EXPOSING THE LIES AND DECEPTIONS OF ARMANDO ANG PART II

by Atty. Marwil Llasos, O.P.

EXPOSING THE LIES AND DECEPTIONS OF ARMANDO ANG PART II

EXPOSING THE LIES AND DECEPTIONS OF ARMANDO ANG

PART II

Marwil N. Llasos, O.P.

(See Part I at: http://bromarwilnllasos.blogspot.com/2011/11/exposing-lies-and-deceptions-of-armando.html)

ARMANDO ANG opens his anti-Catholic book “The Dark Side of Catholicism” with a letter to his “friends in Christ” – his intended readers, i.e., Catholics. With a seeming friendly gesture, Ang started by begging the “indulgence of all Catholics who feel offended by the title or its content.”[1]

The Dark Side of Catholicism: Armando Ang's anti-Catholic bestseller

What else is new? The allegations, attacks and accusations of Armando Ang are nothing new. Ang simply lifted from anti-Catholic polemicists and repackaged them with additional lies and absurd conclusions. What is more appalling in Ang’s version of anti-Catholicism is that it is laden with sheer ignorance and plain hypocrisy. In the succeeding articles, I will debunk Ang point by point, especially the first two chapters of his book which viciously attack Catholic teachings on the Blessed Virgin Mary.

Armando Ang justifies the title of his book that it “seems appropriate because very few know the dark side of their Church history to arrive at an informed decision.”[2] But what is Ang’s basis in concluding thusly? Does he have any statistics showing how “few” are these Catholics who do not know the “dark side” of their Church history? None. In short, Ang’s claims are utterly baseless and founded purely on guesswork.

Catholics are free to consult the history of their Church from readily available sources. Scholarly sources like The New Catholic Encyclopedia are available on-line (see:http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/). Books, publications and journals on the history of the Church are extant. Catholics can read for themselves the history of the Church straight from primary sources.

Armando Ang says that it “is incumbent on every believer to know the truth and the truth shall make us free”[3] (citing Jn. 8:32). I fully concur with Ang in this regard. However, it seems that truth is the farthest consideration of Armando Ang in writing his magnum opus The Dark Side of Catholicism. The book is not concerned with the truth at all. It is replete with falsehood from cover to cover. To look for error in Ang’s book is like looking for sand on the beach.

Most of Armando Ang’s references cannot be verified. Ang heavily relies on anti-Catholic sources. He seldom, if at all, allows the Catholic Church to speak for itself. If ever Ang quotes a Church document, he does so by taking it out of context or twists its meaning and interprets it with prejudiced anti-Catholic mindset. In the succeeding articles, I will document how Armando Ang stifles the truth, covers it up and substitutes it with downright lies.

When Ang claims that he is after the truth, well, he does not walk the talk.

Armando Ang packages himself as a Bible Christian. But nothing can be farther from the truth. For instance, Ang holds that “[i]n seeking the truth there is no substitute for reading the Bible.”[4] This statement definitely lumps Ang with the Reformation “sola-scriptura”promoters. However, gauged against this man-made sola scripturabelief, Armando Ang would not be able to cite a single verse that says precisely “in seeking the truth there is no substitute for reading the Bible.”

Another scriptural blunder that Armando Ang makes is his statement that “[t]he Bible is the foundation of Christianity and it alone holds everything necessary for salvation”[5] – a teaching nowhere claimed by Scripture. Noteworthy is the fact that Ang does not even bother to support his statement with verses from the Bible.

Truth to tell, the Bible never says that “the Bible is the foundation of Christianity.” That is an Ang-made dogma not supported by a single shred of scripture. Ang’s statement would seem that Christianity originates from the Bible and not the other way around. I wonder what happened to Ang’s history. What Armando Ang conveniently forgets is that the Church already existed long before there was a complete Bible!

