

He scare mongers that British military personnel would be propping up the European Union and would be dominated by Germany.

The European Union hopes to have 60,000 ground troops ready for deployment by 2003. British troops would account for about 20 percent of that force and would bear the EU’s 12-star insignia on their uniforms and vehicles. Ultimately, the force would have at its disposal more than 100,000 troops and some 400 aircraft and 100 ships ready to respond to crises. It would be dominated by Germany, whose militaristic past has thrust it into armed conflict with Britain and the United States in two devastating world wars. (p. 24.)

It is so strange how the COGs keep living as though we are in 1938 and not today. After World War II the United States placed military bases in West Germany and those military bases are still stationed there. How could a future German government possibly conspire to militarily conquer the United States if there are US military bases within German territory? But the COGs choose to just let HWA's dogmatic statements do the thinking for them.

The future of that historic fraternal relationship—that “grand alliance” [between the United States and Britain]—will be tested to the extreme in the years ahead.

Since the 1930s HWA and his imitators have constantly insisted that catastrophe would soon occur in the United States. Often (though not always) they have insisted that Germans would be the main perpetrators of this future military conquest. And always this dire threat has always failed miserably.

In September 2006 Mendiola left LCG and joined Dave Pack's Restored Church of God. Around 2008 he left RCG and joined Don Billingsley's Church of God-Faithful Flock.

Alternative For Germany Deputy Leader Said "Islam Does Not Belong to Germany"

Recently the COGs have been scare mongering about the Alternative for Germany party as a sign that the far right is on the rise in Germany. By chance I listened to an interview on BBC Hardtalk with Beatrix Von Storch, the deputy leader of the Alternative for Germany party. I found myself not particularly impressed with this party.

In one part she said that "Islam does not belong to Germany" claiming that "Islam" is plotting to impose Sharia law upon German society. This claim of Muslims in general plotting to impose Sharia law is a misconception common among Islamophobic demagogues. 

In real life many Turks moved to Germany after World War II to work as part of the reconstruction of West Germany. There have been many Muslims in Germany for decades and it sounds so strange to say a politician like Von Storch to say such a thing.

PCG Says California is Cursed by (PCG's) God

Currently the State of California is experiencing massive wildfires that have so far killed at least 40 people. PCG's response to these dreadful events is to insinuate that these fires are a sign that the State of California has been cursed by PCG's God. (Richard Palmer, Why Yet More Californian Wildfires?, October 14, 2017.)

Why is California being hit by so many fires? This is not merely a freak incident. According to California governmental statistics, the state has experienced nearly 6,000 fires so far this year. Over the same period last year, that figure was 4,400. 

The total area destroyed is also increasing. This year over 300,000 acres have burned. The five-year average over the same period is 200,000.

"Why is California being hit by so many fires?" Palmer asks. One could mention the baneful influence of climate change caused by the excess emission of carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Let us look at another source to note how climate change appears to have exacerbated this dreadful situation.

Nonetheless, the California fires do align with what researchers expect to see as average temperatures rise. 

“The length of the fire season is increasing in the Mountain West,” said the University of New Mexico’s Hurteau. “The mechanism for that is in part because [as] the atmosphere warms up, the air expands and can hold more moisture.” 

This warming draws moisture out of plants, creating drier conditions earlier in the season. It also causes an earlier snowmelt in the spring, leading to more arid conditions in the summer. 

“We could have a lot more fire on these landscapes,” Hurteau said. (Vox, October 15, 2017.)

But as noted previously PCG's 1% have a history of denying or minimizing climate change in order to promote other "explanations" for various natural disasters that have occurred, such as claiming that such events are some sort of sign of the wrath of (PCG's) God for behavior contrary to PCG's teachings.

Palmer then quotes a booklet originally produced by PCG in 2011. This leads to Palmer making the following statement.

God is behind these weather disasters, and it appears California is being singularly pummeled. 

Palmer links to a 2007 article by PCG's leader, Gerald Flurry, which insinuates that the State of California is cursed because of the receivership case with WCG in 1979-80. Gerald Flurry's PCG is an offshoot of WCG which was founded in 1989.

These allegations are ridiculous. It is grossly grotesque that this absurd and offensive superstition is being promoted while so many people are suffering. PCG's 1% are wrong to claim that the State of California is somehow cursed by their bizarre, misanthropic version of God.

Incidentally this also shows why PCG's 1% historically have insisted that climate change is not real. If they admitted that the excess emission of carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases were causing or exacerbating natural disasters and bringing about climate change then they could not make this absurd and superstitious claim that the State of California is somehow cursed by PCG's God.

If PCG's 1% admitted that climate change is real then they could not claim that these fires were some sort of sign by their hate filled parody of God.

