Apocalypsis

Mike Gendron's lies and he wanted to see Pope Benedict XVI

2011-11-28T04:24:00.000-06:00

Divine Appointments in Europe

Our ministry in Europe was a huge success with many divine appointments and open doors of opportunity to share the glorious Gospel of grace. On our first day at the Vatican, I approached the Pope's residence to see if we could meet with him to talk about the Gospel and his strategy for ecumenical unity. The Swiss guard told me I could see him at noon (along with the other 500,000 people waiting to see him in St. Peter's square). It occurred to me that I have immediate access to God through one mediator but had no access to the pope because of one obstruction. Later, when the pope appeared at his window to "bless" the crowd, we were astonished to witness the misplaced and excessive exaltation of this man. Our hearts were filled with compassion for the many nuns whose eyes were transfixed on him as if he were a god.

As usual Gendron proceeds to lie and deceive his readers. Notice that like some politicians have done he declares victory without having actually achieved it. He can't tell us that he didn't know that personal meetings with His Holiness are scheduled far in advance. This is just another of his outright lies that he propagates as an attack on the Catholic faith. Is this the kind of Christian integrity that he should display? I think not.

During our tour of St. Peter's Basilica and the Vatican Museum, we were taken back by the immense idolatry and paganism that is thinly veiled by a counterfeit form of Christianity.

Notice that he doesn't bother to detail this, probably because he knows full well that any Catholic whose remotely knowledgeable about our most holy faith would make him look like even more of a liar than he already does. For those of you who might not have seen it, I answer this sort of specious propaganda in an article on my blog called. Iconoclasm: Or: Catholics Worship Graven Images NOT

Clearly Satan has blinded the minds of unbelievers from the light of the Gospel and the glory of Christ.

Any of you feel blinded? Any of you unbelievers? Odd...all the faithful Catholics I know are not only very strong believers and followers of Our Lord Jesus Christ, but can explain and defend what we believe and why.

We left with a greater sense of thanksgiving to God for delivering us from this kingdom of darkness into the glorious light of the Savior.

Hmmm, I seem to express that same feeling about coming home to the Catholic faith in My Testimony.

Many of the Catholics we witnessed to showed no interest in the Word of God because of their fierce and unbending loyalty to their religion. We were, however, encouraged by some who had a teachable spirit and expressed an interest in the truth we shared from Scripture.

Sure Mike, and just how much Italian do you even speak? More likely, he couldn't make himself understood and they were bored with this rude American anti-Catholic. Truth from scripture? Really? If it's so true then how come I've been able to refute so many of your newsletter articles with abundant scriptures and well documented Catholic teaching?
Response to Hard Questions to Ask Good Catholics (By Mike Gendron)
Refuting anti-Catholic tract: "Rome vs The Bible" by Mike Gendron
Refuting: "Is a Catholic Christian an Oxymoron?"
Refuting Mike Gendron's attacks on Eucharistic Adoration

We continued to sow the imperishable seed of God's Word in Naples. It was somewhat of a homecoming for me since I lived there 52 years ago while in middle school. At that time, as a devout Catholic and altar boy, I had what I thought, was a great privilege to meet Padre Pio. He was the stigmatist who bore the 5 wounds of a crucifixion and was recently named a saint. In his autobiography he said souls from purgatory would stop by his window on the way to heaven to thank him for suffering on their behalf.

Irrelevant...

As our merciful God set us free from this religious deception, we now pray that the truth of His Word will do the same for all the divine appointments He set for us.

And I will pray a Rosary and a Divine Mercy Chaplet (Please join me in this my Catholic brothers and sisters.) in thanksgiving that I am not deceived by lying men like you Mike Gendron and my intention will be the collapse of your anti-Catholic "ministry" and your final reversion by the mercy of God.

Refuting Mike Gendron's attacks on Eucharistic Adoration

2011-08-17T04:47:00.009-05:00

News from Evangelist Mike Gendron
July 2011

Adoration of A False Christ Increases
The Congress on Eucharistic Adoration met in Rome for the purpose of encouraging people to spend more time adoring the Eucharistic Christ. Pope Benedict XVI expressed the importance of worshipping the Eucharist when he encouraged everyone to: "Fix our gaze on the holy Host: and thus on God. This is the beauty of true Christianity: The Creator and Lord of all things was made a grain of wheat in order to be sown on our earth. He was made bread to be broken, shared, eaten; he was made our food to give us his own divine life." He also declared, "The transformation of the world is in the fragile, white, consecrated host - the real presence of Jesus. The only true medicine of immortality and the certainty of being loved by God is the Eucharist."

The worship of the Eucharist has become a non-negotiable requirement for ecumenical unity. In 1965, the second Vatican Council stated, "All Christians will be gathered in a common celebration in the Eucharist, into the unity of the one and only Church. This unity subsists in the Catholic Church as something she can never lose." In 2008, Pope Benedict affirmed that requirement when he said, "The road of ecumenism ultimately points towards a common celebration of the Eucharist which would only strengthen our resolve to love and serve one another in imitation of our Lord."

The church must be warned that worshipping the Eucharist is perhaps the worst kind of idolatry. The Lord Jesus Christ said, "If anyone says to you,'Behold, here is the Christ, do not believe him, for false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect'" (Matthew 24:23-24). According to Catholic priest John O'Brien in his book, The Faith of Millions, the priest "reaches up into the heavens, brings Christ down from His throne, and places Him upon our altar to be offered up again as the Victim for the sins of man. The priest speaks and lo! Christ, the eternal and omnipotent God, bows his head in humble obedience to the priest's command." The priest is said to perform great signs and wonders by changing the Eucharist into "the body and blood, soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ such that the whole Christ is truly, really and substantially contained" (Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 1374). "As the RCC pursues being the head of an ecumenical church, that this kind of idolatry, with its accompanying symbols - in this case the monstrance/Eucharist, will play a prominent role. This abstract "thing" called the Eucharist, in which "the faithful" around the world, will be able to apply whatever definition of "god" that they believe in. They have found a neutral symbol to worship. Demonically ingenious!" Jose Oller, PTG Board Member

Truly the Eucharist is a false Christ because the Bible gives precise details about the return of Christ so that no one will be deceived. We are told when, where, how and why Jesus will return. He does not return daily as a "victim for the sins of man" but "a second time, without reference to sin" (Heb. 9:28). He will return immediately after the tribulation with power and great glory and everyone will see Him (Matthew 24:27-30). The Lord will return in a physical body to the Mount of Olives, the same way He ascended to heaven (Acts 1:11).

Evangelicals, who continue to sign unity accords with the Catholic religion, are in essence, giving their stamp of approval for the false Christ of Catholicism. They are also helping the Vatican reverse the Reformation by embracing Catholicism as a valid expression of Christianity. The end result is mass confusion. Christians don't know whether to evangelize Catholics or to unite with them to evangelize the world together. Clearly the truth must be told and people must be warned of the eternal consequences awaiting those who embrace and worship a false Christ. The following video clip exposes the deception.

Congress on Eucharistic Adoration meets in Rome

quote The church must be warned that worshipping the Eucharist is perhaps the worst kind of idolatry.

Of course he's way out of whack here. We know that The Eucharist IS Scriptural and he really needs to get out his time machine and go back and explain that to the Early Church Fathers like Ignatius of Antioch who plainly told the church at Smyrna...

They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer,(7) because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death(11) in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect,(13) that they also might rise again. It is fitting, therefore, that ye should keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of(15) them either in private or in public, but to give heed to the prophets, and above all, to the Gospel, in which the passion[of Christ] has been revealed to us, and the resurrection has been fully proved.(16)

quote The Lord Jesus Christ said, "If anyone says to you,'Behold, here is the Christ, do not believe him, for false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect'" (Matthew 24:23-24).

Nicely snatched right out of context, since this speaks of to an entirely different context. Again though, we have St. Paul saying the following about the Eucharist. 1 st Corinthians 11:23-30
[23] For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread,
[24] and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, "This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me."
[25] In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me."
[26] For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.
[27] Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord.
[28] Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup.
[29] For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself.
[30] That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died.

quote According to Catholic priest John O'Brien in his book, The Faith of Millions, the priest "reaches up into the heavens, brings Christ down from His throne, and places Him upon our altar to be offered up again as the Victim for the sins of man. The priest speaks and lo! Christ, the eternal and omnipotent God, bows his head in humble obedience to the priest's command."

Let me know when Fr, O'Brien is declared an infallible source, okay? In 1938 this may have been the way he explained this. I don't know because I don't have this book and can't find the context of this quote online. However, the way it is explained is actually. The Institution of the Mass

quote The priest is said to perform great signs and wonders by changing the Eucharist into "the body and blood, soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ such that the whole Christ is truly, really and substantially contained" (Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 1374).

Here Gendron pulls a reference in the CCC out of context (along with the passage from Fr. O'Brien above) and uses it to misrepresent authentic Catholic teaching. Look here at paragraph 1375 of the Catechism.

1375 It is by the conversion of the bread and wine into Christ's body and blood that Christ becomes present in this sacrament. The Church Fathers strongly affirmed the faith of the Church in the efficacy of the Word of Christ and of the action of the Holy Spirit to bring about this conversion. Thus St. John Chrysostom declares:

It is not man that causes the things offered to become the Body and Blood of Christ, but he who was crucified for us, Christ himself. The priest, in the role of Christ, pronounces these words, but their power and grace are God's. This is my body, he says. This word transforms the things offered.204 And St. Ambrose says about this conversion:

Be convinced that this is not what nature has formed, but what the blessing has consecrated. The power of the blessing prevails over that of nature, because by the blessing nature itself is changed. . . . Could not Christ's word, which can make from nothing what did not exist, change existing things into what they were not before? It is no less a feat to give things their original nature than to change their nature.205

(Emphasis mine)

So here again Mike Gendron blatantly misrepresents Catholic teaching to try to make his case.

quote "As the RCC pursues being the head of an ecumenical church, that this kind of idolatry, with its accompanying symbols - in this case the monstrance/Eucharist, will play a prominent role.

Would he have preferred that the Church be deceptive about it, as he is? Obviously, as my linked blog article above shows, neither the New Testament nor the early church considered the Eucharist idolatry, so then who are we going to believe?

quote This abstract "thing" called the Eucharist, in which "the faithful" around the world, will be able to apply whatever definition of "god" that they believe in. They have found a neutral symbol to worship. Demonically ingenious!" Jose Oller, PTG Board Member

This doesn't help his case at all, since it's just vitriolic polemics from another member of his own organizations staff.

quote Truly the Eucharist is a false Christ because the Bible gives precise details about the return of Christ so that no one will be deceived. We are told when, where, how and why Jesus will return.

