Christianity Today is the title of a very ecumenical magazine. Though it is supposedly a Christian periodical, true Bible-believing Christians were not surprised when Christianity Today attacked Alberto Rivera and the information he has presented.

Three pages of their March 13, 1981 issue were devoted to "proving Alberto to be a fraud."

Did the magazine honestly believe Alberto to be a fraud or was there another reason for their actions? Many interesting questions are raised:

• Did they attack Alberto for fear of angering their Roman Catholic readers and losing money through falling subscriptions?
• Is it possible that the Catholics are really in control of the magazine and that they organized the whole smear campaign to discredit Alberto in the eyes of those who believe Christianity Today is really a Christian magazine?
• Is Christianity Today even Christian to begin with?

As a result of the magazine article, a former Roman Catholic named James M. Houston wrote a letter to Christianity Today in answer to their attacking article about Rivera.

We reprint part of his letter as further proof of the validity of what Alberto Rivera has said. Please keep in mind that James Houston is in no way connected to either Alberto Rivera or Jack Chick.

Part of his letter reads as follows:

"I have read your three page article exposing J. T. Chick's 'Alberto' to be a fraud (see Christianity Today, March 13, 1981). I would like to make the following comments on the same hoping that God in His sovereignty would allow this letter to be printed (in full) in a future issue of Christianity Today:

1. Considering the evidence set forth in your article, though I find many things stated of which Alberto Rivera may or may not be guilty, I can find no evidence in the article that proves him to be a fraud, unless of course, I'm misunderstanding the word: 'fraud.' You do state what Rome herself has to say about Alberto. Who in a right frame of mind (unless they are totally ignorant of history) would give heed to her words in the light of the following evidence:

1. Her teaching that 'the end justifies the means' allows her the freedom to lie, just as long as it propagates her cause.
2. H. G. Wells, noted historian, in his book, Crux Ansata, states:

   Page 105 -'Roman Catholicism is a broken and utterly desperate thing, capable only of malignant mischief in our awakening world.'

   Page 155 -'I think that it stands for everything most hostile to the mental emancipation and stimulation of mankind. It is the completest, most highly organized system of prejudices and antagonisms in existence. Everywhere in the world there is ignorance and prejudice, but the greatest complex of these, with the most extensive prestige and the most intimate entanglement with traditional institutions, is the Roman Catholic Church. It presents many faces towards the world, but everywhere it is systematic in its filght against freedom.'

3. Lord Macaulay, says on page 548 of his 1852 Essays On Ranke's History Of The Popes:

It is impossible to deny that the polity of the Church of Rome is the very masterpiece of human wisdom....The experience of 1,200 eventful years, the ingenuity and patient care of forty generations of statesmen, have improved that polity to such perfection, that, among the contrivances which have been devised for deceiving and controlling mankind, it occupies the highest place.'

"But even with such a great cloud of witnesses, one might be tempted to ask the following question, 'Has not Rome changed recently?' To answer this most vital question, I turn once again to the message of D. Martyn Lloyd Jones:

'Ah, but,' you say, 'has not the Roman Catholic Church changed? You are simply looking back, you are speaking as if you lived in the 16th century - don't you realize you are living in the 20th century?

My answer is quite simple. The proudest boast of the Roman Catholic Church is this, that she never changes, Semper eadem. How can she change? If she changes she will be admitting that she was wrong in the past - but she was saying then that she was infallible, and that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ and that he cannot make a mistake. If she says that she is capable of change she is denying her central claim! She does not say that she is changing, and she never will. The Church of Rome remains the same.

If anything, she is even worse. She has 'added' things to what she taught in the 16th century, such as Papal infallibility, etc. No, there is no change in the Church of Rome. And if there ever is one great world Church, it will be because the Church of Rome has absorbed all the rest and swallowed them in ignorance!'

"In the light of all this evidence, should we give any logical credence to what Rome has to say about the persons of Jack Chick and Alberto Rivera? God forbid!

"Secondly, getting back to Alberto Rivera and your accusation against him and the Chick organization, I do not believe that Jack Chick would jeopardize his well grounded ministry without some definite leading of the Holy Spirit. Surely he would never put himself in such jeopardy unless he was quite sure Alberto was genuine.

