7/07/2014

Refuting: Mike Gendron's "Who Holds the Keys?"


Quote:
Who Holds the Keys? Written by Mike Gendron.
Two thousand years ago Jesus said to Peter, "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loose in heaven." This reference to the "keys of the kingdom" is found only in Matthew 16:19, however the authority to "bind and loose" is given to all the disciples in Matthew 18:18. Many biblical scholars believe the "keys" are symbols representing the authority to govern and minister theocratic principles on earth. However, the interpretation of this verse has been the subject of debate for hundreds of years.
Indeed they have Mike. Basically the last 500 years or so since a number of errant teachers arose and sought to put themselves forth as the new and modern interpreters of scripture.
Quote:
Within the Roman Catholic tradition, doctrines have developed that give the papacy authority to delegate the power to forgive or retain sins through a sacramental system of penance and absolution. The Catholic Encyclopedia states, "The power to confer or withhold forgiveness might well be viewed as the opening and shutting of the gates of heaven." It was used both as "admission to" as well as "excommunication from" the kingdom. The power to "bind and loose" also gives the Popes authority to pronounce doctrinal judgments, making disciplinary decisions in the Church and even canonize saints. This authority and power prescribes what and who Catholics must believe and how and when they must worship.
No knowledgeable Catholic will state that Christian doctrines do not develop because we know that that has been the case from the New Testament era on. The Trinity is a good example, since that term is nowhere found in scripture and yet it is universally used among Christians to express the doctrines that pertain to Almighty God.
However, Gendron here makes a serious error in his teaching because he states that these passages are the only ones that are used to support the Catholic position and that is completely untrue. He also conspicuously fails to note that, along with the above passages, we also have clear scripture that plainly tells us what the pillar and bulwark of the truth is. Note the following: (1st Timothy 3:15) “if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.”
Now we already know that Gendron is an adherent of the unscriptural fundamental doctrinal error of Sola Scriptura, so he naturally ascribes all ultimate authority to the Bible, in spite of the glaring fact that there is no passage of scripture where the Bible lays claim to any such authority. (Aside: See Does the Bible teach that everything that we believe and practice has to be found in its pages? )

Even so, along with the passages from Matthew that he has cited and the one I have offered above, we can see what the Bible actually says about Christian authority. I believe the fact that none of aligns with Gendron’s teaching should cause one some serious pause.

Quote:
The Vatican teaches that Peter's keys have been handed down to his successors throughout the centuries. This has given credence to the papacy to govern the kingdom of God, which they believe, is the Roman Catholic Church. As a result, Peter and his successors are said to have special spiritual powers as Christ's representative on earth.
Pretty much correct, except that as we have seen, this belief is plainly based upon the Word of God and even for someone crippled by Sola Scriptura, it becomes evident that the Catholic teaching is simply based upon God’s Word and not just a man-made teaching of men. Where then, does that put Gendron’s teaching?
Quote:
Proponents of the Roman Catholic tradition point to history as supporting evidence for their interpretation of the keys of the kingdom. However, most of their historical support comes from tradition dating back only the fourth century.
This is obviously not true; since I have already shown that it predates that all the way back to the New Testament itself. There may well have been discussion and development of the doctrine in the 4th century (though Gendron seems unwilling or unable to offer any historical documentation, which one would think he would do if such existed) but again, such discussion goes hand in hand with developing doctrines, even as the Trinity was also much discussed at that time in the early church.

For extensive discussion and documentation on this point, I offer two excellent articles from Catholic Answers that do indeed offer that early church documentation.
· The Authority of the Pope: Part I
· The Authority of the Pope: Part II
 