Again, not according to the Word of God, or even authentic and authoritative Catholic teaching, since nowhere in Eucharistic teaching does it refer to Christ's 2nd coming, except in in 2 passages of the New Testament. The first from Our Lord Himself and the 2nd from St. Paul's 1st letter to the Corinthians as follows. (Emphasis mine)
John 6:53-55.
[53] So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you;
[54] he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.
[55] For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.

1st Corinthians 11:[26] For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.

So in this case Gendron "goes beyond what is written" and far overreaches in his effort to make his specious case against the Catholic faith.

quote He does not return daily as a "victim for the sins of man" but "a second time, without reference to sin" (Heb. 9:28). He will return immediately after the tribulation with power and great glory and everyone will see Him (Matthew 24:27-30). The Lord will return in a physical body to the Mount of Olives, the same way He ascended to heaven (Acts 1:11).

This is nothing but a specious straw man argument that tries to draw a connection to events that Catholic teaching does not even espouse as I have shown above.

quote Evangelicals, who continue to sign unity accords with the Catholic religion, are in essence, giving their stamp of approval for the false Christ of Catholicism.

Misrepresentation and specious straw man, since any such accords are quite specific, They speak of unity of beliefs which are there...not those which are not.

quote They are also helping the Vatican reverse the Reformation by embracing Catholicism as a valid expression of Christianity.

When and where have we ever said that the "Reformation" was an especially good thing that did not need to be reversed? Did we miss a memo somewhere?

quote The end result is mass confusion

I'm not confused guys...Are any of you? The only real serious confusion seems to be the result of Gendron's specious anti-Catholic messages, which feed gross misrepresentations to his readers.

quote Christians don't know whether to evangelize Catholics or to unite with them to evangelize the world together.

Well, Mike maybe if you'd stick to facts and not misrepresent Catholic beliefs and teachings like this that would be less of a problem.

quote Clearly the truth must be told and people must be warned of the eternal consequences awaiting those who embrace and worship a false Christ.

Catholics would agree with that, which is why guys like me refute your propaganda, so that all Christians...Catholic and non-Catholic are not misled and deceived.

Refuting anti-Catholic tract: "Rome vs The Bible" by Mike Gendron

2011-04-14T14:40:00.015-05:00

I am about to show that this piece of anti-Catholic propaganda is anything but the statement of Biblical truth that It's author purports it to be. My intention is to critique it all the way through and refute and expose it for the deceptive material it is. When finished it will join other refutations of Gendron's anti-Catholic material on my blog.

Who would you believe if you discovered that this document misstated facts and misrepresented and misinterpreted both Catholic teaching and Biblical passages?

He's right about one thing. It's impossible to believe his teachings of men and the Word of God.

Here we go...Right off we have Mr. Gendrons gross misinterpretation of the Word of God.

Where in that verse, does sit say what he says it does? Remember, he just tried to teach you that "The Bible teaches Scripture has authority over the
church.", yet where is that? The fact is that it's not there.
The verse says,
2nd Timothy 3:16-17
[16] All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
[17] that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

It nowhere even infers that the Bible if the ultimate authority that Gendron says it does. It says that it is profitable...not all sufficient, nor even self interpreting.

Gendron conveniently fails to include a very important and relevant verse from the same author (St. Paul) to the same person. Take note:
1st Timothy 3:15
[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.

What does St. Paul tell Timothy is "the pillar and ground of the truth"? The scriptures? No indeed...he tells Timothy (and us), that the Church is where the authority lies.

So..is Gendron's allegation correct? No, it's not.

Let's have a look at these verses.
Romans 8:[30] And those whom he predestined he also called; and those whom he called he also justified; and those whom he justified he also glorified.

Romans 4:[5] And to one who does not work but trusts him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness.

There are several fatal flaws in this bit. For one, he misrepresents Catholic teaching and does so without any documentation showing that that is an authentic Catholic teaching. Let's see what the Catechism says...

I. JUSTIFICATION
1987 The grace of the Holy Spirit has the power to justify us, that is, to cleanse us from our sins and to communicate to us "the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ" and through Baptism:34

But if we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him. For we know that Christ being raised from the dead will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him. The death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God. So you also must consider yourselves as dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus.35
1988 Through the power of the Holy Spirit we take part in Christ's Passion by dying to sin, and in his Resurrection by being born to a new life; we are members of his Body which is the Church, branches grafted onto the vine which is himself:36

[God] gave himself to us through his Spirit. By the participation of the Spirit, we become communicants in the divine nature. . . . For this reason, those in whom the Spirit dwells are divinized.37
1989 The first work of the grace of the Holy Spirit is conversion, effecting justification in accordance with Jesus' proclamation at the beginning of the Gospel: "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."38 Moved by grace, man turns toward God and away from sin, thus accepting forgiveness and righteousness from on high. "Justification is not only the remission of sins, but also the sanctification and renewal of the interior man.39
1990 Justification detaches man from sin which contradicts the love of God, and purifies his heart of sin. Justification follows upon God's merciful initiative of offering forgiveness. It reconciles man with God. It frees from the enslavement to sin, and it heals.
1991 Justification is at the same time the acceptance of God's righteousness through faith in Jesus Christ. Righteousness (or "justice") here means the rectitude of divine love. With justification, faith, hope, and charity are poured into our hearts, and obedience to the divine will is granted us.
1992 Justification has been merited for us by the Passion of Christ who offered himself on the cross as a living victim, holy and pleasing to God, and whose blood has become the instrument of atonement for the sins of all men. Justification is conferred in Baptism, the sacrament of faith. It conforms us to the righteousness of God, who makes us inwardly just by the power of his mercy. Its purpose is the glory of God and of Christ, and the gift of eternal life:40

But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from law, although the law and the prophets bear witness to it, the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, they are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as an expiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins; it was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies him who has faith in Jesus.41
1993 Justification establishes cooperation between God's grace and man's freedom. On man's part it is expressed by the assent of faith to the Word of God, which invites him to conversion, and in the cooperation of charity with the prompting of the Holy Spirit who precedes and preserves his assent:

When God touches man's heart through the illumination of the Holy Spirit, man himself is not inactive while receiving that inspiration, since he could reject it; and yet, without God's grace, he cannot by his own free will move himself toward justice in God's sight.42
1994 Justification is the most excellent work of God's love made manifest in Christ Jesus and granted by the Holy Spirit. It is the opinion of St. Augustine that "the justification of the wicked is a greater work than the creation of heaven and earth," because "heaven and earth will pass away but the salvation and justification of the elect . . . will not pass away."43 He holds also that the justification of sinners surpasses the creation of the angels in justice, in that it bears witness to a greater mercy.
1995 The Holy Spirit is the master of the interior life. By giving birth to the "inner man,"44 justification entails the sanctification of his whole being:

So...is Mike Gendron telling the truth about what the Church teaches about justification? Again...Indeed not.

He goes on to take a swing at the sacrament of Confession, but, here again is he telling the truth about Catholic teaching? from the Catechism section that he cited.
The sacrament of forgiveness
1446 Christ instituted the sacrament of Penance for all sinful members of his Church: above all for those who, since Baptism, have fallen into grave sin, and have thus lost their baptismal grace and wounded ecclesial communion. It is to them that the sacrament of Penance offers a new possibility to convert and to recover the grace of justification. The Fathers of the Church present this sacrament as "the second plank [of salvation] after the shipwreck which is the loss of grace."47
1447 Over the centuries the concrete form in which the Church has exercised this power received from the Lord has varied considerably. During the first centuries the reconciliation of Christians who had committed particularly grave sins after their Baptism (for example, idolatry, murder, or adultery) was tied to a very rigorous discipline, according to which penitents had to do public penance for their sins, often for years, before receiving reconciliation. To this "order of penitents" (which concerned only certain grave sins), one was only rarely admitted and in certain regions only once in a lifetime. During the seventh century Irish missionaries, inspired by the Eastern monastic tradition, took to continental Europe the "private" practice of penance, which does not require public and prolonged completion of penitential works before reconciliation with the Church. From that time on, the sacrament has been performed in secret between penitent and priest. This new practice envisioned the possibility of repetition and so opened the way to a regular frequenting of this sacrament. It allowed the forgiveness of grave sins and venial sins to be integrated into one sacramental celebration. In its main lines this is the form of penance that the Church has practiced down to our day.
1448 Beneath the changes in discipline and celebration that this sacrament has undergone over the centuries, the same fundamental structure is to be discerned. It comprises two equally essential elements: on the one hand, the acts of the man who undergoes conversion through the action of the Holy Spirit: namely, contrition, confession, and satisfaction; on the other, God's action through the intervention of the Church. The Church, who through the bishop and his priests forgives sins in the name of Jesus Christ and determines the manner of satisfaction, also prays for the sinner and does penance with him. Thus the sinner is healed and re-established in ecclesial communion.
1449 The formula of absolution used in the Latin Church expresses the essential elements of this sacrament: the Father of mercies is the source of all forgiveness. He effects the reconciliation of sinners through the Passover of his Son and the gift of his Spirit, through the prayer and ministry of the Church:

God, the Father of mercies,
through the death and the resurrection of his Son
has reconciled the world to himself
and sent the Holy Spirit among us
for the forgiveness of sins;
through the ministry of the Church
may God give you pardon and peace,
and I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.48

Furthermore he wrongly infers that Confession is not scriptural. This idea is refuted in my blog article Catholic Confession .

As for his allegation about works and justification, he again conveniently neglects to give any reference to clearly relevant passages such as
Matthew 25:[31] "When the Son of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne.
[32] Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate them one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats,
[33] and he will place the sheep at his right hand, but the goats at the left.
[34] Then the King will say to those at his right hand, `Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world;
[35] for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me,
[36] I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.'
[37] Then the righteous will answer him, `Lord, when did we see thee hungry and feed thee, or thirsty and give thee drink?
[38] And when did we see thee a stranger and welcome thee, or naked and clothe thee?
[39] And when did we see thee sick or in prison and visit thee?'
[40] And the King will answer them, `Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.'
[41] Then he will say to those at his left hand, `Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels;
[42] for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink,
[43] I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.'
[44] Then they also will answer, `Lord, when did we see thee hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to thee?'
[45] Then he will answer them, `Truly, I say to you, as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me.'
[46] And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

Regeneration
The Bible teaches man is regenerated at the baptism
of the Spirit. For we were all baptized by one
Spirit into one body (1 Cor. 12:13). From the beginning
God chose you to be saved through the sanctifying
work of the Spirit and through belief in the
truth (2 Thes. 2:13).
Catholicism teaches baptism of water is the sacrament
of regeneration (1213). The water of Baptism
truly signifies our birth into the divine life (694).[/quote]Here Gendron proceeds to do one of the very worst examples of scriptural cherry picking I've ever had the misfortune to see. He tells us that, "The Bible teaches man is regenerated at the baptism
of the Spirit. For we were all baptized by one
Spirit into one body (1 Cor. 12:13)."

