Written early 2007 (Edited 2016)
(New Update 8/14/2016 : Before Gary Metz wrote this article for Christianity Today he was relatively unknown. He certainly was not known as any sort of Christian. Yet he writes an essay "debunking" Alberto Rivera for the prominent Christian periodical founded by Billy Graham! This page simply followed Gary Metz's activity 30 years later where he runs blogs and websites about overturning the leadership in Iran of all things. But I wanted to update the page with another little tidbit of information that connects Gary Metz' activity directly with the CIA. The CIA was caught "editing" wikipedia. One of the actual entries the CIA made was in regards to Iran's leadership! Here is the Link: CIA and Vatican edit Wikipedia entries "A CIA computer was the source of a whiny "Wahhhhh" inserted in a paragraph about Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's plans for the office." End Update....)
Gary Metz wrote a story on Alberto Rivera alleging that Alberto Rivera was a fraud. This article was featured in at least two major "Christian" Magazines (Cornerstone Magazine, Christianity Today). And then several Catholic periodicals. Now Listen, Gary Metz article is the MAIN source used to 'debunk' Alberto Rivera ON THE WHOLE ENTIRE INTERNET! (and the world)
First thing. Gary Metz states in his article that Alberto Rivera had a son who died in infancy and that was Alberto's only son. Yet I had many personal correspondences with Alberto Rivera Jr. And Alberto Rivera Jr has made public his presence in an article defending his father. Here also is a radio show where Alberto calls in and confronts Gary Metz directly. Gary Metz never provided proof of Alberto's son's death certificate which he claimed to have and someone called the country and there was no such death certificate in existence. Listen yourself:
Alberto Rivera Confronts Gary Metz live on air. Gary Metz fails to provide proof of allegations against Alberto Rivera. Link or Listen:
While doing some research on Gary Metz it really makes me curious as to why he did his story on Alberto Rivera. That story he did on Alberto Rivera is the only article he did that was featured in these magazines. Let it also be known that Cornerstone Magazine and Christianity Today are very pro Catholic and pro Vatican.
Another thing about Metz is that he is a huge name in political blogging. And it's all about Iran and how there should be a regime change there. For several years he's been writing articles about breaking news in Iran. Also, he has had interviews with individuals who are in the intelligence community.
But getting back to Gary Metz AKA Doctorzin.
Gary Metz: “Our intelligence inside of Iran is not what it should be. It will take years to build the kind of intelligence this country needs inside of Iran.”Fact is, We've been inside Iran for over a half of a century.
Gary Metz has been a member with Free Republic since March 27, 2003.
To show you the type of propaganda news sources Gary Metz AKA Doctorzin writes for, here is an article and PICTURE from their web site (Below): Article Title: “American Nazi Idol-Cindy Sheehan's supporters don't just light candles....” By Ben Johnson of FrontPage Magazine.
Here you can see that this group of people continue to slander good independent Journalists. They don't even care at all about telling the truth because if anyone clicked the link they provided for Greg Szymanski's articbeacon.com you will see that he doesn't run a "UFO website"! But that Greg specializes in exposing the Vatican's jesuit order intrigue in American Politics as all the greatest patriots in the world have done. This type of talk, linking the Study of Jesuit intrigue with far out subjects has come out as their defense strategy. All their agents are saying the same thing. Dylan Avery of Loose Change (in their forum), Alex Jones of infowars.com just to name a few. I have seen many others do it as well as if they were mockingbirds.
So what you can see here is a trail of Jesuit/Vatican shills attempting to discredit good people who are exposing the jesuit order.
What's interesting about this is I don't think I've ever seen such a pro Bush entity be so openly Pro Catholic. And then they're going around calling all kinds of people "Nazis". Reminds me of the movie, "The Manchurian Candidate" (1961) when the real Communists were calling every one else "Communists". In Source Watch web site they label Gary Metz "work" under the category of Propaganda. If you click the Religion link at the web site freerepublic.com that Metz often writes for you will see that they are completely Pro Vatican. So ask yourselves. Why would mainstream Christian magazines pick up this story? Quite obvious. Because as Dr. Alberto said, they have been deeply infiltrated by the Jesuit Order.