Quote:
An accurate historical and grammatical interpretation must consider the use of terms at the time of the writing of the original text. The concept of the kingdom and the keys must be understood from their usage in the first century. Peter and the disciples understood the kingdom to be the visible rule of Christ over the earth, not the spiritual rule of Christ over His invisible church. The king would rule from Jerusalem, free Israel from political bondage and destroy her enemies. After Israel rejected the offer of the kingdom, Christ began to teach about it from a different perspective. He taught that it would be a mystery, invisible, and progressive. It would be both present and future and could be entered only by regeneration. The kingdom would not be limited to the church, but would work through the church to proclaim the good news of God's redemptive rule.
Certainly this was the case early on in the apostle’s experience that was clearly dispelled by the time we reach the 16th chapter of Matthew’s Gospel and there’s no way that a reader can hold Gendron’s position in light of the context of the rest of that gospel, not to mention similar passages from the same time period in the other gospels. I urge everyone to read these chapters for themselves.
Quote:
After the events of Pentecost, Christ's teaching and the indwelling Holy Spirit, gave the disciples a clearer understanding of this kingdom. The real authority of the keys given by Christ is ultimately in the revelation of God's principles from the Scriptures for His theocratic kingdom. Men of God were able to discern the correctness of doctrine and practice using the whole counsel of God (Acts 17:11).
This “Berean defense” is often put forth by Sola Scriptura adherents, but the fact is that not all those who followed that approach were convinced and one can see this from the context of verses 10 and 12. Moreover, in the context of the rest of the entire Word of God and especially the New Testament, again, we see that nowhere does the Bible lay claim to any such authority.

Catholic Answers has a very good article that deals with this.
Not by Scripture Alone

Quote:
An example of this is found in Luke 11:52, where Jesus denounces the Pharisees for misrepresenting God and the Scriptures with a religion of their own making. As a result they were shutting the kingdom of heaven in men's faces. "Woe to you experts in the law, because you have taken away the key to knowledge. You yourselves have not entered, and you have hindered those who were entering."
This is just Gendron’s usual attempt to take an irrelevant passage of scripture and infer that it somehow applies to the Catholic faith, which is his whole raison d'ĂȘtre. Yet does it apply, when one studies the context of the New Testament and the passages he sets forth? The fact is that it does not, especially since we can see that the Catholic Church teaches the scriptural doctrine, while Gendron offers something man made.  
 
Quote:
The ultimate power to open and close the gates of heaven is the Gospel, which "is the power of God for the salvation of all who believe" (Romans 1:16). Peter's first proclamation of the Gospel on the Day of Pentecost, in Acts chapter 2, opened the door of the kingdom to thousands. Since then, the disciples, and all Christians who have succeeded them, have been opening and closing the doors of the kingdom with the Gospel. Those who hear it and believe it are forgiven (loosed) of their sin and enter the kingdom, while those who reject the Gospel remain unforgiven (bound) of their sins and can not enter the kingdom (John 3:36).
At first, one might be willing to accept this paragraph without comment, but there is simply far too much “Gendron misinterpretation” there to allow us to do that.

No faithful Catholic would deny what the scriptures he cites say, but Gendron’s misinterpretation flies in the face of the “great commission” passage, also in Matthew 28, where it plainly mandates; [19] Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, [20] teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age."

What would be the point of such a mandate if the church was not the one opening and closing the gates to the kingdom that they have been given the keys to? Obviously Gendron is wrong in his interpretation because we also have the New Testament plainly telling us in Romans 10: [14] But how are men to call upon him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without a preacher? [15] And how can men preach unless they are sent? As it is written, "How beautiful are the feet of those who preach good news!" Gendron has sought to diminish the very scriptural role of the church in the spread of the gospel and to mislead people from seeing that the New Testament supports the Catholic Church, the church founded by Our Blessed lord Jesus Christ, as the authority ordained by Christ Himself.
Quote:
The contrast between the Catholic interpretation of the "keys of the kingdom" and the historical-grammatical interpretation is significant. One centers around the teachings of men and is based on tradition and reason, while the other centers around the Word of God and is based on His revealed will and reign.
This of course is totally untrue and Gendron is indeed the one who has plainly denied the factual historical and grammatical interpretation of these passages of scripture and set forth here his own flawed human reasoning and man-made tradition. One need only look at the facts and decide for oneself.

7/05/2014

Refutation: Mike Gendron's "Why Can't Born Again Christians Remain in the Catholic Church?"