But let's look at that verse.
1 Corinthians 12:[13] For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body -- Jews or Greeks, slaves or free -- and all were made to drink of one Spirit.

Now, (and this is very important!) take a look at the context of 1st Corinthians chapter 12. and tell me that what he's stated here is actually what St. Paul was talking about. The fact is that it's not...not even close. I urge you to read it in its context and see for yourselves.

Let's look at his other scripture citation.
2 Thessalonians 2:[13] But we are bound to give thanks to God always for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God chose you from the beginning to be saved, through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth.

Again, does this say what he tells us it says in this tract? Not at all, and this verse in no way conflicts with Catholic teaching as he alleges does it?
Salvation
The Bible teaches man is saved by God’s unmerited
grace. For it is by grace you have been saved,
through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is
the gift of God, not by works, so that no one can
boast (Eph. 2:8-9).
Catholicism teaches man is saved by meriting the
graces needed for salvation. We can merit for ourselves
and for others the graces needed for the
attainment of eternal life (2010).[/quote]First, let's take a look at his catechism citation in context to see if what he's alleging accurately reflects Catholic teaching.[quote]III. MERIT

You are glorified in the assembly of your Holy Ones, for in crowning their merits you are crowning your own gifts.59 2006 The term "merit" refers in general to the recompense owed by a community or a society for the action of one of its members, experienced either as beneficial or harmful, deserving reward or punishment. Merit is relative to the virtue of justice, in conformity with the principle of equality which governs it.
2007 With regard to God, there is no strict right to any merit on the part of man. Between God and us there is an immeasurable inequality, for we have received everything from him, our Creator.
2008 The merit of man before God in the Christian life arises from the fact that God has freely chosen to associate man with the work of his grace. The fatherly action of God is first on his own initiative, and then follows man's free acting through his collaboration, so that the merit of good works is to be attributed in the first place to the grace of God, then to the faithful. Man's merit, moreover, itself is due to God, for his good actions proceed in Christ, from the predispositions and assistance given by the Holy Spirit.
2009 Filial adoption, in making us partakers by grace in the divine nature, can bestow true merit on us as a result of God's gratuitous justice. This is our right by grace, the full right of love, making us "co-heirs" with Christ and worthy of obtaining "the promised inheritance of eternal life."60 The merits of our good works are gifts of the divine goodness.61 "Grace has gone before us; now we are given what is due. . . . Our merits are God's gifts."62
2010 Since the initiative belongs to God in the order of grace, no one can merit the initial grace of forgiveness and justification, at the beginning of conversion. Moved by the Holy Spirit and by charity, we can then merit for ourselves and for others the graces needed for our sanctification, for the increase of grace and charity, and for the attainment of eternal life. Even temporal goods like health and friendship can be merited in accordance with God's wisdom. These graces and goods are the object of Christian prayer. Prayer attends to the grace we need for meritorious actions.
2011 The charity of Christ is the source in us of all our merits before God. Grace, by uniting us to Christ in active love, ensures the supernatural quality of our acts and consequently their merit before God and before men. The saints have always had a lively awareness that their merits were pure grace.

After earth's exile, I hope to go and enjoy you in the fatherland, but I do not want to lay up merits for heaven. I want to work for your love alone. . . . In the evening of this life, I shall appear before you with empty hands, for I do not ask you, Lord, to count my works. All our justice is blemished in your eyes. I wish, then, to be clothed in your own justice and to receive from your love the eternal possession of yourself.63

So...based upon the very first sentence as well as the context of his citation, is his allegation true? No...it's not.

The truth is that catechism is speaking about our intercessory prayers meriting God's mercy and intervention for the conversion of others. If this were not true, then why would any Christian pray for another's salvation? I can't think of a single Christian community that does not do so, Can you?

The Bible teaches man is saved for good works. For
we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus
to do good works, which God prepared in advance
for us to do (Eph. 2:10).
Catholicism teaches man is saved by good works.
In this way they attain their own salvation and
cooperate in saving their brothers (1477).

Continuing...let's look at his scripture verse, keeping in mind that(as John Martignoni often says, "Catholics have no problem at all with what that verse says."

Ephesians 2:[10] For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

The NAB which he seems to like puts it this way.
For we are his handiwork, created in Christ Jesus for the good works that God has prepared in advance, that we should live in them. Now let's take a look at his catechism citation in its context.

In the Communion of Saints
1474 The Christian who seeks to purify himself of his sin and to become holy with the help of God's grace is not alone. "The life of each of God's children is joined in Christ and through Christ in a wonderful way to the life of all the other Christian brethren in the supernatural unity of the Mystical Body of Christ, as in a single mystical person."86
1475 In the communion of saints, "a perennial link of charity exists between the faithful who have already reached their heavenly home, those who are expiating their sins in purgatory and those who are still pilgrims on earth. between them there is, too, an abundant exchange of all good things."87 In this wonderful exchange, the holiness of one profits others, well beyond the harm that the sin of one could cause others. Thus recourse to the communion of saints lets the contrite sinner be more promptly and efficaciously purified of the punishments for sin.
1476 We also call these spiritual goods of the communion of saints the Church's treasury, which is "not the sum total of the material goods which have accumulated during the course of the centuries. On the contrary the 'treasury of the Church' is the infinite value, which can never be exhausted, which Christ's merits have before God. They were offered so that the whole of mankind could be set free from sin and attain communion with the Father. In Christ, the Redeemer himself, the satisfactions and merits of his Redemption exist and find their efficacy."88
1477 "This treasury includes as well the prayers and good works of the Blessed Virgin Mary. They are truly immense, unfathomable, and even pristine in their value before God. In the treasury, too, are the prayers and good works of all the saints, all those who have followed in the footsteps of Christ the Lord and by his grace have made their lives holy and carried out the mission in the unity of the Mystical Body."89

So... is that contrary to the Bible? By no means, but more important, does his citation actually support what he alleges in his tract? So...does this allegation have "merit". No..it does not.

The Bible teaches man is saved for all eternity. And
you also were included in Christ when you heard
the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation.
Having believed, you were marked in him with a
seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit
guaranteeing our inheritance. (Eph. 1:13-14).
Catholicism teaches man is saved only until the
next mortal sin is committed. Those who die in a
state of mortal sin descend into hell (1035).

Here's his scripture citation. [13] In him you also, who have heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and have believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, [14] which is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.

Notice what verse 14 actually tells us. "...until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory. " and NAB is even more clear, "which is the first installment 8 of our inheritance toward redemption as God's possession, to the praise of his glory."

Here we clearly see a scriptural basis for possible loss of salvation... "until we acquire", and "the first installment of our inheritance toward redemption" showing us that salvation is not the single event that is preached by so many n-Cs (Who REALLY Preaches "A Different Gospel"?), but a process that consists of ever deepening conversion. CA has several excellent articles that speak to this.

CCC 1035 says (in context)
1035 The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, "eternal fire."617 The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.
1036 The affirmations of Sacred Scripture and the teachings of the Church on the subject of hell are a call to the responsibility incumbent upon man to make use of his freedom in view of his eternal destiny. They are at the same time an urgent call to conversion: "Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few."618

Since we know neither the day nor the hour, we should follow the advice of the Lord and watch constantly so that, when the single course of our earthly life is completed, we may merit to enter with him into the marriage feast and be numbered among the blessed, and not, like the wicked and slothful servants, be ordered to depart into the eternal fire, into the outer darkness where "men will weep and gnash their teeth."619
1037 God predestines no one to go to hell;620 for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of her faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want "any to perish, but all to come to repentance":621

Father, accept this offering
from your whole family.
Grant us your peace in this life,
save us from final damnation,
and count us among those you have chosen.622

Furthermore Revelation plainly shows us that one can lose ones salvation.
Apocalypse 3:[5] He who conquers shall be clad thus in white garments, and I will not blot his name out of the book of life; I will confess his name before my Father and before his angels.
Blotting out ones name from the Book of Life would mean that it had to be in there to begin with, right? Those who are saved are those whose names are written in the Book of Life, right?

The Bible teaches salvation is offered to those outside
the church. "We are therefore Christ's ambassadors
as though God were making His appeal
through us, be reconciled to God" (2 Cor. 5:20).
Catholicism teaches salvation is offered through
the Church. Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition,
the Church is necessary for salvation. Anyone refusing
to enter it or remain in it cannot be saved (846).[/quote]This is one of his weakest scriptural arguments in this tract because here he uses a verse that we Catholics have no problem at all with to support his argument that we call all people to salvation in His Church. But let's look at CCC 846 in its context. Full context here.

"Outside the Church there is no salvation"
846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.336
847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:

Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.337
848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."338

The Bible teaches that all sins are purified by the
blood of Jesus (1 John 1:7).
Catholicism teaches some sins are purified by the
fires of Purgatory. They undergo purification in
Purgatory, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to
enter the joy of heaven (1030-31).[/quote]Actually we Catholics are not alone in this belief as this article from my blog shows. Biblical and Jewish Traditional Beliefs About Purgatory

To me it's not so hard to comprehend. if I'm going to the wedding supper of the Lamb wouldn't I prepare myself accordingly?(See Matthew 22:1-14)We "wash up" before earthly meals...how much more so to feast with the Holy Trinity in the Kingdom of God?!

Saints and Priests
The Bible teaches man becomes a saint when the
Spirit baptizes him into the body of Christ.
(Eph. 4:11-12).
Catholicism teaches man becomes a saint only if
the Pope canonizes him. This occurs when he
solemnly proclaims that they practiced a heroic
virtue and lived in fidelity to God's grace (828).[/quote]11 4 And he gave some as apostles, others as prophets, others as evangelists, others as pastors and teachers, 12 to equip the holy ones for the work of ministry, 5 for building up the body of Christ, 13 until we all attain to the unity of faith and knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, 6 to the extent of the full stature of Christ, 14 so that we may no longer be infants, tossed by waves and swept along by every wind of teaching arising from human trickery, from their cunning in the interests of deceitful scheming. 15 Rather, living the truth in love, we should grow in every way into him who is the head, Christ, 7 16 from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, with the proper functioning of each part, brings about the body's growth and builds itself up in love.There's the context of his passage which again points up the process of the Christian faith and then even goes on to speak of precisely what we find here in Gendron's tract. Just look at verse 14.

Most of you already see the gross misrepresentation of Catholic teaching he's set up as a straw man argument, but here's CCC 828 anyway to make it all the more clear.