Examine The Charges!
"These magazines - upon which so many people rely - make statements concerning Dr. Rivera with no presentation of supportive evidence. This is so obvious, it is difficult to assess the writings accusing the man.
"Now, imagine we are sitting in a Court of Law and serious charges are laid against Alberto Rivera. The Prosecution does its utmost presenting its charges and its testimony supporting those charges.
"The Defense Attorney, if he considers that evidence weak, will move that no case has been established, and ask the Magistrate to dismiss the charges. Should the Judge agree, the Accused is released. He is assumed to be innocent!
"We want to observe the charges, and consider how well those making the charges substantiate them. Should they not be properly supported in the presentations, then we ask that they be dismissed, and that apologies be made to the brethren charged. The Bible tells us as Christians:
'Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely. Prove all things, hold fast that which is good. Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.'
"Did the critics read Alberto's outline of the Basic Steps followed by the Roman Hierarchy to discredit and destroy any who left their ranks? Did they endeavour to expose Romanism's errors and evil practices? Did they insist that Jesuitism is not, by any means Christian?
"In his defence against what he describes as slanders levelled by friend and foe alike, Rivera calls attention to...unchristian and anti-biblical charges and accusations by the head of the Christian Research Center (which carefully avoids research into the crimes and massacres of the Roman Catholic institution) through the instrumentality of articles appearing in...Cornerstone and Christianity Today ...
"An honest, decent person, even a non-Christian, will recognize the validity and credibility of Dr. Rivera as a Roman Catholic priest! Why have these critics consistently attacked Alberto Rivera instead of the doctrines he espouses and proclaims?
"Mr. Metz says: Alberto says he worked with notable Jesuit spies such as Kathryn Kuhlman and Jim Jones; yet nowhere and at no time has Rivera said he had worked with either one!
"The critics tell us that the story of Alberto was banned by the Christian Reformed Church, Zondervan Publishers and The Southern Baptist Sunday School Board; yet failed to admit that many of the congregations associated with these three bodies continue to sell the Crusaders Comics in question.
"The critics failed to ask the Roman Catholic hierarchy why they were upset because the articles were true, for because of them thousands of former Roman Catholics had found Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour, and were coming out of Rome's religion.
"Why else should a priest on an Indian Reservation in New Brunswick order a faith missionary to stay off the Reserve, if it were not that many young native adults were reading of Alberto through the comics and were coming to Christ? This has been true in Western Canada and in some places in Ontario.
"Why did not the critics ask the representatives of the Roman Church why these demands they currently make to ban from entry, etc., unless it is for fear of an acceleration of many of their people in this exodus from Rome?
"Why, specifically, are the mentioned publishers trying to abolish the ALBERTO series from all of their outlets? Have they been asked? Have they been asked whether the local Roman Church representatives have not appealed for this because they are offensive to them? (This was the reason given by the office of the Toronto R.C. Archbishop.) We are told by the critics: Our investigation reveals (Rivera's) police record, his investment schemes, his bad cheque-writing, his contradictory testimony, his fabricated education record, and his reported family abuse. Yet the author of these words must have forgotten something! He neglected to quote from any court records (indeed does not mention any single Court record location, any dates, any case numbers, and charges filed, whether or not an arrest was made, and the final outcome of the levelled charges allegedly made).
"Reported abuse, newspaper clippings, magazine articles, several article writers (each quoting the others), never must be understood to be valid, factual evidence credible of anything at all! Critical mention is made of a college in Spain for which Rivera (as a Jesuit priest) was authorized to collect funds, when he was not properly authorized to do so.
"The articles claim that Rivera was never a priest. No mention is made of the name of the college, or the source of the information to support the conclusions. It was officially agreed from Roman Catholic sources that Dr. Rivera had indeed been appointed to act in the collection of funds for one month, and surely he would have not been so used without his priestly credentials being checked!