Why Can't Born Again Christians Remain in the Catholic Church?
This is a question we have been asked many times in our 23 years of ministry.
Then perhaps you should endeavor to give a correct and Biblical answer, Sir.
We must answer it with the authority of God's Word.
Okay....let's see this.
When Catholics repent and believe the Gospel of God, they are born again and the indwelling Holy Spirit will lead them out of spiritual darkness into the glorious light of Jesus Christ (Mark 1:15; Eph. 1:13-14).

Alright, here we see the beginning of his usual anti-Catholic propaganda. It assumes several things.

That Catholics do not repent or believe the Gospel of God. Notice here that he does not define what exactly that "Gospel of God" is, but I will offer the following links to relevant articles from my blog.
He infers that we Catholics do not have the indwelling Holy Spirit, yet I would point out that the holy lifestyles of many devout Catholics flies right in the face of his inference. Furthermore, we can point to the great number of documented holy lives of saints such as Francis of Assisi, Maximilian Kolbe, Elizabeth Seaton, and Pope John XXIII and Pope John Paul II, just to name a few. Our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ tells us in Matthew 7...
[15] "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. [16] You will know them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thorns, or figs from thistles? [17] So, every sound tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears evil fruit. [18] A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. [19] Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. [20] Thus you will know them by their fruits.
As they abide in God's Word, they will know the truth and the truth will set them free from religious bondage and deception (John 8:31-32).

This assumes that faithful Catholics do not read and practice their faith according to the Bible, which is simply untrue. Discussions here on CAF as well as my own personal research indicate that most faithful Catholics are avid Bible readers, know the Bible at least as well as our n-C contemporaries and are well aware of the Biblical basis for our most holy faith.

In many cases, my own included, we have found that the "religious bondage and deception" was not in the Catholic Church, but in the communities that we were previously a part of. (See My Testimony for details) Whether that previous deception and resulting errors was intentional is open to debate because most of those who were involved were quite sincere. I would further assert that if there is any deception from anyone involved in this discussion, that it has been already been proven to be Mr Gendron himself. Please see the following articles on my blog.
Then they will look for a church that worships God in Spirit and truth because that is the kind of worshippers God seeks (John 4:24)
And every faithful Catholic will respond to what that scripture says with a heartfelt "Amen and Alleluia!"

But let's move on and see if Gendron is really offering truth. This we do in obedience to the Word of God, which tells us, "
but test everything; hold fast what is good, " (1st Thessalonians 5:21)
Anyone who says they have been born again, yet refuses to leave a false religion that deceives people with another gospel, must examine themselves to see if they have genuine saving faith (2 Cor. 13:5).
Christians are called to walk according to the truth which means, as they become more and more passionate for the truth, they will turn away from any falsehood that stands opposed to God's Word.

Well then Mr. Gendron it would seem from the list of my articles above that you have been hoisted upon your own petard because it is indeed my own passion for the truth that led me out of the errors of n-C communities and to return to the Catholic faith. Then further, it has been that same passion for the truth which has led me to carefully examine so much of your anti-Catholic propaganda (That you are paid for by the way, while I seek and receive no form of compensation at all. I am merely a simple and faithful Catholic who loves his faith and pursues truth wherever it leads, because our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ said "I am the way, the truth, and the life..." .(See John 14:6)

I would then suggest to all those who follow you and have so far paid you to be deceived by you that they at least follow your very words here one last time, and "turn away from any falsehood that stands opposed to God's Word."

One of Catholicism's false practices is described as a doctrine of demons in the Bible. Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the Apostle Paul wrote that some will "depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons through the insincerity of liars whose consciences have been seared who forbid people to marry" (1 Tim. 4:1-4). Catholicism is the only religion that names the name of Christ and forbids its clergy to marry, thus proving that some of its teachings are directly opposed to Scripture.

This is categorically untrue and here again, we see Gendron deceiving people, both about the Catholic faith, and even the very word of God.

First, the Catholic Church does not forbid its clergy from marrying. There are many married priests in our church from other than the Latin Rite. We are, however, the only Christian people who allow and encourage our clergy to obey the very words of Christ Himself. For a detailed study, see my article, Priestly celibacy is unBiblical. NOT!