It is strange to see that people who could say something so terrible and dreadful also think that they are worthy of being followed and getting tithes from the lay members and donors outside of the organization who are called "co-workers."

PCG on Colonialism in New Zealand

New Zealand flag.

One peculiar claim HWA made was his insistence that in the Millennial reign of (HWA's) Christ all of humanity would speak one common language. Recently PCG has released an article citing the New Zealand Wars (1845-72) to prop up this bizarre claim. (Jeremiah Jacques, Does the World Need a Universal Language?, October 12, 2017.)

Does the World Need a Universal Language? 

A study of the main cause of the New Zealand Wars points emphatically toward the answer.

He presents this article as a study of "the main cause" of the New Zealand Wars. Let us assess his article.

First he talks about a battle in Opotiki that occurred in October 1865.

This bloody October 1865 clash was just one short chapter in the nearly-three-decades-long conflict now known as the New Zealand Wars. All together, the violence of these wars claimed the lives of some 2,150 Māori and around 745 representatives of the British Crown.

What a terrible situation! And yet this historical fact is now going to be used to prop up HWA's bizarre claim that there will only be one language among humanity during the millennial rule of Christ.

The article gets its chronology confused.

Historians agree that the seeds of the conflict were sown 15 years before that Opotiki clash. 

The author is in error saying 15 years. He actually means 25 years referring to the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840 as is seen later in the article. PCG cannot even get that detail right and yet they expect their audience to believe that PCG's leadership is somehow uniquely connected to God.

[Update: October 31, 2017. Someone at PCG has since corrected the "15 years" statement to "25 years".]

Let us continue with the article.

Historians agree that the seeds of the conflict were sown 15 years before that Opotiki clash. Ironically enough, they were sown in pursuit of peace: Māori chiefs were seeking protection from sailors, convicts and merchants who were bringing strife into their villages. The Māori also wanted security from any potential takeover by colonizing powers such as France, and to bring an end to the intertribal Musket Wars that were killing tens of thousands of their people.

On the other side of the negotiating table were the British who sought to expand the reach of their stabilizing empire.

The author insists that the British had a "stabilizing empire." But this view depends on who you are talking to. In order to rule over so many peoples and territory it was necessary to subvert, cripple or even destroy whatever governmental institutions existed among those persons and within those lands.

PCG and many of the other COGs teach British Israelism, the idea that the white British and American peoples are descendants of the ancient Israelites mentioned in the Old Testament. Part of their teaching is that when the northern Kingdom of Israel was defeated by the Assyrians in c. 720 BC part of (their version of) God's punishment on this people was to withhold bestowing blessings upon them for 2,520 years until AD 1800 onward. At that point (their version of) God blessed the white British and American peoples with vast material blessings. They insist that the vast colonial expansion of the British Empire was ordained by (their version of) God.

Jacques then mentions that about 535 Māori chiefs and the British signed the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840 but the Māori chiefs were using a version of this document translated into Māori whereas the English version used different words.

But due to mistranslations in the Māori version and misunderstandings, many on the Māori side did not think they were giving up sovereignty. Instead, they believed they were assimilating themselves into the British legal system and giving the British the right to keep the peace, but that the treaty allowed them to maintain the right to rule themselves and to manage their own affairs. ... 

During the months after the treaty was signed, the conflicts caused by these “different understandings” grew increasingly intense. They eventually erupted into war. ... 

And the dispute did not entirely end at the conclusion of the New Zealand Wars. To this day, the Treaty of Waitangi remains the subject of heated debate and disagreement between factions on the two sides. Disputes about the Treaty’s meaning continue to cause strife that is the antithesis of the harmony it was intended to bring about.

Jacques links to an article about remembering the New Zealand Wars of 1845-72 but it seems he has nothing to say about the article's discussion of the pain that the Māori people have endured since those times, an common experience for those who have been colonized over the centuries. That is a shame but unsurprising. Armstrongism's views of British Israelism leads people to think that colonization was a good thing and causes them to ignore what it wrought to the colonized such as the Māori, Native Americans and indigenous Australians.

But Jacques puts aside the issues of colonization to prop up HWA's bizarre claim that in the future there will be one language spoken by all of humanity.

In a world of 6,700 languages and 39,000 distinct dialects, communication problems are inevitable. ... Often, as in the case of translating the English word “sovereignty” into Māori, approximations must be used. ... In most cases, the confusion stays within the realm of embarrassment and inconvenience. But sometimes—as in the example of the Treaty of Waitangi—it ends up veering into more serious territory, and causing long lasting problems.

It is terribly naive to imply that difficulties in translation were "the main cause" of the New Zealand Wars. When one overthrows a government by force, such as the governmental institutions that existed among the Māori before colonization, it is not a misunderstanding. It is not because the colonized and the colonizers just spoke different languages. What an absurd thing to say.