(Source: http://lectionarypowerpoints.com/lectionaryPowerPoints.asp?theDate=2/15/1987)

To repeat, Ang’s teaching that “the Bible is the foundation of Christianity” is unscriptural and anti-Biblical. Nowhere in Sacred Scripture can we find that assertion. If Ang made his homework on the Bible, he would have easily ascertained that the word “foundation” is never - ever – applied to the Bible. To whom (or what) does the Bible apply the word “foundation”? First, of course, is Jesus Christ. The apostle Paul says in 1 Corinthians 3:11 that “For other foundationcan no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.”[6] How dare Armando Ang rob Christ of that honor!

The Lord Jesus Christ founded His Church on the rock that is Peter: “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” (Mt. 16:18).

The Lord Jesus Christ gives the keys to the apostle Peter

And to what else does the Bible ascribe the word “foundation”? To the apostles and prophets as categorically stated in Ephesians 2:20: “And are built upon the foundation of the apostles andprophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone.”

Finally, Armando Ang must have also forgotten that the Bible itself calls the Church as “foundation.” According to the apostle Paul,“if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth” (1 Tim. 3:15, NIV).

The Church: The Pillar and Foundation of Truth (1 Tim. 3:15)

Let me ask Armando Ang anew: where in the Bible does it say that the Bible is the foundation of Christianity? Chapter and verse, please, Mr. Ang.

If Armando Ang cannot give me a verse, then he is guilty as charged for teaching an un-biblical doctrine. What credibility does Ang still have to preach about the Bible when his teaching has been demonstrated to be anti-Biblical?

Armando Ang lies through his teeth when he says that“[n]othing in the book [The Dark Side of Catholicism] is written against the Catholics.”[7] If Ang’s book is not written against Catholics, then against whom? Muslims? Buddhists? Mormons? Atheists? Protestants? Baptists? Evangelicals?

What do you take us for, Mr. Ang? Your book is written againstus Catholics – and no other. What makes it even more offensive to us is that it caricatures us and attacks the caricature it makes of us. Armando Ang passes off the caricature as though it is one and the same with the Catholic Church. Anent this, the words of Archbishop Fulton Sheen is apropos –

The Servant of God Archbishop Fulton Sheen

“There are not over a hundred people in the United States who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions, however, who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church – which is, of course, quite a different thing. These millions can hardly be blamed for hating Catholics because Catholics “adore statues;” because they “put the Blessed Mother on the same level with God;” because they “say indulgence is a permission to commit sin;” because the Pope “is a Fascist;” because the Church “is the defender of Capitalism.” If the Church taught or believed any one of these things, it should be hated, but the fact is that the Church does not believe nor teach any one of them. It follows then that the hatred of the millions is directed against error and not against truth. As a matter of fact, if we Catholics believed all of the untruths and lies which were said against the Church, we probably would hate the Church a thousand times more than they do.”[8]

Armando Ang pathetically claims that his book “is meant to enlighten them.”[9] No, Mr. Ang, your book is meant to deceive Catholics, especially the unwary. The Dark Side of Catholicism is nothing but a pack of brazen lies, heaped with fabrications and laced with innuendoes, speculations and accusations that are expertly woven so as to appear factual and veracious. And for how much do you sell your book?

A frustrated historian, Armando Ang unabashedly claims that “[u]nder the present circumstances, there is a shortage of reading materials regarding the evolution of the Catholic Church that each Catholic should know.”[10] What is Ang’s basis in saying so? None, as he does not even cite a single shred of evidence to prove it. Given his limited bibliography, Ang is unaware of the cornucopia of materials on Church History starting from St. Luke’s The Acts of Apostles, down to Eusebius’ Church History and so on to modern authors and historians, Catholics and non-Catholics alike. The Internet provides a limitless resource for Church History that is readily available to anyone. If there’s anyone who is ignorant about Church history, it is Armando Ang.

Armando Ang self-righteously claims that he “would be remiss as a Christian to keep the truth away from the faithful.”[11] The reality is that Ang does not only keep the truth away from the faithful; he distorts it. He is thus not only remiss; he is culpable. Thus, for Ang to use James 4:17[12] as a pretext for his falsehood is an abominable sacrilege – a gross abuse of God’s holy word.