'We are told that a minister of The Church of God of Prophecy, had experienced embarrassment when Rivera allegedly had written a cheque on an already closed account.
"Yet no mention is made of the location of the minister, of the banks concerned, of the locality of the airline desk complaining, whether the writers had ever seen a copy of the cheque, whether the closed account had previously existed, or to which office of which Department the said minister had written a complaint. (True, the accusers give us the name of the minister, but nothing else.)
"Charges are made of a history of legal entanglements, court actions, accusations of fraud, warrants issued for arrest, writing of bad cheques; yet no specifies regarding complaints, vital details, police records, places, hearings. No results are reported at all.
"Indeed, enquiries have been made by the Canadian Protestant League of every one of the police jurisdictions mentioned by the accusers, and consistently the response has been, we have never heard of this man!
"We hear of alleged inconsistencies, contradictions, impossibly conflicting dates; yet we have never been given the sources of such information - letters, tapes, photo-copies, individuals, interviews, etc. - not even a newspaper clipping!
"We are told: Alberto's claim to have been a Jesuit priest and bishop is denied by Roman Catholic spokesmen. They state the documents he exhibits as proof of this priesthood are little more than form letters giving permission to travel abroad.
"What else would one expect? Surely we would not expect Roman Catholic officialdom to admit that Alberto Rivera is telling the truth about them or their Jesuitical practices! How naive are we expected to be?"
Editor's Note: The following is a link to the response to Christianity Today's March 13, 1981, attack on Fr. Alberto Rivera. https://www.chick.com/articles/houstonletter.asp.
(GARY METZ vs. ALBERTO on) KBRT RADIO INTERVIEW: In 1984, Gary Metz was a guest on the Southern California radio show "Talk From The Heart". The host was Rich Bueller. Gary came across as a very calm, believable journalist with no axes to grind. He itemized a list of falsehoods he claimed to have proof of that Alberto lied about. After about ten minutes of this type of information, it sounded obvious that Alberto was a chronic liar and/or nut case. Metz claimed to have all sorts of documented proof of these lies and distortions. And Metz seemed to have absolutely no motive to smear Alberto or Chick Publications. (He doesn't mention he was refused a job by Chick.) He came across as just a journalist doing his job. But then an surprising thing happened: Alberto called in unexpectedly to the show! And by golly, he ALSO sounded believable and sincere. VERY sincere. The three talked together and, for the most part, were extremely civil. Alberto seemed genuinely grateful to have a opportunity to defend himself, especially in the presence of his chief accuser. He claimed the vast majority of news programs & newspapers would never call and check his side of the story or view his documents, yet they would provide plenty of time for his detractors. More importantly, they would never investigate the mere possibility that his claims about the mischief of the Vatican were true, which was, after all, a major news story.
Because Alberto is Spanish and speaks somewhat broken English, a few exchanges were confusing. But Alberto sounded like he was trying to be as direct as he could. He didn't back peddle on any of his claims. He often said emphatically, "that is correct sir". But he also made it clear that "he" is not the issue, but that the deceiving Catholic Church was the real issue and that Metz never investigates the Vatican at all. Metz avoided that point and responded with a series of accusations. Alberto said he first wanted Metz to answer just three simple questions: 1. How come Metz cannot provide any of the documents showing convictions for the crimes Metz accuses Alberto of in the USA or foreign lands? 2. How come Metz cannot prove Alberto's leave of absence document from the Vatican is false? 3. How come Metz never even mentions Alberto's special I.D. (as a priest) granted by the security secret police that requires a birth certificate and 9 major documents from other legal authorities in Spain? Metz claims he never says Alberto had any convictions (but didn't offer to provide the warrants for Alberto's arrest that he claimed to possess earlier). Alberto asks about the "convictions of illegitimate children" Metz claimed to have. (It seems what Alberto really meant to say was "proof", not "convictions".) Metz says he had a death certificate of Alberto's first son from the County of El Paso, Texas in 1965. Alberto says "you should PROVE that and make it public". Metz says "Sure, no problem". (But we have yet to see it and the Austin Bureau of Vital Statistics denies the certificate exists.) Metz ignored Alberto's other two questions and instead, moves on to more accusations. But most of Metz's evidence is from Catholic institutions, and Alberto counters that they are lying because the Vatican has instructed them to do so.