Furthermore, since this mandate that you oppose and call a doctrine of demons, comes directly from Christ Himself, I would urge you to be cautious lest you actually find yourself blaspheming a work of the Holy Spirit.

Another reason true converts must leave Catholicism is that it demands submission of every person's will and intellect to the bishops' teachings. Catholic bishops are said to be the only authentic instructors and teachers of the faith, and Catholics are bound to adhere to their teaching with a religious submission of the mind (Canon Law, 753).

As usual with Gendron , he rips his quote out of all context in order to further his agenda which is deceive persons into opposing the Catholic faith, so we'll take a look at the actual context and see if what he asserts is accurate and unreasonable.
Can. 747 §1. The Church, to which Christ the Lord has entrusted the deposit of faith so that with the assistance of the Holy Spirit it might protect the revealed truth reverently, examine it more closely, and proclaim and expound it faithfully, has the duty and innate right, independent of any human power whatsoever, to preach the gospel to all peoples, also using the means of social communication proper to it.

§2. It belongs to the Church always and everywhere to announce moral principles, even about the social order, and to render judgment concerning any human affairs insofar as the fundamental rights of the human person or the salvation of souls requires it.

Can. 748 §1. All persons are bound to seek the truth in those things which regard God and his Church and by virtue of divine law are bound by the obligation and possess the right of embracing and observing the truth which they have come to know.

Can. 749 §1. By virtue of his office, the Supreme Pontiff possesses infallibility in teaching when as the supreme pastor and teacher of all the Christian faithful, who strengthens his brothers and sisters in the faith, he proclaims by definitive act that a doctrine of faith or morals is to be held
.

§2. The college of bishops also possesses infallibility in teaching when the bishops gathered together in an ecumenical council exercise the magisterium as teachers and judges of faith and morals who declare for the universal Church that a doctrine of faith or morals is to be held definitively; or when dispersed throughout the world but preserving the bond of communion among themselves and with the successor of Peter and teaching authentically together with the Roman Pontiff matters of faith or morals, they agree that a particular proposition is to be held definitively.

§3. No doctrine is understood as defined infallibly unless this is manifestly evident.

Can. 750 §1. A person must believe with divine and Catholic faith all those things contained in the word of God, written or handed on, that is, in the one deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn magisterium of the Church or by its ordinary and universal magisterium which is manifested by the common adherence of the Christian faithful under the leadership of the sacred magisterium; therefore all are bound to avoid any doctrines whatsoever contrary to them.

§2. Each and every thing which is proposed definitively by the magisterium of the Church concerning the doctrine of faith and morals, that is, each and every thing which is required to safeguard reverently and to expound faithfully the same deposit of faith, is also to be firmly embraced and retained; therefore, one who rejects those propositions which are to be held definitively is opposed to the doctrine of the Catholic Church.

Can. 751 Heresy is the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.

Can. 752 Although not an assent of faith, a religious submission of the intellect and will must be given to a doctrine which the Supreme Pontiff or the college of bishops declares concerning faith or morals when they exercise the authentic magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim it by definitive act; therefore, the Christian faithful are to take care to avoid those things which do not agree with it.

Can. 753 Although the bishops who are in communion with the head and members of the college, whether individually or joined together in conferences of bishops or in particular councils, do not possess infallibility in teaching, they are authentic teachers and instructors of the faith for the Christian faithful entrusted to their care; the Christian faithful are bound to adhere with religious submission of mind to the authentic magisterium of their bishops.

Can. 754 All the Christian faithful are obliged to observe the constitutions and decrees which the legitimate authority of the Church issues in order to propose doctrine and to proscribe erroneous opinions, particularly those which the Roman Pontiff or the college of bishops puts forth.

So, as we can all see from this extensive context (Linked here), Gendron is misleading people with his article. It's nothing new...as you saw in my links above...he does this a lot. 
 