Jacques insists that after the second coming all of humanity will speak a common language.

The Bible plainly shows that after Jesus Christ returns to establish the Kingdom of God on Earth, the peoples of all nations will come to speak just one universal language. ... this future worldwide language will also be free of the ambiguity and imperfection that corrupt all modern languages. It will be free of the type of impurities that contributed to the Crown and the Māori lifting up weapons against each other in the New Zealand Wars.

Again, it is naive to imply that "the main cause" of the New Zealand Wars and colonization were misunderstandings in a meeting in 1840.

Also why does he think it necessary to destroy all of our languages? Many languages are endangered and many people are struggling to preserve their languages so that the unique insights they contain and the heritage of their ancestors may be preserved. Many languages have already fallen out of use among humanity. It is not good that these communities all over the world are losing their languages. But this dogma of HWA's that there will be one language in the Millennium ignores the problems that the lose of languages presents to all of us.

In the present world, rife with linguistic confusion that contributes to frictions of all kinds, it is difficult to imagine such a bright and harmonious future. But the Bible makes clear that the dawning of that age of pure speech and lasting peace is very near.

HWA's promises, including his insistence that there will be a single language shared by all humanity in the near future, are empty words which will never be fulfilled. It is clear that Jacques' claim that misunderstandings were "the main cause" of the New Zealand Wars is completely wrong.

Reflections on Armstrongite Yearly Conference (Feast of Tabernacles)

Banned by HWA has a very fascinating post pointing out that many of the sermons taught at the Feast of Tabernacles are still very similar to what has been taught within the COGs for decades.

Feast of Tabernacles 2017 Sermons..."Don't these people's brains rot after listening to the very same thing for decades?"

Considering that what is taught is so similar this calls into question why is it necessary to attend these yearly conferences for eight days every year just to hear the same things?

Bibliography of Roderick C. Meredth's Plain Truth About the Protestant Reformation

Over the last few issues of LCG's recruitment magazine, Tomorrow's World, they have reprinted a narrative that the late Roderick C. Meredith wrote back in 1958.entitled The Plain Truth About the Protestant Reformation. The purpose of the narrative was to discredit the founding of the Protestant churches as illegitimate in order to make joining his own organization seem like the righteous thing to do.

What follows below is a list of the books he cited in this narrative. It should be noted that even taking into account that it was written in 1958 he instinctively referred to older books, many of which date before the start of the 20th Century.

One wonder why did he choose to get his information from such old works? Did nothing made by more recent historians at least made him curious to learn about what they were saying?

• Alzog, Johannes. Manual of Universal Church History. 1878.

• Bainton, Roland. Here I Stand. 1950.

• Bainton, Roland. The Reformation of the Sixteenth Century. 1940.

• Bebington, John Albert. The Reformation. 1901.

• D'Aubigné, Jean-Henri Merle. History of the Great Reformation. 1843-1853.

• Deharbe, Joseph. A History of Religion. 1881.

• Fisher, George. History of the Christian Church. 1887.

• Fisher, George. The Reformation. 1873.

• Gibbon, William. Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, 1776-1789.

• Hastie, William. The Theology of the Reformed Church. 1904.

• Hausser, Ludwig. The Period of the Reformation. 1873.

• Hislop, Alexander. The Two Babylons. 1853, 1858.

• Hurlburt, Jesse Lyman. The Story of the Christian Church. 1918.

• Jones, Rufus. The Church's Debt to Heretics. 1924.

• Kurtz, Johann Heinreich. Church History. 1889.

• Lindsay, T. M. A History of the Reformation. 1906-7.

• Michelet, Jules. The Life of Luther. 1846.

• MacKinnon, James. Calvin and the Reformation. 1936.

• Moncrief, John Wildman. A Short History of the Christian Church. 1908.

• Moore, Audrey Lackington. The History of the Reformation. 1890.

• Mosheim. Johann Lorenz von.  Institutes of Ecclesiastical History.

• Neander, August (1789-1850). General History of the Christian Religion.

• Perrin, Jean Paul. History of the Old Waldenses. 1884.

• Plummer, Alfred. The Continental Reformation. 1912.

• Qualben, Lars P. A History of the Christian Church. 1936.

• Schaff, Philip. History of the Christian Church. 1858.

• Schaff–Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, third edition, 1908-1914. Named after Johann Jakob Herzog (1805-1882) and Philip Schaff (1819-1883).

• Vedder, Henry C. A Short History of the Baptists. 1907.

• Walker, Reginald F. An Outline History of the Catholic Church. 1944.

• Walker, Williston. A History of the Christian Church. 1918. [Link omitted due to quality issue with at least one previously offered source.]