"The Spirit of Truth ... will guide you into all the truth" (Jn. 16:13)

Armando Ang likewise asserts that there “are many teachings of early Catholic Church that have been contaminated by new doctrines that serve no salvation value.” But such an assertion can easily be made.What precisely are these teachings of the early Catholic Church that have been contaminated by new doctrines? Ang does not say. How were these teachings contaminated by new doctrines? Ang keeps us guessing. And what are these new doctrines that serve no salvation value? Ang does not point them our. Bottomline: you have to buy his book. What an effective sales pitch! I feel sorry for those who will buy and be deceived by Ang’s book.

Armando Ang states that the purpose of his book is to separate the truth from the myth. Well, he seems to have succeeded in doing so. He keeps the truth away and retains the myth against Catholicism and passes it off as Gospel truth – and sells it to the public. Ang’s book is a masterpiece of distortion of truth; a magnum opus of bearing false witness against one’s Catholic neighbor.

Jesus Christ remains with His Mystical Body, the Church

Armando Ang avers that the Church has enough saving grace to save Catholics.[13] But the appropriate statement is, the Church has the plenitude of grace from Christ Our Lord to save Catholics. It, too, has the fullness of truth – whether Armando Ang realizes or not. The Church has the promise from Christ that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it (Mt. 16:18). All hell and Armando Ang may try everything in their venal power to destroy the Church but they will never succeed. Jesus Christ promised us that that He will be with us always until the end of time (Mt. 28:20).

Hell and its cohorts attacking the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church

Finally, Armando Ang claims that his own children are devoted Catholics and ne has never tried to convince them to join another Church.[14] I have no way of verifying the veracity of this claim. But it is certain that Armando Ang does not have credibility even to his children. Otherwise, Ang’s children will join him in his new-found church if they see the quality of their father’s witness. Obviously, they don’t. And here is where Ang’s hypocrisy and inconsistency are painted in bold relief. Earlier he claimed that he would be remiss as a Christian to keep the truth away from the faithful and furthermore said that it is a sin not to do what you know is the right thing to do.[15] If Ang really believes that his devoted Catholic children are on the way to perdition because of their religion, why doesn’t he, as a good father, do the right thing to do to persuade his children by precept and example to leave the Catholic Church? Only Armando Ang can tell.

---

[1] Armando Ang, The Dark Side of Catholicism (Manila: A1 Publishing, 2005) flyleaf (the first page after the cover).

[2] Ibid.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Unless otherwise indicated, Scripture citations are from the King James Version, Protestant translation of the Bible, which is the favorite translation of Armando Ang.

[7] Armando Ang, The Dark Side of Catholicism (Manila: A1 Publishing, 2005) flyleaf.

[8] Fulton Sheen, What is the Catholic Church, available at:

(http://www.ourcatholicfaith.org/)

[9] Armando Ang, The Dark Side of Catholicism (Manila: A1 Publishing, 2005) flyleaf.

[10] Ibid.

[11] Ibid.

[12] “Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.”

[13] Armando Ang, The Dark Side of Catholicism (Manila: A1 Publishing, 2005) flyleaf.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Ibid.

EXPOSING THE LIES AND DECEPTIONS OF ARMANDO ANG

A repost from Atty. Marwil Llasos, O.P.

EXPOSING THE LIES AND DECEPTIONS OF ARMANDO ANG

Our Lady of Victories, pray for the triumph of the Holy Catholic Church

EXPOSING THE LIES AND DECEPTIONS OF ARMANDO ANG

Marwil N. Llasos, O.P.

ARMANDO ANG is the author of the anti-Catholic book “The Dark Side of Catholicism” which is already on its third edition. The phenomenal sales of Ang’s Catholic-bashing book proves that indeed anti-Catholicism sells even in our predominantly Catholic country. By the way, Ang also authored “The Dark Side of Unorthodox Protestantism” – as if there’s such a thing as “orthodox” Protestantism given the division in the Protestant world. I was looking for “The Dark Side of Islam” but I couldn’t find one that is authored by Armando Ang. I wonder why Ang does not write a book exposing the “dark side” of Islam. Perhaps in the future and I am really looking forward to have a copy of that much-awaited book.