At one point, Alberto's education is brought up. He claims to have four PhDs. Metz claims it's false. Alberto says the Catholic Church often dispenses these degrees to nuns and priests without the proper studies being required. (Sometimes they only require a seminar.) He says, however, that he did most the studies to obtain his degrees. Metz says those degrees don't exist and he can only find evidence of Alberto's high school education. Again, Alberto explains the Catholic Educational institutions are denying his records under direction of the Vatican. "You can ask the Devil about Christ, and I am sure the Devil will not give you a true report on Christ, our Lord and Savior." Alberto seems to believe that Metz was fooled in his investigation, as opposed to being a Jesuit or other agent of the Vatican on a deliberate mission to destroy Alberto. He never attacks Metz personally.
Then another opponent is brought into the debate. Brian Onken, a research consultant for the Christian Research Institute (founded by Walter Martin) also challenges Alberto. Alberto seems unfazed at having two against one and seems more interested in trying to remember who Brian is. Brian explains some prior conversations he had with Alberto, when Alberto recalls him and makes the connection. He seems happy to speak with Brian again, but Brian talks fast and the two don't communicate very clearly. One of Alberto's claims, that deceased cult leader Jim Jones was a Jesuit, is challenged. Alberto sticks by the claim. Alberto also offers to make full sized copies of his documents and provide them to Chick Publications to give anyone who doubts them.
There were no big bomb shells dropped or smoking guns revealed. The language barrier could easily account for any of Alberto's unclear answers. He doesn't seem evasive or resort to "I don't recall" duck and dodge tactics. He thanks the interviewer for giving him the chance to speak on the program once it is completed. His boldness in calling the show is certainly noteworthy, as is the fact that he then provided recorded copies of the show in his catalog. Alberto seems to think this debate exonerates him. But it actually seemed more like the famous Nixon/Kennedy TV debate. Everyone who watched it came away with a different opinion as to who won and why. Nixon's 5 o'clock shadow was said to have alienated him from otherwise neutral viewers. In this case, it's Alberto's problem with the language that would naturally bias many listeners toward his American critics. But if you listen strictly to the content, it appeared much more like a draw. (A frustrating yet fascinating draw.)
Interesting enough, listening to Alberto's voice and his apparent sincerity gave me the CREEPS because it sounded to me like he was an honest person. I'm beginning to see why Chick would listen to him, even though his claims are so fantastic. I don't consider myself easily convinced. I could tell O.J. and Clinton were both lying by the manner of their delivery. But Alberto SOUNDS like he is telling the truth as he sees it. So he's either (1.) a better liar than two of the most famous fibbers, or (2.) he's completely delusional and actually believes his own fantasies, or (3.) he's telling the truth. His claims are so dramatic and far reaching, it can't possibly all be true-- can it? What if only HALF of it is true? This is the danger of Chick's tracts: They can make you think too much... Grade: B+ for Brain Stimulation. Return to Comics, Books & Tapes Index.