A third reason to leave is that the Word of God condemns the Catholic clergy for preaching another gospel (Gal. 1:6-9). The Catholic plan of salvation nullifies God's saving grace by adding works, sacraments, purgatory and law-keeping to the Gospel.

Actually, what we have here is a third reason not to listen to this man. again, I offer my article Who REALLY Preaches "A Different Gospel"? which details specific scriptures regarding the plan of salvation, versus what many n-C communities offer. I urge you all to obey the New Testament mandate in 2nd Timothy 2:15 to "Carefully study to present thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth." Please see also How Is A Catholic Saved?
Not to be outdone, Catholic bishops responded by condemning born again Christians with over 100 anathemas from the Councils of Trent and Vatican II.

Here again, Gendron proves himself to be unworthy of our trust in his teaching and preaching as he misstates that the Church was "condemning born again Christians", when in fact it was condemning heretical teachings as per the New Testament.

Here is what CA apologists offer concerning this.
Could you explain anathema? Does the Church teach that Protestants are anathema because they don't agree with the Church?

Answer


The use of the word anathema has evolved during the history of the Church, and today it means the same thing as excommunication. (The word anathema is no longer officially used.) Because a person must be a Catholic to be anathema (excommunicated) the term does not apply to Protestants.

So then this in no way applies to n-Cs, so again Gendron is deceiving his readers.

Here too is another much longer and more in depth answer. Does the Church condemn those who disagree with its teachings?

By way of addressing Gendron's inclusion of Purgatory and the sacraments, I'll also include my own research articles on them in refutation.
Originally Posted by A fellow Catholic
In addition to what you pointed out, if I am not mistaken, Vatican II pronounced no anathema whatsoever, so that is yet another reason to distrust what he says.
I hadn't thought of that, but I believe you're right! Thank you!

So, the question to any and all of Mike Gendron's church members,  supporters, and those who believe what he teaches, is...If he is wrong on all these points, both about what the Catholic Church actually teaches and the about what the Word of God says, then how must one respond to this reality?

6/18/2014

Insight on the Eucharistic Real Presence from Archbishop Fulton Sheen

A young Wife, who had been taking Instructions for a Year, told the Writer she could Believe everything in the Faith, except the Eucharist. Upon inquiring-about her Husband, it was learned that he was in the Pacific, on Military Duty. In answer to further questions, she admitted that she Corresponded-with him every Two (2) Days, and that she had his Photograph before her, in the House.

We argued there was nothing Wanting-for Perfect Happiness. What more could she Want, than the Constant-Memory of him, through the Photograph and a Written-communication, in which Heart poured-out-to Heart. But, she Protested that she could never be Truly Happy, except-through Union (1)-with her Husband.


But, it was retorted, if Human Love craves Oneness (1), shall not Divine Love? If Husband and Wife seek-to-be One (1) in the Flesh, shall not the Christian and Christ crave-for that Oneness (1) with One-another? The Memory of the Christ Who lived Twenty (20) Centuries ago, the recalling-of His Mercy and Miracles through Memory, the correspondence-with Him by-reading the Scriptures -- all these are Satisfying, but they do not Satisfy Love. There must-be, on the Level-of Grace, something Unitive (1) with Divine Love. Every Heart seeks a Happiness outside it, and since Perfect Love is God, then the Heart-of Man and the Heart-of Christ must, in some-way, Fuse (1). In Human Friendship, the other-Person is Loved as another-Self, or the other-Half of One's Soul. Divine Friendship must have its 'Mutual-Indwelling': "He who dwells-in Love, dwells-in God, and God in him" (1John 4:17). This Aspiration-of the Soul for its Ecstasy is fulfilled-in the Sacrament of the Eucharist.


These are the Sacraments
Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen

9/20/2013

Refuting Mike Gendron's "Do Pope Francis's Remarks Have Prophetic Implications?"



Now let's take his remarks apart so that everyone who sees this post will have some idea of how to counter his anti-Catholic propaganda.
Do Pope Francis's Remarks Have Prophetic Implications?

                         Written by Mike Gendron on 20 September 2013.