To be fair, Armando Ang must also write “The Bright Side of Catholicism” if he is sincere and honest in what he claimed that “[i]t is incumbent on every believer to know the truth and the truth shall make us free”[1] (citing John 8:32). But I don’t see it forthcoming for Ang to publish a book showing the “bright” side of Catholicism. The anti-Catholic that he is, Ang has already made up his mind that“[t]here are many teachings of the early Catholic Church that have been contaminated by new doctrines that serve no salvation value.”[2] Like all anti-Catholic polemicists, Ang has already betrayed his bias and prejudice against the Catholic Church that he would no longer consider evidence and arguments contrary to his firmly held views.

Ang's anti-Catholic bestseller is deceiving the unwary

A friend, fellow Catholic apologist and Marian devotee sent me a copy of the 2005 updated edition of Armando Ang’s The Dark Side of Catholicism. I will refer to that book in my critique of Ang’s allegations, accusations, claims and arguments.

I noticed that Ang’s book is a pastiche of anti-Catholic polemical writings of Loraine Boettner, Dave Hunt, James McCarthy, James White and of course, Jack Chick – and a host of other anti-Catholic authors. And so what else is new?

Ang’s book is a regurgitated thrash. It merely rehashes old, worn out and long debunked attacks against the Catholic Church. Ang adds up his own lies and deceptions to the growing list of false accusations against the Church. From whom could these accusations come from if not from the “accuser of the brethren”? (Rev. 12:10). Like his father the devil (Jn. 8:44), Ang passes off his lies as Gospel truth. The Bible categorically states, “Do shalt not raise a false report: put not thine hand into the wicked to be an unrighteous witness” (Exo. 23:1, unless otherwise indicated, the Scripture citations herein are from the King James Version, Ang’s favorite translation).

I make it of record that I look forward to personally debating Armando Ang. I prefer that such eyeball to eyeball confrontation be held in his own congregation. I intend to cross-examine him on the contents of his book. I will be glad to require him to prove each and every single allegation of his. If what Armando Ang is saying is true, he will accept this challenge.

For the meantime, I will run a series of articles debunking Ang’s false accusations and brazen lies. Since I am a Mariologist, I will concentrate on The Dark Side of Catholicism’s first two chapters on the Virgin Mary (Chapter 1) and the Marian Cults (Chapter II). I did the same to Dr. Anthony Pezzotta’s “Truth Encounter” where I debunked his attacks on Mary in chapter 11 and 12 of his discredited book.

I wish to draw my reader’s attention to Armando Ang’sdeceptive style. He employs this style countless times in his book. I will just cite one example for now.

The unscholarly style of Armando Ang

In page 13 of Armando Ang’s The Dark Side of Catholicism,one can find this assertion –

“As early as the 5th century Pope Leo the Great (440-461) wrote that Mary gave birth to Jesus without detriment to her virginity. Pope Alexander III (1159-1181) reiterated it by declaring that “Mary conceived without detriment to her virginity, gave birth to the Son without pain, and departed hence without being subject to corruption.” (Kauffman, 38-39) This was confirmed by the apparition at Agreda, Spain in the early 1600s that went on to explain “that the twelve stars on the crown serve as evidence of her virtue and also refers to the twelve tribes of Israel as revealed in the book of Revelation.” This was reiterated again by the appearance of the apparition in 1989 at San Nicolas, Argentina. (Ibid., 44) But in an apparition to Annie Kirkwood who wrote down the Virgin Mary's message in her book, Mary's Message of Hope, claims that Mary told her that she “had several children in addition to Jesus.” (Steiger, 31)

The readers will note that Armando Ang does not cite the primary sources of his allegation. He passes on second hand information. This reveals the level of Armando Ang’s scholarship, or the lack of it.

Armando Ang makes it appear that he is quoting Pope Alexander III. But when you check the citation, Ang is not quoting the exact papal document. Instead he is quoting from Kauffman, allegedly from pages 38-39 of his book. The problem is, we do not know which book of Kauffman is being cited. In Ang’s References and Suggested Readings found at pages 421-424 of his book, he lists “Kauffman, Timothy F.” as his reference. However, Kauffman has two books listed, both published in 1982, Graven Bread and Quite Contrary.The reader of The Dark Side of Catholicism will have to guess which of the two Kauffman’s books Armando Ang is citing for his chopped quotation. Since these books are not readily available, the reader cannot easily check the veracity of Ang’s attribution.