828 By canonizing some of the faithful, i.e., by solemnly proclaiming that they practiced heroic virtue and lived in fidelity to God's grace, the Church recognizes the power of the Spirit of holiness within her and sustains the hope of believers by proposing the saints to them as models and intercessors.303 "The saints have always been the source and origin of renewal in the most difficult moments in the Church's history."304 Indeed, "holiness is the hidden source and infallible measure of her apostolic activity and missionary zeal."305

Moreover, there are a number of saints who have never been canonized. The archangels Michael, Gabriel, and Raphael just for instance, and there are others. (See Can I pray to Abraham?)

The Bible teaches every Christian is a priest and a
member of the royal priesthood (1 Peter 2:9).
Catholicism teaches every man needs a priest for salvation.
Catholic priests guarantee that Christ is acting
in the sacraments which are necessary for salvation
(1120-29).

There is, as most of you know, a difference between the priesthood of all believers and the ministerial priesthood. Most n-Cs share a defacto belief in this or else they would never refer to their ministers as being "called" to that vocation, now would they?

CA has a good response to this. Volume 19
Issue 10
Quick Questions
Table of Contents

Q:“
My Protestant friends point to 1 Peter 2:9 and say, "Look, we are all priests. You don't need to go to a priest to confess your sins." How do I answer?
”

A:
In a sense we are all priests. But this title is not what bestows the power to forgive sins. God sent Jesus to forgive sins, and Jesus conferred the power to forgive sins on the apostles when he said, "‘As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.’ And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained’" (John 20:21-23). This power to forgive sins has been passed on to the apostles’ successors and to priests ordained to the ministerial priesthood through the sacrament of holy orders.

Catholics recognize the difference between the priesthood of the faithful and the ministerial priesthood:

Priesthood: (1) Of the faithful: The priestly people of God. Christ has made of his Church a "kingdom of priests," and gives the faithful a share in his priesthood through the sacraments of baptism and confirmation. (2) Ministerial: The ministerial priesthood received in the sacrament of holy orders differs in essence from this common priesthood of all the faithful. It has as its purpose to serve the priesthood of all the faithful by building up and guiding the Church in the name of Christ, who is head of the Body. (Cardinal Levada’s glossary)

Look also at Romans 15:16 where St. Paul clearly speaks of himself as a priest.

to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles in performing the priestly service of the gospel of God, so that the offering up of the Gentiles may be acceptable, sanctified by the holy Spirit.

The Lord's Supper
The Bible teaches the Lord’s Supper is a memorial.
"Do this in remembrance of me" (1 Cor. 11:24-25).
Catholicism teaches the Lord’s Supper is a sacrifice.
The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist
are one single sacrifice...the same Christ who offered
Himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the
cross is contained and offered in an unbloody manner
(1367).

This is just sad...I will respond with one of the first articles that I wrote (here at CAF no less) and put up on my blog. The Eucharist IS Scriptural

CCC 1367 and its context reads as follows and is well worth the reading.

The sacrificial memorial of Christ and of his Body, the Church
1362 The Eucharist is the memorial of Christ's Passover, the making present and the sacramental offering of his unique sacrifice, in the liturgy of the Church which is his Body. In all the Eucharistic Prayers we find after the words of institution a prayer called the anamnesis or memorial.
1363 In the sense of Sacred Scripture the memorial is not merely the recollection of past events but the proclamation of the mighty works wrought by God for men.184 In the liturgical celebration of these events, they become in a certain way present and real. This is how Israel understands its liberation from Egypt: every time Passover is celebrated, the Exodus events are made present to the memory of believers so that they may conform their lives to them.
1364 In the New Testament, the memorial takes on new meaning. When the Church celebrates the Eucharist, she commemorates Christ's Passover, and it is made present the sacrifice Christ offered once for all on the cross remains ever present.185186 "As often as the sacrifice of the Cross by which 'Christ our Pasch has been sacrificed' is celebrated on the altar, the work of our redemption is carried out."
1365 Because it is the memorial of Christ's Passover, the Eucharist is also a sacrifice. The sacrificial character of the Eucharist is manifested in the very words of institution: "This is my body which is given for you" and "This cup which is poured out for you is the New Covenant in my blood."187 In the Eucharist Christ gives us the very body which he gave up for us on the cross, the very blood which he "poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins."188
1366 The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross, because it is its memorial and because it applies its fruit:

[Christ], our Lord and God, was once and for all to offer himself to God the Father by his death on the altar of the cross, to accomplish there an everlasting redemption. But because his priesthood was not to end with his death, at the Last Supper "on the night when he was betrayed," [he wanted] to leave to his beloved spouse the Church a visible sacrifice (as the nature of man demands) by which the bloody sacrifice which he was to accomplish once for all on the cross would be re-presented, its memory perpetuated until the end of the world, and its salutary power be applied to the forgiveness of the sins we daily commit.189 1367 The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice: "The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different." "And since in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner. . . this sacrifice is truly propitiatory."190
1368 The Eucharist is also the sacrifice of the Church. The Church which is the Body of Christ participates in the offering of her Head. With him, she herself is offered whole and entire. She unites herself to his intercession with the Father for all men. In the Eucharist the sacrifice of Christ becomes also the sacrifice of the members of his Body. The lives of the faithful, their praise, sufferings, prayer, and work, are united with those of Christ and with his total offering, and so acquire a new value. Christ's sacrifice present on the altar makes it possible for all generations of Christians to be united with his offering.
In the catacombs the Church is often represented as a woman in prayer, arms outstretched in the praying position. Like Christ who stretched out his arms on the cross, through him, with him, and in him, she offers herself and intercedes for all men.
1369 The whole Church is united with the offering and intercession of Christ. Since he has the ministry of Peter in the Church, the Pope is associated with every celebration of the Eucharist, wherein he is named as the sign and servant of the unity of the universal Church. The bishop of the place is always responsible for the Eucharist, even when a priest presides; the bishop's name is mentioned to signify his presidency over the particular Church, in the midst of his presbyterium and with the assistance of deacons. The community intercedes also for all ministers who, for it and with it, offer the Eucharistic sacrifice:

Let only that Eucharist be regarded as legitimate, which is celebrated under [the presidency of] the bishop or him to whom he has entrusted it.191 Through the ministry of priests the spiritual sacrifice of the faithful is completed in union with the sacrifice of Christ the only Mediator, which in the Eucharist is offered through the priests' hands in the name of the whole Church in an unbloody and sacramental manner until the Lord himself comes.192

1370 To the offering of Christ are united not only the members still here on earth, but also those already in the glory of heaven. In communion with and commemorating the Blessed Virgin Mary and all the saints, the Church offers the Eucharistic sacrifice. In the Eucharist the Church is as it were at the foot of the cross with Mary, united with the offering and intercession of Christ.
1371 The Eucharistic sacrifice is also offered for the faithful departed who "have died in Christ but are not yet wholly purified,"193 so that they may be able to enter into the light and peace of Christ:

Put this body anywhere! Don't trouble yourselves about it! I simply ask you to remember me at the Lord's altar wherever you are.194 Then, we pray [in the anaphora] for the holy fathers and bishops who have fallen asleep, and in general for all who have fallen asleep before us, in the belief that it is a great benefit to the souls on whose behalf the supplication is offered, while the holy and tremendous Victim is present. . . . By offering to God our supplications for those who have fallen asleep, if they have sinned, we . . . offer Christ sacrificed for the sins of all, and so render favorable, for them and for us, the God who loves man.195
1372 St. Augustine admirably summed up this doctrine that moves us to an ever more complete participation in our Redeemer's sacrifice which we celebrate in the Eucharist:

This wholly redeemed city, the assembly and society of the saints, is offered to God as a universal sacrifice by the high priest who in the form of a slave went so far as to offer himself for us in his Passion, to make us the Body of so great a head. . . . Such is the sacrifice of Christians: "we who are many are one Body in Christ" The Church continues to reproduce this sacrifice in the sacrament of the altar so well-known to believers wherein it is evident to them that in what she offers she herself is offered.196

All this shows that Gendron refuses to accept the plain sense of scripture when it comes into conflict with his personal interpretations.

The Bible teaches that believers receive Jesus once,
spiritually, in the heart. God... put his Spirit in our
hearts as a guarantee (2 Cor. 1:22).
Catholicism teaches Catholics receive Jesus physically,
frequently, in the stomach. The body, blood...soul and
divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ...is truly, really and
substantially contained in the Eucharist (1374-78).

This is also answered by the article on my blog linked above. The New Testament and the writings of the Early Church Fathers are very clear. The Eucharist IS Scriptural

Condemnation
The Bible condemns anyone who perverts the Gospel
including the Roman Catholic clergy. If we or an angel
from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one
we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!
(Gal. 1:6-9).
Catholicism condemns with over 100 anathemas
those who believe the Bible instead of the Canons of
the Council of Trent. These condemnations are still in
effect today.

I think I answer this pretty well in my article Who REALLY Preaches "A Different Gospel"? Mike Gendron preaches that different and deficient gospel and so I would fear for my soul were I he.

As for the anathemas he speaks of, I'll let Jimmy Akin supply the response to that since it is very clear and concise.Anathema (This Rock: April 2000)

These thirteen teachings of Roman Catholicism
demonstrate how the traditions of men can nullify
and oppose the Word of God (Mark 7:7-13).

So...has he proved his allegations? I think not

In fact, I believe he has done more to condemn himself that any damage he might have done to our most holy Catholic faith. Has he been honest in his remarks and allegations?

Having seen all this, does he present as someone whose preaching one might trust?

For the devout and knowledgeable Catholic the answer is a definitive NO.[quote]True saving faith is granted by God as people hear and believe His Word (Rom. 10:17)
Eternal life can be received only as a gift of God’s grace, through faith
in Jesus Christ. Accordingly, we must come to the
cross of Christ with empty hands of faith, leaving
everything behind, except our sins (2 Cor. 5:21).

I'm not going to bother with this part as it's just Gendron sermonizing. I can see a coupe of iffy aspects even of that.
[quote]For other publications contrasting Roman
Catholicism with Christianity contact:
Evangelist Mike Gendron
PO Box 940871
Plano, TX 75094
Phone: 972-495-0485
www.pro-gospel.org
Bible quotes:
The New American Bible for Catholics.
Catechism references:
Catechism of the Catholic Church,
@ 1994 by the United States Catholic Conference.

Oh, by all means send them to me. I can probably refute them too, and post it all on the internet so that people will know better than to listen to you about the Catholic faith.

What Was Authentic Early Christian Worship Really Like?

2011-01-30T16:21:00.006-06:00

The allegation was made (on Catholic Answers Forums) that the Baptist church is found in the early church. That is completely contrary to the facts of history from the authentic and verifiable writings of the Early Church Fathers. The following documents same.

If the Catholic Mass is not in line with how the early church worshiped (and supposedly the Baptist church is?) then please explain to me that why St. Justin Martyr describes their sacraments and worship as follows and why Baptist services are nowhere anything like this.