                          
                                                              As Christ is calling His people out of the world with the truth of His Word, Satan is holding people captive with his lies. While Christ is preparing His bride for the wedding feast of the Lamb, Satan is using his harlot to gather all unbelievers together to worship the AntiChrist.

This is nothing more than vitriolic a-C polemics without any semblance of Biblical basis. We could use this same kind of specious allegation against Gendron and pretty much anyone anywhere else were we willing to stoop this low. 

In a wide-ranging interview published Thursday from Jesuit journals, Pope Francis said the church is not to "interfere spiritually" in the lives of gays and lesbians. This comment comes after the explosive comments he made in July about not judging homosexuals. His motivation for such statements is not known, but he appears to be overly tolerant as he suppresses the truth of God's Word. Christians know the only hope for any unredeemed sinner, including homosexuals, is to be lovingly confronted with God's Word and then called to repentance and faith in the Gospel. For the pope to say the church is not to interfere spiritually in the lives of sinners is the same strategy of Satan. It is his goal to keep people from hearing the Word of Christ because he knows the truth with set them free from the power of sin and religious deception (Rom. 10:17; John 8:31).

This of course flies completely in the face of the very words of Our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ when he tells us in Matthew 7:1-2 & Luke 6:37 which is precisely the message that His Holiness is putting forth to the Church.


Now let's look at His Holiness' exact words and see if he's saying what Gendron alleges.
We need to proclaim the Gospel on every street corner,” the pope says, “preaching the good news of the kingdom and healing, even with our preaching, every kind of disease and wound. In Buenos Aires I used to receive letters from homosexual persons who are ‘socially wounded’ because they tell me that they feel like the church has always condemned them. But the church does not want to do this. During the return flight from Rio de Janeiro I said that if a homosexual person is of good will and is in search of God, I am no one to judge. By saying this, I said what the catechism says. Religion has the right to express its opinion in the service of the people, but God in creation has set us free: it is not possible to interfere spiritually in the life of a person.

“A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: ‘Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?’ We must always consider the person. Here we enter into the mystery of the human being. In life, God accompanies persons, and we must accompany them, starting from their situation. It is necessary to accompany them with mercy. When that happens, the Holy Spirit inspires the priest to say the right thing.
 

Obviously Gendron is lying to intentionally mislead his readers as to what Pope Francis said and means. In fact, Gendron nowhere offers a link to the actual interview so that his readers might see for themselves. I feel that this qualifies and specious deception on Gendron's part.

By the way, this was the same reason the Catholic Church put the Bible on the list of forbidden books at the Council of Trent.

This is a straight up lie because no such thing was done by the council of Trent and the Catholic Church has always sought to make the Bible more available to people and protect it from corruption. It's easy to find what the council actually did say about the Bible. DECREE CONCERNING THE EDITION, AND THE USE, OF THE SACRED BOOKS 


When asked if he approves of homosexuality, he replied, "Tell me, when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?' This pope continues to show his ignorance of God's word. All sinners, including homosexuals are condemned by God until they repent and believe His Gospel. Only then is there legal status before the holy judge changed from condemnation to justification.

We've already seen the context of what His Holiness said and meant, and all I can see here is that Gendron makes the same Pharisaical allegation against Pope Francis that we saw in last Sunday's Gospel reading which is as true today of Pope Francis, as it was of Our Blessed Lord Jesus. “This man welcomes sinners and eats with them.”

The pope said, "The dogmatic and moral teachings of the church are not all equivalent...We have to find a new balance; otherwise even the moral edifice of the church is likely to fall like a house of cards." Tragically, the false and fatal gospel of the Roman Catholic religion has no power to overcome the flagrant immorality of the unregenerate Catholic clergy and their followers. Quite frankly, I am surprised the Catholic church has not yet fallen like a house of cards. Catholics should be leaving their religion in droves as they witness the growing corruption and scandals of pedophile priests preying on young boys.