• Wharey, James. Sketches of Church History. 1840.

PCG Implied "Technocrats" Want to Confiscate Firearms (2013)

The idea of the federal government confiscating firearms at present is very unlikely and it is not a serious proposal despite the terrible massacre in Las Vegas. Those who wish to implement gun safety laws are more concerned by other issues such as restricting bumper stocks (which turn semi-automatic rifles into automatic machine guns even though automatic machine guns were banned from sale in 1986) and high capacity magazines. But despite this state of affairs PCG's Joel Hilliker once scare mongered of this largely exaggerated fear in his article, Beware the ‘Well-Educated Technocrats’ (November 11, 2013).

Here Hilliker is lambasting government officials he labels as "technocrats." At the time the presidency was held by a member of the Democratic Party and true to PCG's political stance towards the right they tended to condemn that political party.

These are the people who believe that monitoring the digital communications of all citizens is essential. They believe we’re only safe if they are the only ones with guns.

Who proposed that only the government should have guns? No one. What kind of guns is he referring to? All firearms? Does this include include pistols and hunting rifles? Or do such restrictions only apply to semi-automatic machine guns? He does not say. But these words make people fear that they might lose all their guns when in fact this fear s largely unfounded.

***

Also Hilliker's article also states that a certain congressman (who is now currently a senator) had given a presentation at PCG's Armstrong Auditorium back on October 31, 2013. This article was mentioned in a previous post.

Last Year PCG Thought Muslims Might be Thrown into Walled Off Ghettos

Back on July 14, 2016 an ISIL sympathizer took a truck and murdered eighty-four innocent people. Following this mass murder PCG's Richard Palmer wrote an article speculating that France would be compelled to throw Muslims into walled off ghettos in response to such violence.

Armed guards and security scanners will not be enough. It would not have stopped this attack—it has not stopped terrorist attacks in Israel. There the nation had to physically wall off the majority of Muslims in the region and set up secure checkpoints before there was a substantial reduction in attacks. These are the only kinds of action that can end this.

Even now, that is anathema to modern Europe. But this is the direction it will be forced in. A couple of hours’ drive from Nice, the city of Marseilles is one-third Muslim. The same is true for many big cities in Europe. Walling off these populations would not be easy, and it would prove much harsher to local Muslims than Israel’s West Bank barrier. (Richard Palmer, Nice Attack: ‘We Should Learn to Live With Terrorism’, July 15, 2016.)

Now a murderer in Las Vegas murdered at least fifty-nine innocent people and injured over five hundred people. He was white. His brother says he had no religious or political affiliation. We must face reality: That dreadful and extremist Islamophobic idea would not have stopped this terrible massacre. The murderer would never have been able to commit such a dreadful massacre without possessing deadly weapons designed only with the purpose to kill and maim human beings in an armed conflict.

Shame on PCG for letting such extremism be published on their media outlet.

PCG's Gerald Flurry Cited Gun Control Measure to Slur President Obama as "Another Antiochus"

Back in 2013 PCG's leader Gerald Flurry slurred President Obama as "another Antiochus" comparing him with two individuals he loathes: namely Antiochus Epiphanes, the ruler of Hellenistic Syria who infamously persecuted Judaism and even set up an idol in the Temple in Jerusalem; and Joseph Tkach who implemented the changes within WCG renouncing much of what was taught under HWA. In making this inflammatory accusation Gerald Flurry cited President Obama's signing of twenty-three executive orders concerning gun control following the Sandy Hook massacre on December 14, 2012.

On January 16, 2013, President Obama signed 23 executive actions on gun control, and then urged Congress to pass even stricter gun laws. When he signed those orders, he surrounded himself with little children who had written letters to him asking, Mr. President, would you please do something about the violence in schools? Who wants to debate with him when he has little children all around him? 

The president is so eager to restrict guns. But what is he doing to stop drug cartels making inroads into America? What about stopping the drug wars between gangs in America’s big cities? What success has he had in stopping Chicago, his home town, from becoming the murder capital of the world?  

I am sickened by what Adam Lanza did. But what makes me sicker is somebody using that massacre to promote a political ideology! I think those 23 executive orders are really about getting around the Constitution and conditioning the minds of the people to accept the president saying, Don’t worry about the supreme law of the land! Listen to me! Just like Antiochus did! (Gerald Flurry, America Under Attack, Chapter 3, 2013.)

More details about this ridiculous and inflammatory accusation may be seen in the previous post: Gerald Flurry Says President Obama is an "Antiochus-type" Figure Just Like Tkach.

Catastrophe in Las Vegas

Thoughts and condolences to all those affected by the mass shooting in Las Vegas. What a horrible crime that has been committed and how awful it is that so many innocent people have been harmed.