CHAP. LXV.--ADMINISTRATION OF THE SACRAMENTS. But we, after we have thus washed him who has been convinced and has assented to our teaching, bring him to the place where those who are called brethren are assembled, in order that we may offer hearty prayers in common for ourselves and for the baptized [illuminated] person, and for all others in every place, that we may be counted worthy, now that we have learned the truth, by our works also to be found good citizens and keepers of the commandments, so that we may be saved with an everlasting salvation. Having ended the prayers, we salute one another with a kiss.(3) There is then brought to the president of the brethren(4) bread and a cup of wine mixed with water; and he taking them, gives praise and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, and offers thanks at considerable length for our being counted worthy to receive these things at His hands. And when he has concluded the prayers and thanksgivings, all the people present express their assent by saying Amen. This word Amen answers in the Hebrew language to genoito [so be it]. And when the president has given thanks, and all the people have expressed their assent, those who are called by us deacons give to each of those present to partake of the bread and wine mixed with water over which the thanksgiving was pronounced, and to those who are absent they carry away a portion.

CHAP. LXVI.--OF THE EUCHARIST. And this food is called among us Eukaristia(5) [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.(6) For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, "This do ye in remembrance of Me,(7) this is My body;" and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, "This is My blood;" and gave it to them alone. Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn.

CHAP. LXVII.--WEEKLY WORSHIP OF THE CHRISTIANS. And we afterwards continually remind each other of these things. And the wealthy among us help the needy; and we always keep together; and for all things wherewith we are supplied, we bless the Maker of all through His Son Jesus Christ, and through the Holy Ghost. And on the day called Sunday,(1) all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability,(2) and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given,(3) and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And they who are well to do, and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succours the orphans and widows and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in need. But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His apostles and disciples, He taught them these things, which we have submitted to you also for your consideration.

JUSTIN MARTYR, FIRST APOLOGY Ch 65 Sacraments & Mass

All of this was written by a man who paid with his life for the faith and nothing he writes remotely looks like modern Baptists...nor ancient Baptists for that matter, since they imply did not exist in the 2nd century Christian Church.

For those who believe Jack T. Chick knows what he's talkin' about...

2011-01-26T11:43:00.004-06:00

Catholic Answers Special Report: Chick Tracts

What is Joy in the Lord?

2010-12-28T23:46:00.003-06:00

Wow...so many aspects of it.

In my life it is the ever present knowledge (often reinforced by a glimpse of my crucifixes), that God incomprehensibly loves me so much that His Son suffered all that to make it possible for me to be His again.

It is the constant knowledge that no matter what comes my way, good or bad, He will not abandon me and His mercy and compassion is (to quote St. Faustina), "unfathomable".

My happiness may come and go, but my joy in Him...is something that, like His love for me, is beyond my comprehension, and yet, in all things...it remains.

Lauds for Pope Pius XII and the Catholic Church in WWII

2010-07-28T05:27:00.003-05:00

Albert Einstein on the Catholic Church:

"Only the Catholic Church stood squarely across the path of Hitler's campaign for suppressing the truth. I never had any special interest in the Church before, but now I feel a great affection and admiration because the Church alone has had the courage and persistence to stand for intellectual truth and moral freedom. I am forced thus to confess that what I once despised, I now praise unreservedly."

Dr Joseph Nathan, representing the Hebrew Commission in September 1945.

"We express our heartfelt gratitude to those who protected and saved us during the Nazi-Fascist persecutions. Above all, we acknowledge the Supreme Pontiff [Pope Pius Xll] and the religious men and women who, executing the directives of the Holy Father, recognised the persecuted as their brothers and with great abnegation, hastened to help them, disregarding the terrible dangers to which they were exposed."

Jesuit Honored as 'Righteous Among Nations' for Saving 3 Jewish Children
Pair of Brothers, Cousin Hid Among Catholic School Students

By Anita S. Bourdin

ROME, DEC. 15, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Graziano Sonnino and Marco Pavoncello remember Jesuit Father Raffaele de Ghantuz Cubbe for his courage and goodness. It was that courage and goodness that saved their lives, along with the life of Sonnino's brother Mario.

The Sonninos and Pavoncello, as young Italian Jews, were saved from the Holocaust when Father Cubbe hid the children at his Jesuit school. Their surname was changed to Sbardella, a southern name of the region of Cassino, which had been bombed by the Allies, meaning their identity was impossible to verify.

Father Cubbe (1904-1983) was recognized Tuesday in Rome with the honor of Righteous Among the Nations, the title bestowed by the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial.

Mordechay Lewy, Israel's ambassador to the Holy See, presented the honor to Father Cubbe's nephew, Francesco de Ghantuz Cubbe.

Pavoncello and Graziano Sonnino took part in Tuesday morning's ceremony; Mario Sonnino died last July, as did his sister Virginia.

Their children and grandchildren were present, as were their nieces and nephews.

THE PAGANIZATION OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH UNDER CONSTANTINE

2009-09-12T22:36:00.002-05:00

The Historic Facts:

Is it true that Constantine was a pagan and used his influence to corrupt the Catholic Church?

Raise Up A Child...

Constantine was raised with Christian beliefs by his mother St. Helena although he delayed his baptism until he was on his deathbed. It seems clear that he had enough faith to seek salvation in Christ, knowing that he was facing eternity and his soul was in the balance

Your Young Men Will See Visions...

After seeing a vision in which he was told that he would conquer under the sign of the Christian cross, he adopted it as his standard and his entire army carried it into battle against the pagan general Maxentius and he won control of the empire in 312 AD.

Freedom At Last...

The following year Constantine signed the Edict of Milan (sometimes known as the Edict of Tolerance) that officially ended the persecution of the Church. It's hard to understand how anyone can believe that Constantine, (who died a Christian despite his delay) would have paganized the early Catholic Church.

Julian Doesn't Keep The Faith.

Forty-eight years later, in 361 AD, the emperor Julian the Apostate launched a persecution of the Church in an attempt to bring back paganism. Why would that have been necessary if Constantine had already corrupted the Catholic Church?

History Tells All

Some careful research and study of the first 300 years of Christianity will reveal that Catholic doctrines such as the Eucharist, Apostolic authority, and the pope as the successor of Peter were believed from the very beginning of Christianity and certainly were not the result of any pagan influence under Constantine.

In Fact

Christianity has been called Catholic in Acts 9:31 (Greek: "ekklesia katholos") and at least from 107AD when Ignatius, the Bishop of the Church in Antioch, used it in one of his letters to another church which indicates that by that time the original Christian Church was already well known as the Catholic Church in order to distinguish Christ's Church from heretical groups. Keep in mind that that same church in Antioch was where we were all first called Christians as recorded in Acts 11:26. (The Faith of the Early Fathers, William A. Jurgens, Collegeville, Minn.; Liturgical Press, 1970. p.25, #65)

Get The Facts: Make Your Own Decision

Bible Cheat Sheet

2009-07-05T08:00:00.005-05:00

THE CHURCH
Mt 16:18-19 - upon this rock I will build my Church 
Mt 18:17 - if he refuses to listen even to the Church... 
Mt 28:18-20 - go baptize and teach all nations 
Mk 16:15-16 - go to whole world and proclaim gospel 
Lk 10:16 - whoever hears you, hears me; rejects you, rejects me. 
Jn 14:16, 26 - Holy Spirit with you always, teach/remind you of everything 
Jn 16:13 - Spirit of truth will guide you to all truth. 
1Tim 3:15 - Church is the pillar and foundation of truth. 

The Church is the body of Christ 
Col 1:18 - He is the head of the body, the church. 
1 Cor 12:20-27 - you are Christ's body, individually parts of it. 
Eph 5:30 - we are members of His body. 
Rom 12:4-5 - though many, we are one body in Christ 
1 Cor 6:15 - Don't you know your bodies are members of Christ? 

The Church must be one 
Jn 10:16 - there will be one fold and one shepherd. 
Eph 4:3-6 - one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father 
Rom 16:17 - I urge that there be no divisions among you 
1Cor 1:10 - I urge that there be no divisions among you 
Phil 2:2 - be of same mind, united in heart thinking one thing 
Rom 15:5 - God grant you to think in harmony with one another 
Jn 17:17-23 - I pray that they may be one, as we are one 
Jn 17:23 - that they may be brought to perfection as one 
1Cor 12:13 - in one spirit we are baptized into one body 
Rom 12:5 - we, though many, are one body in Christ 
Eph 4:4 - one body, one Spirit, called to be one hope 
Col 3:15 - the peace into which you were called in one body 
Mt 16:18-19 - upon this rock I will build my Church (singular)
Mt 18:17 - tell it to THE Church; if he refuses to listen even to THE Church...
(must be visible)

Apostolic Church 
Jn 15:16 - Jesus chose special men to be his Apostles 
Jn 20:21 - Jesus gave the Apostles his own mission 
Lk 22:29-3 - Jesus gave them a kingdom 
Mt 16:18 - Jesus built Church on Peter, the rock 
Jn 10:16 - one shepherd to shepherd Christ's sheep 
Lk 22:32, Jn 21:17 - Peter appointed to be chief shepherd 
Eph 4:11 - church leaders are hierarchical 
1Tim 3:1, 8; 5:17 - identifies roles of bishops, priests, deacons 
Tit 1:5 - commission for bishops to ordain priests 

Authoritative Church 
Mt 28:18-20 - Jesus delegates all power to Apostles 
Jn 20:23 - power to forgive sin 
1Cor 11:23-24 - power to offer sacrifice (Eucharist) 
Lk 10:16 - power to speak with Christ's voice 
Mt 18:18 - power to legislate 
Mt 18:17 - power to discipline 

Infallible Church 
Jn 16:13 - guided by Holy Spirit into all truth 
Jn 14:26 - Holy Spirit to teach & remind them of everything 
Lk 10:16 - speak with Christ's own voice 
1Tim 3:15 - Church called "pillar and foundation of truth" 
1Jn 2:27 - anointing of Holy Spirit remains in you 
Acts 15:28 - Apostles speak with voice of Holy Spirit 
Mt 28:20 - I am with you 

Perpetual Church 
Is 9:6-7 - of Christ's government there will be no end 
Dan 2:44 - God's kingdom shall stand forever 
Dan 7:14 - His kingdom shall not be destroyed
Eph 3:21 - to him be glory in the church to all generations for ever and ever. 
Lk 1:32, 33 - no end to Christ's kingdom 
Mt 7:24 - Jesus is like a wise man who built his house on a rock 
Mt 13:24-30 - let wheat & weeds grow together until harvest 
Mt 16:18 - gates of hell will never prevail against Christ's church 
Jn 14:16 - Holy Spirit will be with you always 
Mt 28:19-20 - I am with you all days