The problem is even more compounded when Armando Ang alleges that the Pope’s declaration was “confirmed by the apparition at Agreda, Spain in the early 1600s that went on to explain ‘that the twelve stars on the crown serve as evidence of her virtue and also refers to the twelve tribes of Israel as revealed in the book of Revelation.’ ” Ang certainly does not know what he is talking about. There has been no apparition by the Blessed Virgin Mary at Agreda, Spain. Instead, a visionary named Mary of Agreda received locutions from the Blessed Mother and these are published in a four-volume work “City of God” (the owner of this blog owns Mary of Agreda’s four-volume work from TAN Books). Ang’s statements are often inaccurate and unreliable. Furthermore, it is noteworthy that Ang’s quotation does not provide any reference to Mary of Agreda’s book. Instead, he refers his readers, again, to Kauffman.

Armando Ang is incorrigible. He once again cited Kauffman in claiming that the “apparition” at Agreda was “reiterated again by the appearance of the apparition (sic) in 1989 at San Nicolas, Argentina.” Ang’s source? Kauffman! So much for the “scholarship” of Armando Ang.

Annie Kirkwood: Ang's "prophetess" is no Catholic

Armando Ang and Annie Kirkwood

Here is the ultimate bombshell to blast whatever remains of Armando Ang’s pretense of scholarship and credibility.

Armando Ang, after mentioning the “apparitions” where Mary underscored her perpetual virginity, pitted these “apparitions” to another “apparition” that claims the contrary – the “apparition” toAnnie Kirkwood:

Annie Kirkwood's book: Mary's Message of Hope. I doubt it very much if Armando Ang has actually read it

But in an apparition to Annie Kirkwood who wrote down the Virgin Mary's message in her book, Mary's Message of Hope claims that Mary told her that she “had several children in addition to Jesus.” (Steiger, 31)

In attacking the perpetual virginity of Mary, Armando Ang does not hesitate to use questionable and disreputable sources such as Annie Kirkwood. The purpose of Armando Ang is plain to see. He wants to make it appear that the “apparitions” of the Blessed Virgin Mary contradict each other when it comes to the issue of her perpetual virginity. Thus, Ang pitted the “apparitions” at Agreda and Argentina with the apparitions to Annie Kirkwood.

The author of The Dark Side of Catholicism is absolutely ignorant about what he is writing about. Again, he is merely passing off second hand information. His quote that Mary told Annie that she had “several children in addition to Jesus” is actually taken from Brad and Sherry Hansen Steiger’s book “Mother Mary Speaks to Us” (1996). I wonder if Armando Ang was able to read any of Annie Kirkwood’s writings in the original.

Byron Kirkwood: The husband "prophetess" and compiler of her "messages"

Contrary to the false claim of Armando Ang, there was no apparition of the Blessed Virgin Mary to Annie Kirkwood. Annie Kirkwood claimed that “Mary” communicates to her “strongly” through the mind and she “hears” internally what “Mary” says.[3] As claimed by Annie Kirkwood herself, she received no apparitions but mere interior locutions. Obviously, Armando Ang does not know the difference as he keeps on mentioning “apparitions” in his book. His intention is clear: to pit one “apparition” against the other and discredit the perpetual virginity of Mary.

By mentioning the “apparition” to Annie Kirkwood alongside with those at Agreda and Argentina, Armando Ang clearly wants to portray the “apparition” to Annie Kirkwood as Catholic. But Ang is clearly deceiving his readers by not divulging a crucial fact: Anna Kirkwood is not Catholic![4] The messages Annie Kirkwood has been allegedly receiving from the Virgin Mary are not accepted by the Catholic Church. Thus, it is not legitimate or proper for Ang to pit this “apparition” from the others. The messages of the “Mary” given to Annie Kirkwood are downrightly absurd, inane and heretical. For a critique of Annie Kirkwood’s messages, please see:

(http://www.catholicplanet.com/apparitions/false21.htm)

Another book of Annie Kirkwood: Mary's Message to the World

Annie Kirkwood’s “Mary” teaches the heresy of “indifferentism” – that all religions are the same and it doesn’t matter what religious faith one holds. Kirkwood’s “Mary” states that “[t]he religious and cultural differences between peoples are outer and not as important as they think.”[5] Armando Ang leaves out that fact.