 Okay, again here we have more specious vitriolic polemics. It also flies completely in the face of the factual evidence of the literal host of heroically virtuous lives of saints beginning in the early church through this very day, and implies that all Catholic clergy are involved in abuses and sins, while giving n-C clergy a free pass which they obviously do not deserve. (sex abuse protestant - Google Search)

As for the remarks about the Catholic gospel being false and fatal, I have answered this allegation before in my blog article Who REALLY Preaches "A Different Gospel"?

To bad for you Mr. Gendron but perhaps the problem is that what you so often condemn, and what has survived and thrived for 2,000 years and the reason for that is the same as the reason that the Jews of Christ's time couldn't stop us as Gamaliel said in
Acts 5:39. "but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them. You might even be found opposing God!" 

Sadly, many Catholics ignore it all because of their fierce loyalty to what they believe is the "one true church" that will get them to heaven after they are purified in purgatory. This is a great time to evangelize Catholics since they don't know who or what to believe. We must point them to Christ and His Word for truth!

This is just pep talk propaganda to encourage Gendron's misguided and misinformed followers (and I guess it helps him keep his cash flow up, since without pushing his anti-Catholic propaganda he'd have to settle for doing what all Christians are called to do, which is proclaiming the Gospel.

The fact is that more and more faithful Catholics are learning more about our most holy faith and getting the facts for themselves (even as we have been doing right here in this discussion) and thanks be to God for sites like Catholic Answers and their forums and all those faithful Catholics who constantly learn and grow in our Christian faith.

As you have all seen in my response, Gendron lies and misleads his followers about what the Church teaches and about Pope Francis is actually saying, (why else would he not offer citations of source for the things he alleges Pope Francis said and what Trent declared so that people can see it all for themselves?)
 
Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum    

4/02/2013

Jason Hauser.'s latest attack: "A Humble Pope?"

A Humble Pope?
Written by Jason Hauser.
When Pope Benedict XVI's successor, Jorge Bergoglio, was announced as the new Pope, the one word that many used to describe him was "humble." The Italian born pope from Argentina is of the Jesuit order which is known for their vows of poverty and work among the poor.

Hauser here displays his lack of due diligence in his articles because look at Pope Francis bio.


Pope FrancisFrancis is the 266th and current Pope of the Catholic Church, elected on 13 March 2013. As such, he is Bishop of Rome, the head of the worldwide Catholic Church and sovereign of the Vatican City State.


Born: December 17, 1936 (age 76), Buenos Aires

Nationality: Argentine

Education: University of Buenos Aires

Parents: Regina Maria Sivori, Mario Jose Bergoglio


Pope Francis is Argentinian and only his dad was Italian born.

 Pictures and articles have surfaced revealing that as an archbishop, Bergoglio took the public bus and cooked his own meals. When it was announced that he would be known as Pope Francis I, the connection was quickly made to St. Francis of Assisi, who renounced his wealth to live a life of poverty and service to others. Many have rejoiced that this is just the kind of humble leader that will further ecumenical relationships and win greater favor for Roman Catholicism.
He is also wrong on the small point that His Holiness is simply Pope Francis. There is no Pope Francis I until and unless there is a Pope Francis II.

Francis of Assisi is known as "the mirror of Christ", so how can a Pope who chooses his name as a patron and so far has been so exemplary of Our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ be a problem?

There is great irony however with the premise of a humble Pope. The papacy overseeing and affirming the teachings of Roman Catholicism has long been anything but humble. In the 14th century, Pope Boniface VIII was so bold as to claim in his papal bull, Unam Sanctum: "We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff." Fifty years later, Pope clement VI declared in his writing, Super Quisbusdam, "...no man of the wayfarers outside of the faith of this Church, and outside the obedience of the Pope of Rome, can finally be saved...all who have raised themselves against the faith of the Roman Church and have died in final impenitence have been damned and have descended to the eternal punishments of hell." Just before the turn of the 20th century, Pope Leo XIII declared, "He who would separate himself from the Roman Pontiff has no further bond with Christ." These papal declarations, by popes who claim to speak infallibly on faith and morals, couldn't be more clear, that salvation is dependent upon obedience and submission to popes. The Biblical response to this nonsense can be found in Acts 4:12; Col. 1:18, 1 Tim. 2:5; John 14:6 and Eph. 5:23.