PAPACY & APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION
Primacy of Peter 
Mt 16:18 - upon this rock (Peter) I will build my church 
Mt 16:19 - give you keys of the kingdom; power to bind & loose 
Lk 22:32 - Peter's faith will strengthen his brethren 
Jn 21:17 - given Christ's flock as chief shepherd 
Mk 16:7 - angel sent to announce Resurrection to Peter 
Lk 24:34 - risen Jesus first appeared to Peter 
Acts 1:13-26 - headed meeting which elected Matthias 
Acts 2:14 - led Apostles in preaching on Pentecost 
Acts 2:41 - received first converts 
Acts 3:6-7 - performed first miracle after Pentecost 
Acts 5:1-11 - inflicted first punishment: Ananias & Saphira 
Acts 8:21 - excommunicated first heretic, Simon Magnus 
Acts 10:44-46 - received revelation to admit Gentiles into Church 
Acts 15:7 - led first council in Jerusalem 
Acts 15:19 - pronounces first dogmatic decision 
Gal 1:18 - after conversion, Paul visits chief Apostle 
*Gal 2:11-14 - I opposed Cephas to his face for his hypocrisy 
Peter's name always heads list of Apostles: Mt 10:14; Mk 3:16-19;
Lk 6:14-16; Acts 1:13 
"Peter and his companions" Lk 9:32; Mk 16:7 
Spoke for Apostles - Mt 18:21; Mk 8:29; Lk 8:45; 12:41; Jn 6:69 
Peter's name occurs 195 times, more than all the rest put together 

Apostolic Succession 
2 Chr 19:11 - high priest is over you in everything of Lord's 
Mal 2:7 - seek instruction from priest, he is God's messenger 
Eph 2:20 - Church built upon foundation of apostles & prophets 
Eph 4:11 - God gave some as apostles, others as prophets... 
1 Cor 12:28-29 - God designated in church: apostles, ... 
Acts 1:20 - let another take his office 
Acts 1:25-26 - Matthias takes Judas' apostolic ministry 
1 Tim 3:1, 8; 5:17 - qualifications for: bishops, priests, & deacons 
1Tim 4:14 - gift conferred with the laying on of hands 
1Tim 5:22 - do not lay hands too readily on anyone 
Acts 14:23 - they appointed presbyters in each church 
2Tim 2:2 - what you heard from me entrust to faithful teachers 
Titus 1:5 - appoint presbyters in every town, as I directed

SCRIPTURE AND TRADITION
Bible Alone or Bible Plus Tradition? 
1Cor 11:2 - hold fast to traditions I handed on to you 
2Thess 2:15 - hold fast to traditions, whether oral or by letter 
2Thess 3:6 - shun those acting not according to tradition 
Jn 21:25 - not everything Jesus said recorded in Scripture 
Mk 13:31 - heaven & earth shall pass away, but my word won't 
Acts 20:35 - Paul records a saying of Jesus not found in gospels 
2Tim 1:13 - follow my sound words; guard the truth 
2Tim2:2 - what you heard entrust to faithful men 
2Pet 1:20 - no prophecy is a matter of private interpretation 
2Pet 3:15-16 - Paul's letters can be difficult to grasp & interpret 
1Pet 1:25 - God's eternal word = word preached to you 
Rom 10:17 - faith come from what is heard 
1Cor 15:1-2 - being saved if you hold fast to the word I preached 
Mk 16:15 - go to the whole world, proclaim gospel to every creature 
Mt 23:2-3 - chair of Moses; observe whatever they tell you 

Tradition Condemned? 
*Mt 15:3 - break commandment of God for your tradition 
*Mk 7:9 - set aside God's commandment to uphold tradition 
*Col 2:8 - seductive philosophy according to human tradition 
1Cor 11:2 - commends them for following Apostolic tradition 
2Thess 2:15 - commands them to keep traditions 
2Thess 3:6 - shun those acting not according to tradition 

Deuterocanonicals
Heb 11:35 - 'Women received their dead by resurrection. 
Some were tortured, refusing to accept release,
that they might rise again to a better life' refers only to 2nd Macc 7


SALVATION, FAITH AND WORKS
Faith Alone or Faith plus Works? 
Jam 2:24 - a man is justified by works and not by faith alone 
Jam 2:26 - faith without works is dead 
Gal 5:6 - only thing that counts is faith working in love 
1 Cor 13:2 - faith without love is nothing 
Jn 14:15 - if you love me, keep my commandments 
Mt 19:16-17 - if you wish to enter into life, keep commandments 
1Tim 5:8 he who doesn't provide for family worse than unbeliever.

Have You Been Saved? 

Past Event (I have been saved) 
Rom 8:24 - for in hope we were saved 
Eph 2:5, 8 - by grace you have been saved through faith 
2Tim 1:9 - He saved us, called us according to his grace 
Tit 3:5 - He saved us through bath of rebirth, renewal by Holy Spirit 

Present Process (I am being saved) 
Phil 2:12 - work out your salvation with fear and trembling 
1Pet 1:9 - as you attain the goal of your faith, salvation 

Future Event (I will be saved) 
Mt 10:22 - he who endures to the end will be saved 
Mt 24:1 - he who perseveres to the end will be saved 
Mk 8:35 - whoever loses his life for my sake will save it 
Acts 15:11 - we shall be saved through the grace of Jesus 
Rom 5:9-10 - since we are justified, we shall be saved 
Rom 13:11 - salvation is nearer now than first believed 
Cor 3:15 - he shall be saved, but only as through fire 
1Cor 5:5 - deliver man to Satan so his spirit may be saved 
Heb 9:28 - Jesus will appear second time, to bring salvation 

Good Works 
Mt 7:21 - not Lord, Lord but he who does the will of father 
Mt 19:16-17 - to have life, keep my commandments 
Jn 14:21 - he who keeps my commandments loves me 
Rom 2:2-8 - eternal life by perseverance in good works 
Gal 5:4-6 - nothing counts but faith working through love 
Eph 2:8-10 - we are created in Christ Jesus for good works 
Phil 2:12-13 - work out salvation with fear and trembling 
Jam 2:14-24 - a man is justified by works & not faith alone 

Judged According to Deeds 
Rom 2:2-8 - eternal life by perseverance in good works 
2Cor 5:10 - recompense accord to what did in body 
2Cor 11:15 - their end will correspond to their deeds 
1Pet 1:17 - God judges impartially according to one's works 
Rev 20:12-13 - dead judged according to their deeds 
Col 3:24-25 - will receive due payment for whatever you do 

Assurance of Salvation? 
Mt 7:21 - not everyone saying "Lord, Lord" will inherit 
Mt 24:13 - those who persevere to the end will be saved 
Rom 11:22 - remain in his kindness or you will be cut off 
Phil 2:12 - work out your salvation in fear and trembling 
1Cor 9:27 - drive body for fear of being disqualified 
1Cor 10:11-12 - those thinking they are secure may fall 
Gal 5:4 - separated from Christ, you've fallen from grace 
2Tim 2:11-13 - must hold out to the end to reign with Christ 
Hb 6:4-6 - describes sharers in Holy Spirit who then fall away 
Heb 10:26-27 - if sin after receiving truth, judgment remains 

Regenerative Baptism 
Jn 3:5, 22 - born of water & Spirit; Apostles begin baptizing 
Tit 3:5 - saved us through bath of rebirth & renewal by Holy Spirit 
Acts 2:37-38 - repent, be baptized, receive gift of Holy Spirit 
Acts 22:16 - get selves baptized and sins washed away 
1Cor 6:11 - you were washed, sanctified, justified 
Rom 6:4 - baptized into death; live in newness of life 
1Pet 3:21 - baptism...now saves you 
Heb 10:22 - heart sprinkled, bodies washed in pure water 
(also see The Sacraments)

Health and Wealth Gospel 
Mk 10:28 - no "take cross and follow me" = not worthy of me 
Rom 8:16-17 - heirs with Christ, if only we suffer with him 
Rom 8:18 - present suffering nothing compared w/future glory 
Phil 1:28-29 - granted to believe, also to suffer for him 
Col 1:24 - filling up what is lacking in Christ sufferings 
Heb 12:5-7 - whom God loves, he disciplines as sons 
Heb 12:11 discipline seems painful, but brings righteousness 
1Pet 1:6 - for a while you must suffer various trials 
1Pet 2:19-21 - suffering = grace; Jesus suffered as our example 

BLESSED VIRGIN MARY
Mary 
Lk 1:28, 30 - angel: "full of grace, found favor with God 
Lk 1:42 - Elizabeth: "most blessed among women" 
Lk 1:48 - Mary: "all generations will call me blessed" 

Mother of God 
Lk 1:43 - Elizabeth calls her "mother of my Lord" = God 
Mt 1:23 - virgin bear a son, Emmanuel = "God is with us" 
Lk 1:35 - child born will be called holy, the Son of God 
Gal 4:4 - God sent his Son, born of a woman 

The Assumption 
Gn 5:24 (Hb 11:5) - Enoch taken to heaven without dying 
2Kg 2:11 - Elijah assumed into heaven in fiery chariot 
Mt 27:52 - many saints who had fallen asleep were raised 
1Thess 4:17 - caught up to meet the Lord in the air 
1Cor 15:52 - we shall be instantly changed at the last trumpet 
Rom 6:23 - for the wages of sin is death 
Rev 11:19-21 - ark in heaven = woman clothed in sun 
Ps 132:8 - Arise, O Lord & go to thy resting place,
thou & the ark of thy might. 