"THE NEXT STEP" Tract/book Review! Is it a tract or is it a book? You decide! From the outside it looks like a 64 page soft cover book. Inside, the cartoons and text are laid out like tracts (3 rows per page). In fact, chapter 2 and 3 are basically reprints of the earlier tracts (so we'll deal with the other six chapters here). The first one is The Birth of the Bible. It the only chapter with artwork by Fred Carter and focuses on how the early churches determined real scripture from Satan's forgeries. The early editions of The Next Step tell this story in twelve tract sized panels, but the recent edition reduces that number to eleven. It does so by increasing the SIZE of two of the panels by 50%, making this is the only story in the book that can't be easily photocopied at 110% to create your own bootleg tract. Half of the artwork is redrawn as well. The earlier editions tell about Eusebius (Emperor Constantine's chief religious advisor) and how he separated real scripture from false. Current editions leave out the name of Eusebius and one of his four categories, "the 'disputed books:' James, II Peter, Jude, II & III John which, though included in his own bibles, were doubted by some." Why such details are omitted in the new edition is uncertain. Perhaps it was too confusing. It's more likely that after speaking with Alberto, Chick's views on Constintine soured. (Alberto thought Constantine still worshiped Apollo, died unsaved, and emblazoned ankhs instead of crosses on his roughnecks' shields. He doesn't even like the cross, as in another Alberto comic he shows its pagan/Egyptian origins.) The only other major change was the omission of the word "heretics" from category four. You can bet this was done after Chick had his tiff with Rome, to avoid using the same word that Pope used to condemn good protestants during the Inquisition.
Chapter 4 is entitled Love. Although it is only 9 tract pages long (16 panels) it's one of the funniest in the book. Some of the humor is intentional, and some not. It starts out with a fat balding slob putting the moves on Billy's drunk mom in the family room. Billy's friend asks if that's his dad. "No- That's some creep she picked up at the bar!" As the unshaven cigar chomping loser pulls mom in for a kiss, she cackles "Haw haw- stop in Harry!" The bum replies, "My name is Ernie!" Billy splits with his long haired friend because "She makes me sick!" With such loose motherly morals, who can blame poor Billy? Unfortunately, he's a chip off the old block, spending his spare time mugging people.The two delinquents smash a Christian over the head with a chain and steal his wallet. They're excited to find $28 but the bleeding man begs them to come back... Does he need his medical alert card? Or someone to call an ambulance? Heck no, he wants to give them more money that they overlooked in his other pocket. Billy asks, "Are you crazy?" (Please note: Crazy people never realize they are crazy because they're too crazy to realize what crazy means.) The good Christian insists he's NOT crazy, "but I love you kids with Christ's love!" (So maybe he's crazy for Christ.) Lucky for him, it's contagious because the two hoods immediately sit down and want to convert.
Billy runs home and busts inside declaring he's been saved. Evil Ernie doesn't appreciate the unannounced interruption and punches Billy out. Sleazy mom yells, "Stop it Harry!" --and gets the running gag response, "My name is Ernie!" (We only see her hand, probably because she's naked by now.) The cops arrive and ask Billy if he wants to press charges. In true Chick style, Billy decides to play the martyr and take the abuse without griping. "I don't hate him. All he needs is Jesus in his life." Remember, Chick Christians rarely tattle. They take their muggings, child abuse and wife abuse with a stiff upper lip... Even though that lip is usually split and bleeding. Billy has a bloody mouth, nose and black eye, but he quickly heals and sets out to convert mom. Scrubbing the floor for her seems to do the trick. In one panel, she forgets to think using a thought cloud, and instead thinks aloud using a standard word balloon, "I can't stand it. The is kid is driving me nuts-- He really does love me!" (Shhh mom! He's right next to you. He can read your balloon!) Two panels later, she's on her knees with Billy. Praise the Lord.
Chapter 5 is called The Enemy, and explains Satan's sinister plan for humanity. It's 22 tract pages long (37 panels) and would have fit perfect in a real tract. But it was never issued as one as far as anyone can tell. More's the pity, because it provides lots of insight into Chick's Biblical views. Satan is one bad dude. But he started out as "the most beautiful creature ever made... His beauty was so great that he had built-in pipes for music." Then pride made him rebel and he was exiled along with 1/3rd the other angels for his trouble. They were "given a new location; the atmospheric heaven is now Satan's domain." (And you thought he was in hell? Silly you.) Satan uses a variety of tricks to attack the weak and disobedient Christian: "Loving the world... taking one's eyes off the Lord... pride." Chick states that Satan does not attack a Christian without permission. (Is this supposed to make us feel better?) The story of Job is recounted where God lets Satan devastate devout Job's life just to see if he'll crack. It brings back memories of the dark comedy "Trading Places", where two rich guys decide to trade Dan Aykroyd's luxurious life with Eddie Murphy, a down and out street hustler. The motive for ruining Aykroyd's life is to settle a $1 wager. Why would an omniscient God need to test people like that if he already knows the outcome? Chick says "If he is walking in the Lord, it is always for God's Glory and the Christian's own good." Well, that settles that.