Which has been the consistent teaching of the Catholic Church for 2,000 years. The fact is that those who are fully informed as to the truths of the Catholic faith and then chose to reject them, do so at the peril of their souls. This is no different than so many non-Catholics who preach that anyone who does not "get saved"/"accept Jesus as personal Lord and Savior" face the same fate.

Our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ established only one Church. and this is no news
.


 Over the last 1500 years, Rome has written her own history and would lead all to believe that such bold and arrogant statements by Popes are fully justified.
Naturally Hauser offers no documentation of this rewriting of any history, because no such thing has occurred and so no evidence exists. Sadly some of his readers will be gullible enough not to question that and that is one problem with propaganda like this.
 But throughout history we see continual opposition to Rome's unbiblical claims. In the third century, for example, Cyprian called out the bishop of Rome, Stephen I, for claiming to excommunicate all churches who disagreed with him. Cyprian wrote that no one should "set himself up as a bishop of bishops" or by "tyrannical terror force his colleagues to the necessity of obeying."
Naturally this is removed from context and the smart man will carefully review the following. SAINT CYPRIAN OF CARTHAGE
Later in the 6th century, the bishop of Rome, Gregory I, was very outspoken against the bishop of Constantinople, John IV, using the title "Universal Bishop." He warned him of "all who flatter you and offer you this name in error" and not to "foolishly consent to be called by the proud title." While history reveals that Gregory used his powerful position in questionable ways, he was resolved to reject such antichristian pride and usurpation of Christianity by a singular bishop.
 This is just more inaccurate anti-Catholic propaganda that does not prove true in the context of the historic facts, Take note:
In view of later developments Gregory's dealings with the Oriental Churches, and with Constantinople in particular, have a special importance. There cannot be the smallest doubt that Gregory claimed for the Apostolic See, and for himself as pope, a primacy not of honor, but of supreme authority over the Church Universal. In Epistle 13.50, he speaks of "the Apostolic See, which is the head of all Churches", and in Epistle 5.154, he says: "I, albeit unworthy, have been set up in command of the Church." As successor of St. Peter, the pope had received from God a primacy over all Churches (Epistle 2.46; 3.30; 5.37; 7.37). His approval it was which gave force to the decrees of councils or synods (Epistle 9.156), and his authority could annul them (Epistles 5.39, 5.41, 5.44). To him appeals might be made even against other patriarchs, and by him bishops were judged and corrected if need were (Epistles 2.50; 3.52; 3.63; 9.26; 9.27). This position naturally made it impossible for him to permit the use of the title Ecumenical Bishop assumed by the Patriarch of Constantinople, John the Faster, at a synod held in 588. Gregory protested, and a long controversy followed, the question still at issue when the pope died. A discussion of this controversy is needless here, but it is important as showing how completely Gregory regarded the Eastern patriarchs as being subject to himself; "As regards the Church of Constantinople," he writes in Epistle 9.12, "who can doubt that it is subject to the Apostolic See? Why, both our most religious lord the emperor, and our brother the Bishop of Constantinople continually acknowledge it."

At the same time the pope was most careful not to interfere with the canonical rights of the other patriarchs and bishops. With the other Oriental patriarchs his relations were most cordial, as appears from his letters to the patriarchs of Antioch and Alexandria.

Regardless of any winsome humble acts that Pope Francis might display, his very position and affirmation of the teachings of Roman Catholicism reveal that he is, in fact, a cleverly disguised deceiver of a false gospel (2 Pet. 2:1-3). 
Which is your errant opinion Mr Hauser and you are entitled to it, but the rest of the world is entitled also to the truth. I feel pretty certain that few people will accuse you or your boss Mike Gendron of many "winsome humble acts" especially after seeing how you misrepresent Catholic teachings and attempt to distort them by cherry picking them over out of context.

Perhaps readers here will also be interested in my blog article that speaks to who exactly is offering " a cleverly disguised deceiver of a false gospel".
Who REALLY Preaches "A Different Gospel"?
Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.