The Immaculate Conception 
Lk 1:28 - hail full of grace[highly favored] Lord is with you 
Lk 1:30 - you have found favor with God 
Lk 1:37 - for with God nothing shall be impossible 
Gn 3:15 - complete enmity between woman & Satan, sin 
Ex 25:11-21 - ark made of purest gold for God's word 
*Rom 3:23 - all have sinned & are deprived of God's glory 
*Lk 1:47 - my spirit rejoices in God my Savior 

Perpetual Virginity 
Lk 1:34 - how can this be, since I do not know man 
Lk 2:41-51 - age 12, Jesus evidently only son of Mary 
Mk 6:3 - "the son of Mary" not "a son of Mary" 
*Mt 13:55-56 - brothers James, Joseph, Simon & Jude 
Mt 27:56 - Mary the mother of James & Joseph also 
Jn 19:25 - Mary the wife of Clopas 
Jn 19:26 - entrusted Mary to John, not a younger sibling 
Jn 7:3-4 - brothers advise like elders: "go to Judea, manifest self"
unthinkable for younger siblings (see next verse)
Mk 3:21 - set out to seize him, "he is out of his mind" 
*Mt 1:25 - Joseph knew her not until she bore first-born 
Mt 28:20 - I am with you always, UNTIL the end of the age 
1Tim 4:13 - UNTIL I arrive, attend to reading, teaching... 
1Cor 15:25 - he must reign UNTIL has enemies underfoot 
Lk 1:80 - John in desert UNTIL day of his manifestation 
Ex 13:2; Nb 3:12 - consecrate first -born that opens womb 
Ex 34:20 - first-born among your sons you shall redeem

THE PRIESTHOOD
Call No Man Father 
Acts 7:2 - St. Stephen calls Jewish leaders "fathers" 
Acts 21:40, 22:1 - St. Paul calls Jerusalem Jews "fathers" 
Rom 4:16-17 - Abraham called the father of us all" 
1Cor 4:14-15 - I became your father in Christ through gospel 
1Tim 1:2 - my true child in our common faith 
Heb 12:7-9 - we have earthly fathers to discipline us 
Lk 14:26 - if anyone comes to me without hating his father... 
1Thess 2:11 - we treated you as a father treats his children 
Philem 10 - whose father I became in my imprisonment 
1Jn 2:13, 14 - I write to you, fathers, because you know him 

Celibacy 
*1Tim 4:1-3 - forbidding marriage is a doctrine of demons 
*1Tim 3:2 - bishop must be married only once 
Eph 5:21-33 - marriage is good: holy symbol of Christ & church 
Mt 19:12 - celibacy praised by Jesus, who was chaste 
Jer 16:1-4 - Jeremiah told not to take wife & have children 
1Cor 7:8 - St. Paul was celibate 
1Cor 7:32-35 - celibacy recommended for full-time ministers 
2Tim 2:3-4 - no soldier gets entangled in civilian pursuits 
1Tim 5:9-12 - pledge of celibacy taken by older widows 

(also see Apostolic Succession and the sacrament of Holy Orders)

PURGATORY, HELL, & SIN
Purgatory 
Mt 5:48 - be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect 
Heb 12:14 - strive for that holiness without which cannot see God 
Jam 3:2 - we all fall short in many respects 
Rev 21:27 - nothing unclean shall enter heaven 
Jam 1:14-15 - when sin reaches maturity gives birth to death 
2Sam 12:13-14 - David, though forgiven, still punished for his sin 
Mt 5:26 - you will not be released until paid last penny 
Mt 12:32 - sin against Holy Spirit unforgiven in this age or next 
Mt 12:36 - account for every idle word on judgment day 
2Macc 12:44-46 - atoned for dead to free them from sin 
1Cor 3:15 - suffer loss, but saved as through fire 
1Pet 3:18-20; 4:6 - Jesus preached to spirits in prison 
2Tim 1:16-18 - Paul prays for dead friend Onesiphorus 
1Cor 15:29-30 - Paul mentions people baptizing for the dead 

Hell 
Is 33:11, 14 - who of us can live with the everlasting flames 
Mt 25:41 - depart, you accursed, into the eternal fire 
Mt 25:46 - these will go off to eternal punishment 
Lk 3:16-17 - the chaff will burn in unquenchable fire 
2Thess 1:6-9 - these will pay the penalty of eternal ruin 

Original Sin 
Gn 2:16-17 - the day you eat of that tree, you shall die 
Gn 3:11-19 - God's punishment for eating of the tree 
Rom 5:12-19 - many became sinners through one man's sin 
1Cor 15:21-23 - by a man came death; in Adam all die 
Eph 2:1-3 - we all once lived in the passions of our flesh

THE SACRAMENTS
Infant Baptism 
Jn 3:5; Mk 16:16 - baptism required for entering heaven 
1Cor 15:21-22 - in Adam all die, in Christ all made alive 
Mk 10:14 - let children come; to such belongs the kingdom 
Lk 18:15 - people were bringing even infants to him... 
Col 2:11-12 - baptism has replaced circumcision 
Jos 24:15 - as for me and my house, we will serve Lord 
Mt 8:5ff. - daughter healed because of centurion's faith 
Mt 15:21ff. - daughter healed because of Canaanite woman's faith 
Lk 7:1ff. - just say the word, and let my servant be healed 
Acts 16:31 - believe in Lord Jesus you & house will be saved 
Acts 16:15 - she was baptized, with all her household 
Acts 16:33 - he and all his family were baptized at once 
1Cor 1:16 - I baptized the household of Stephanas 

Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist 
Jn 6:35-71 - Eucharist promised 
Mt 26:26ff (Mk 14:22ff., Lk 22:17ff.) - Eucharist instituted 
1Cor 10:16 - Eucharist = participation in Christ's body & blood 
1 Cor 11:23-29 - receiving unworthily his body & blood 
Ex 12:8, 46 - Paschal lamb had to be eaten 
Jn 1:29 - Jesus called "Lamb of God" 
1 Cor 5:7 - Jesus called "paschal lamb who has been sacrificed 
Jn 4:31-34; Mt 16:5-12 - Jesus talking symbolically about food 
1Cor 2:14-3:4 - explains what "the flesh" means in Jn 6:63 
Ps 14:4; Is 9:18-20; Is 49:26; Mic 3:3; 2Sm 23:15-17; Rv 17:6, 16 -
to symbolically eat & drink one's body & blood = assault 

Confirmation 
Acts 19:5-6 - Paul imposed hands on baptized, received Holy Spirit 
Acts 8:14-17 - laid hands upon them, they received Holy Spirit 
2Cor 1:21-22 - put seal on us and given Holy Spirit in our hearts 
Eph 1:13 - you were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit 
Heb 6:2 - instruction about baptism & laying on of hands 

Confession 
Mt 9:2-8 Son of Man has authority to forgive sins 
Jn 20:23 - whose sins you forgive/retain are forgiven/retained 
Jn 20:22 - breathed on them, "receive Holy Spirit" [recall Gn 2:7] 
2Cor 5:17-20 - given us the ministry of reconciliation 
Jam 5:13-15 - confess your sins to one another 
Mt 18:18 - whatever you bind & loose on earth, so it is in heaven 

Anointing the Sick 
Mk 6:12-13 - anointed with oil many sick, cured them 
Jam 5:14-15 - presbyters pray over sick, anoint, sins forgiven 

Holy Orders 
Acts 20:28 - Holy Sprit appointed you overseers, to tend Church 
Lk 22:19 - do this in memory of me 
Jn 20:22 - As Father sent me, I send you...receive Holy Spirit 
Acts 6:6 - the apostles prayed and laid hands on them 
Acts 13:3 - they laid hands on them & sent them off 
Acts 14:22 - they appointed presbyters in each church 
1Tim 4:14 - gift received through laying on of hands of presbyterate 
2Tim 1:6 - gift of God you have through imposition of hands 
Tit 1:5 - appoint presbyters in every town as I directed you 
(also see The Priesthood)

Matrimony 
Mt 19:5-6 - leave father & mother, join wife, 2 become 1 flesh 
Mk 10:7-12 - what God joined together, no man separate 
Eph 5:22-32 - union of man & wife image of Christ & Church 
Heb 13:4 - let marriage be honored among all

SOCIAL TEACHINGS
Divorce and Remarriage 
Mal 2:14-16 - for I hate divorce, says the Lord 
Mt 5:32-33 - to divorce or marry divorced wife is adultery 
Mt 19:4-6, 9 - to divorce wife and remarry = adultery 
Lk 16:18 - to divorce & remarry or marry divorced = adultery 
Rom 7:2-3 - wife consorts = adulteress if living, but not if dead 
1Cor 7:10-11 - if wife separated, stay single or reconcile 

Contraception 
Gn 38:9-10 God killed Onan for spilling seed [see next]
Dt 25:5-10 - penalty for defying Levirate law: not death  
Gn 1:27-28 (Gn 9:1, 35:11) - be fruitful and multiply 
Ps 127:3-5 - children gift from God, blessed is a full quiver 
1Chr 25:5 - God gave 14 sons & 3 daughters to exalt him 
1Chr 26:4-5 - God indeed blessed Obededom with 8 sons 
Hos 9:10-17 - Israel is punished with childlessness 
Ex 23:25-26 - blessings promised: no miscarrying, barrenness 
Lv 21:17-20 - crushed testicles is called a defect & blemish 
Dt 23:1 - no one castrated shall enter the assembly 
Dt 25:11-12 - punishment for potential damage to genitals 
Rom 1:25-27 - natural function of women = childbearing 
1Tim 2:11-15 - women saved through the bearing of children 
Acts 5:1-11 - Ananias/Saphira slain - withholding part of gift 
Gal 6:7 - God is not mocked-accepting pleasure, denying fruit 
Mt 21:19, Mk 11:14 - Jesus cursed fruitless fig tree 
Gal 5:20, Rv 9:21, 21:8 - Greek pharmakeia = abortifacient potions 
1Cor 6:19-20 - body temple of the Holy Spirit, glorify God with body 

Homosexuality 
Gn 1:27 - complementarity of sexes reflects God's inner unity 
Gn 2:21-24 - transmission of life through total self-donation - one flesh
Gn 19 - original sin deteriorates to Sodom's sin, destroyed 
Lv18:22 - called abomination, cut off from people (v.29) 
Lv 20:13 - both shall be put to death for abominable deed 
Rom 1:27 - called unnatural, shameful, and a perversity 
1Cor 6:9 - active homosexuals won't inherit kingdom of God 
1Tim 1:9-10 - those who engage in such acts called sinners 

Drinking Wine 
Gn 27:25 - Isaac brought Jacob wine, and he drank 
Dt 14:23-26 - spend money on sheep, wine, & strong drink 
Prov 20:1 - wine is a mocker, unwise to be led astray by it 
Eccl 9:7 - drink your wine with merry heart - God approves 
Is 25:6 - God will provide feast of rich foods & choice wines 
Is 5:11 - woe to those who rise early & run after strong drink 
Is 5:22 - woe to those who are heroes at drinking wine 
Luke 7:33-34 - son of man eats & drinks: behold glutton & drunk 
Jn 2:2-10 - miracle at Cana: water turned into good wine 
Eph 5:18 - do not get drunk with wine, that is debauchery 
1Tim 5:23 - drink a little wine for the sake of your stomach

SAINTS, RELICS, AND STATUES
Communion of Saints 
Eph 1:22-23 - he is head of the Church, which is His body 
Eph 5:21-32 - Christ is the head of the Church, Savior of the body 
Col 1:18, 24 - He is head of the body, the Church 
1Cor 12:12-27 - if I suffer, all suffer; if I am honored, all rejoice 
Rom 12:5 - we are one body in Christ, individual parts of one another 
Eph 4:4 - one body, one Spirit, called to one hope 
Col 3:15 - you were called in one body 
Rom 8:35-39 - death cannot separate us from Christ 
Rom 12:10 - love one another with mutual affection 
1Thess 5:11 - encourage, build up one another 
Gal 6:2 - bear one another's burdens 
Gal 6:10 - let us do good to all, especially those in family of faith 