The “Jesus” of Annie Kirkwood’s “Mary” is a different Jesus. Far from being “meek and humble,” Annie Kirkwood’s “Jesus” is described by his mother “Mary” as “[a]lthough he seldom lost his temper, when he did, his eyes would come dark and menacing.”[6]Does Ang accept this description of Jesus? He doesn’t say.

Furthermore, Armando Ang’s Annie Kirkwood believes in UFOs. According to her, “Mary” predicted that “[t]here will be increased UFO activity.”[7] She went on to say that the “coming storms and tremors of unheard of size will perhaps make believers of you. The other signs of UFO activity and supernatural events will call attentively to our plea to man.”[8] Ang for sure does not believe in UFOs – but why does he believe Annie Kirkwood’s “Mary” when she claimed to have “had several children in addition to Jesus”?

The reason is plain and simple. Because Anne Kirkwood’s “Mary” provided Ang with ammunition to demolish Mary’s perpetual virginity. Deceived and deceiving, Armando Ang doesn’t have any qualm in keeping crucial information away from his readers. Ang is definitely not concerned with truth at all. What he wants to do is to attack the church by any means, fair or foul.

Using Annie Kirkwood’s messages to discredit Mary’s perpetual virginity indicates how far Armando Ang can go to attack the dogma. What Ang does not realize is that his reliance on Annie Kirkwood backfires on him.

As an Evangelical, I am sure that Armando Ang believes that the so-called “brothers and sisters” of Jesus Christ mentioned in Mark 6:3 and Matthew 13:55-56 are His siblings. In these verses, the names of the “brothers” of Jesus are named James, Joses (Joseph), Judasand Simon. But what does Annie Kirkwood’s “Mary” say the names of her children are? Except for James,[9] the names of the other children of “Mary” are David and Daniel,[10] Elizabeth,[11] Jacob,[12]Ruth[13] and Mary Martha.[14] What does Armando Ang say about it?Nothing. He leaves out this relevant information because he doesn’t want his readers to know about it. Armando Ang happily accepts Annie Kirkwood’s Mary’s claim that she has several children in addition to Jesus. But, Armando Ang keeps mum when this same “Mary” names her children differently from what the Bible says. Isn’t it double standard? Isn’t that dishonesty? Isn’t that deception? What is left of Armando Ang’s credibility? Zero. Nothing. Nada. Zilch.

For the Spanish translation of this article, please see:

(http://tomasdetorquemadaop.blogspot.com/2011/11/una-exposicion-de-las-mentiras-y.html)

---

[1] Armando Ang, The Dark Side of Catholicism (Manila: Al Publishing, 2005) flyleaf.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Annie Kirkwood, Mary’s Message to the World (New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1991) p. viii. The owner of this blog has a copy of this book.

[4] Ibid., p. ix.

[5] Ibid., p. xiii.

[6] Ibid., 65.

[7] Ibid., p. 10.

[8] Ibid., p. 32.

[9] Ibid., p. 62, 67.

[10] Ibid., p. 68.

[11] Ibid., p. 69.

[12] Ibid.

[13] Ibid., p. 70.

[14] Ibid.

New Title?

After being called "Media, Society, and God", I decided to change the name (and obviously the URL) of this blog. Why?

Basically, it's more catchy than the current title. And I would call it "The Jackhammer" after my Admin name at 100% Katolikong Pinoy. Basically, I would centralize everything here, and it would be more of a blog than a mere motto. Anyway, I would change the name by Advent, so do watch out.

Setting off the current title was absolutely teary for me since it was known as such for more than a year and a half. But, it's okay for me. At least it has a new spankin' title. hahahahaha