Chick also says "Satan's greatest achievement is that no one believes he exists. A great number of theological graduates do not believe in a personal devil." He then goes on to list 34 satanic religions and gimmicks, including ESP, Ouija Boards, Christian Science, T.M., and of course, the Roman Catholic System. He warns of another sneaky trap: "Satan has liberal pastors scattered throughout the protestant churches... These are the 20th century sadducees." He gives a check list of 7 litmus test beliefs that liberal pastors pervert or deny. #7 is "Everlasting punishment in the lake of fire for the unsaved... If the pastor denies any of the above, then get out and find a Bible preaching church." Chick paraphrases a few prophecies and asserts "Demon possession is more prevalent today than during the time of Jesus." He winds up on a hopeful note, however, showing Satan praising God while kneeling in the flames of hell. It may be another 1,000 years before this happens, but the important thing is that God gets the last laugh.
Chapter 6 is Pitfalls. It's the shortest chapter in the book (only six tract pages or 9 panels long). It shows a boss eavesdropping on his employee, admiring what a fine Christian the man is. He considers becoming saved himself. But then, a horrible thing happens. The Christian reaches down and places a box of paper clips in his pocket. "Why that @!!!** thief! I'll get that phoney on the next layoff! Christian my foot! It'll be a frosty Friday in H--- before I ever become one!" Chick then warns readers that, "Some Christian workers have been laid aside because they failed to have a partner accompany them on a visit to a person of the opposite sex." (Yep, that'll do it all right.) He points out that King David was 50 years old when he saw Bathsheba. Kinda kinky...
Chapter 7 (Called Out) is the most bland chapter in the book. It's only 11 pages/panels long and the artwork is pretty basic. It depicts a clean cut guy getting pulled from a group of protesters onto a pedestal by a Christian. He's told what he has to do to stay on the pedestal. The only funny parts are various protest signs in the audience: "boycott garlic" and "kids lib" in particular. A real dud.
Chapter 8 is the last and longest chapter (34 tract pages in length). It's called Warn Them and it's a how-2 guide for converting the heathen. The first five panels are the best: A Christian stands before a washed out bridge in a storm. A car approaches and he considers warning them. But then he concludes "I don't want to be branded as a doom merchant. The bad news might upset him. Besides that, he may not want to be my friend because of my fanatical views." The car races off the bridge into the darkness screaming, "YAAAAAAH!". The rest of the tract is less dramatic. Basic Bible outlining tips are provided, along with ideas on how to prepare for your ambush session with thy neighbor. Just such a session is demonstrated. A Christian approaches his "target" as the unsuspecting neighbor rakes leaves. In a rare endorsement of deception, Chick urges Christians NOT to say what's really on their mind: "Never hit them cold with a question like 'have you been saved?' Talk about the weather or their job for a few minutes." Then Chick suggest that you pop the question... "If you were to die tonight, are you sure you would go to heaven? Any reply less than 100% certainty is a sign you must present the Roman Road." Needless to say, the neighbor takes the bait and devours the message. No leaves get raked but another soul is saved. One panel gives some helpful hints, including "Go neatly dressed- you represent the King of Kings," and "Watch your breath- use breath mints." The last third of the story is a shameless pitch for that greatest of all witnessing tools, Chick Tracts!
Your Chick tract collection is really not complete without having this book. It's only $3.50, so money is no object. Though the quality of the stories within it varies, they go a long way in explaining exactly where Chick is coming from. Grade B+ Back to Main Page.