"Just a small consideration of what Rome has done to those who exposed her in the past tells me that Chick has laid his very life on the line. And what of his dear family? Has he not also jeopardized them?

"Thirdly, I must consider Alberto himself. Why would he also put himself and his dear family in such jeopardy? What could he possibly gain by such a move? No, logic moves me to conclude that he is being led by the Holy Spirit of our dear Lord. God bless his brave heart!

"Fourthly, I must consider Satan's part in all this, in the light of what Jesus says in Matthew 12:25-26:

"Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation ... And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall his kingdom stand?'

"In the light of the much proven fact that Rome has always been a devilish system and the curse of everything it touches, I doubt very seriously that the Devil himself would author a book that at least has started people once again thinking about the great evil of Rome. The Devil may not be wise, but he is shrewd and cunning.

"Fifthly, I must also consider the true, holy, living Christians that I personally know. And though they be few, yet they are in agreement that this is of God.

"Sixthly, though Rome has proven herself to be the greatest fraud ever put off on mankind, I do not recall your magazine going to any great length to expose her as such, even though such a move on your part would be a most blessed benefit to all of mankind, especially the body of Christ.

"Again, I must ask the question, why is your magazine so anxious to expose dear Alberto? A good question, for even if I thought for a moment that this book, ALBERTO, was set forth in pretense, could not my heart rejoice (as the Apostle Paul does in Philippians 1: 18) that once again this 'mother of all spiritual whoredoms' is being brought again to the attention of the TRUE sheep of God? I must say that I am very suspicious of your motive in printing this article.

"Also, I noted on the second page of your article where the Roman Catholic Editor of Our Sunday Visitor states: '...The sad thing is that Chick's ties are hard to refute.' It may be that they are 'hard to refute' simply because they are true! Amen!

"And last, I must consider the fact that to my remembrance (and I read extensively) I have never read anything against J. T. Chick UNTIL he attacked Rome. The Devil's mad and I'm so glad! Hallelujah!

"I could go on, but I'm afraid I may have labored you too much already, so I will stop. I do pray that this letter will be received in the spirit in which it is written; and God willing, may the truth set forth in it reach the hearts of many DEAR souls, lest they end up with the mark of the Beast. May God also encourage your heart to search this matter out diligently, lest you be found to be fighting against the very Spirit of Truth, Himself, even our dear Lord.

"Written by one who loves Jesus and hates the DEVOUT enemies of Jesus with that PERFECT hatred that David speaks of in Psalm 139:21-22, I remain,

Someone who is praying for you,
(.signed) James M. Houston"

In this letter, Mr. Houston asks some very good questions. For example:

1. Why is Christianity Today so anxious to condemn a man who is exposing a false religious system?
2. Where's the proof to substantiate the allegations that are leveled against Alberto? The article is long on accusations, but solid proof is conspicuously absent.
3. Christianity Today says the Catholic church denies that Alberto was ever a priest. Would you expect them to come out and admit that he was? Never!

While the article was designed to discredit and smear Alberto, a careful reading of it only reinforces the information this servant of God has presented.

In light of all this, how can any honest person believe the Roman-inspired lies about A. Rivera and J. Chick? We have presented independent evidence which heavily supports Rivera's charges against the Roman church, evidence which can be obtained by anyone without much difficulty.

We offer this challenge to any so called "expert on the cults," or any other skeptic. Before you accuse these two fine Christian brethren, first get your facts right. Attacking the cults is good and useful; however, don't focus on the minor cults without exposing the biggest, most evil and dangerous one first. Otherwise, don't be surprised if true born again Bible-believing Christians view your efforts with suspicion.

Before you accuse either of them of "hating Catholics," find out what you're talking about. It is not hate, but true love, that motivates these men to cry out to deceived lost souls perishing in a false religion. Who is guilty of hate? Men who try to awaken and rescue the perishing, or pious religious leaders who deceive multitudes and help push them into the eternal flames of hell?

No, it is neither Rivera or Chick who are guilty of hate. They are to be commended for their genuine love and compassion for the lost. If you care to discuss hate, study the history of the Catholic institution. Their past is replete with acts that perfectly define the word hate.