Intercessory Prayer of Saints 
Rom 15:30 - join me by your prayers to God on my behalf 
Col 4:3, 1Thess 5:25 - pray for us 
2Thess 1:11 - we always pray for you 
2Thess 3:1 - finally, brothers, pray for us 
Eph 6:18-19 - making supplication for all the saints & for me 
Tob 12:12 - angel presents Tobit & Sarah's prayer to God
Ps 148 - David calls upon angels
Zech 1:12 - angel intercedes for Jerusalem 
Mk 12:25, Mt 22:30 - men in heaven are as the angels
Rev 5:8 - those in heaven offer prayers of the holy ones to God 
*Saints dead, prayer is necromancy (Dt 18:10-11) 
Mk 12:26-27 - he is God of the living, not of the dead 
Mk 9:4 - Jesus seen conversing with Elijah & Moses
Lk 9:31 - Elijah & Moses aware of earthly events 
Rev 6:9-11 - martyrs under altar want earthly vindication 
Heb 12:1 - we are surrounded by a cloud of witnesses 
Lk 16:19-30 - departed rich man intercedes for brothers 
Rev 20:4 - saw the souls of those who had been beheaded 
Wis 3:1-6 - the souls of the just are in the hand of God 
2Macc 15:7-16 - the departed Onias & Jeremiah pray for the Jews 
Jas 5:16 Prayers of righteous man
1 Cor. 13:12 - I shall understand fully
1 John 4: 20-21 - whoever loves God must love his brother
1 Cor 12:21 - parts of Christ's Body cannot say to other parts,
"I do not need you".

*1Tim 2:5 - "One mediator between God and man" 
1Tim 2:1-7 - offer prayers, petitions for all men 
1Pet 2:5 - be a holy priesthood to offer sacrifices through Christ 
Mk 10:18 - only God is good 
Mt 25:23 - well done my good and faithful servant 
Jn 10:11-16 - I am good shepherd; one flock I shepherd 
Jn 21:15-16 - feed my lambs, tend my sheep 
Eph 4:11 - He gave some as apostles…others as pastors 
Heb 3:1, 7:24, 9:12-13 - Jesus eternal high priest; one sacrifice 
Rev 1:6, 5:10 - He made us a kingdom of priests for God 
 

Veneration of Saints 
Jos 5:14 - Joshua fell prostrate in worship before angel 
Dan 8:17 - Daniel fell prostrate in terror before Gabriel 
Tob 12:16 - Tobiah & Tobit fall to ground before Raphael 
Mt 18:10 - angels in heaven always behold face of God (we venerate 
angels because of their great dignity,
which comes form their union with God. 
Saints also are united with God) 
1Jn 3:2 - we shall be like him, we shall see him as he is 
1Thess 1:5-8 - you become an example to all the believers 
Heb 13:7 - remember leaders, consider/imitate their faith & life 

Relics 
2Kgs 13:20-21 - contact with Elisha's bones restored life 
Acts 5:15-116 - cures performed through Peter's shadow 
Acts 19:11-12 - cures through face cloths that touched Paul 

Statues 
*Ex 20:4-5 - do not make and worship any graven images 
Ex 25:18-19 - make two cherubim of beaten gold 
Num 21:8-9 - Moses made bronze serpent & put on pole 
1Kgs 6:23-29 - temple had engraved cherubim, trees, flowers 
1Kgs 7:25-45 - temple had bronze oxen, lions, pomegranates

(also see The Blessed Virgin Mary)

MISCELLANEOUS TOPICS

Scandals in the Church 
Jer 32:32-35 - OT leaders & priests offered child sacrifices 
2 Kgs 23:7 - OT cult prostitutes in the temple of the Lord 
Jn 4:22 - in spite of their infidelity, salvation is from Jews 
Mk 14:43-46 - Judas betrayed Jesus 
Mk 14:66-72 Peter denied him 
Jn 20:24-25 Thomas refused to believe his resurrection 
Mk 14:50 - they all left him and fled in garden of Gethsemane 
Rom 3:3-4 - will their infidelity nullify fidelity of God? No! 
2 Tim 2 :13 - if we are unfaithful, God remains faithful 
Mt 13:24-30 - Parable of the weeds among the wheat 
Mt 13:47-48 - parable of net that collects good and bad 

Fasting 
*1Tim 4:3 - condemns anti-flesh heretics
Mk 7:19 - Christ declared all food clean 
1Tim 4:4-5 - everything created by God is good 
Dan 10:3 - Daniel refused to eat choice foods for 3 weeks 
Mt 9:15 - Christ's followers will fast once he is gone 
Mt 6:16-18 - Jesus gave regulations concerning how to fast 

Divinity of Jesus 
Jn 1:1 - the Word was God 
Jn 1:14-15 - glory of Father's only Son, full of grace and truth 
Jn 8:19 - if you knew me, you would know my Father 
Jn 8:58-59 - I assure you, before Abraham was, I AM 
Jn 10:30-33 - the Father and I are one (see Ex 3:14, 20:7;
Lev 19:12, 24:14-16) 
Jn 10:38 - the Father is in me and I am in the Father 
Jn 12:45 - whosoever sees me sees the one who sent me 
Jn 14:8-12 - whoever had seen has seen the Father 
Jn 20:28 - Jesus accepts Thomas's "my Lord and my God" 
Col 2:9 - in him dwells whole fullness of deity bodily 
Acts 20:28 - church of God he acquired with his blood 
Eph 1:7 - in him we have redemption by his blood 
1Jn 1:7 - blood of his Son Jesus cleanses from all sin 
Tit 2:13 - glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ 

Time of Second Coming Unknown 
Mt 24:44 - be prepared, Jesus coming at unexpected hour 
Mt 25:13 - stay awake, you know neither the day nor hour 
Mk 13:35-37 - watch, unknown when lord of house coming 
Lk 12:46 - master will come like a thief in night 
1thess 5:2-3 - day of Lord will come like a thief in night 
2Pet 3:9-10 - day of lord will come like a thief 
Rev 3:3 - if not watchful, will come like a thief 
Mt 24:36 - no one but Father alone knows day and hour 

Holy Spirit a Person, Not a Force 
Jn 14:26 - "he will teach you all things" 
Acts 8:29 - "and the Spirit said to Philip, 'Go up..." 
Acts 13:2 - "Holy Spirit said, 'Set apart for me...'" 
Rom 8:27 - "Spirit intercedes for the saints..." 
1Cor 2:11 - no one understands the thoughts of God, but Spirit 
1Cor 12:11 - Spirit apportions to each as he wills 
Eph 4:30 - "do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God" 

Repetitious Prayer 
*Mt 6:7 - do not babble like pagans with their many words 
1Kgs 18:25-29 - example of vain repetition: call Baal for hours 
Mt 26:44 - Jesus prayed a third time, saying the same thing again 
Lk 18:13 - collector kept beating breast & praying: be merciful 
Rev 4:8 - repeat day & night, "Holy, holy, holy is the Lord" 
1Thess 5:17 - pray without ceasing
Ps 136 (26X 'his steadfast love endures forever')
Mt 6:9-13 Our Father

Refuting the fundamental modern error of Sola Scriptura.

2009-01-19T09:41:00.004-06:00

I was going to add my own refutation to this modern fundamental error and new wind of doctrines of men, but I have discovered that it has already been dealt with by many others and so there is little purpose except to make the information available to you all here.

The following links do that very well. Please enjoy.

Recommended Reading:
Proving Inspiration
Scripture and Tradition
What's Your Authority?
Scriptural Reference Guide
A Quick Ten-Step Refutation of Sola Scriptura by Dave Armstrong
Catholic Questions: Apologetics Backward by Mary Beth Kremski

What Exactly Do You Mean by Sola Scriptura? by Jimmy Akin
Why the Bereans Rejected Sola Scriptura by Steve Ray
Ten Thousand Chickens for One Thousand Bibles by James Akin
Where Does the Authority Lie? by Kenneth J. Howell

According to Scripture by Tim Staples
Sola Scriptura is Unscriptural
The Complex Relationship between Scripture and Tradition by Jimmy Akin
Logic and Protestantism's Shaky Foundations by Brian W. Harrison, O.S.
Going Beyond by Patrick Madrid

Refuting: "Is a Catholic Christian an Oxymoron?"

2008-11-10T12:55:00.013-06:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by A Catholic at CAF

I'm sure I'm not the first Catholic to have come across this horribly inaccurate and misleading tract by "evangelist" Mike Gendron. (see it here: http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/ro...m/RC1299W2.htm )

I'm in the process of debunking it myself, and I'd love some help. I think in particular the part about the anathemas and merit might be tricky ones that I could use more experienced apologists' aid.

Also, does anyone know if an apologist has already done this?

Thanks, and God bless,

Ankerberg is just another a-C and Gendron makes his living off his a-C propaganda. I refuted one of his articles on my blog and will be happy to help dismantle this one as well. He's really not very good.

Quote:

Others, who know the official teachings of the Catholic Church contradict the essentials of the Gospel, would say "yes." We propose that a Catholic Christian is indeed an oxymoron for two reasons: 1) we are what we believe, and 2) it is impossible for anyone to believe two opposing views simultaneously. I recognize that there may be some Christians attending the Catholic Church but if they have believed the Gospel they are no longer Catholics. Let us consider some of the contradictory beliefs between Catholics and Christians.

This is just his typical rhetorical jive talk.

Since Catholics do not hold two different positions..he's inferring something that is untrue. It's called making a specious argument and it's dishonest of any professing believer to use it.

Quote:

Authority

A Christian believes Scripture has authority over church. All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness (2 Tim. 3:16). By setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to every man’s conscience (2 Cor. 4:2).

A Catholic believes the Church has authority over Scriptures. The manner of interpreting Scripture is ultimately subject to the judgment of the Church, which exercises the divinely conferred commission, and ministry of watching over and interpreting the Word of God (CCC, para. 119).

Here, he's correct about what we believe, but he is wrong as to what Christians believe. Firstly, that position is unique to only some of the professing communities, and even then there is much disagreement as to what they mean by the terms they use. Sola Scriptura means different things to different people that one encounters. Jimmy Akin has a great short article on this here.

Furthermore, as has been show many times, the first passage that eh cites does not support the scripture as sole and final authority, it concerns the inspiration of the scriptures and their usefulness in many areas, but that is all, as any objective reader will see. His second passage is circular reasoning and a prime example of why we should reject SS. In construing it with this passage he has made every individual with a Bible in hand an authority unto themselves, which why SS is so pernicious. This allows for (and has resulted in) the cascading myriad of errant teachings that are prevalent with nearly all the modern post reformation step children today. An excellent example of its bad fruit.

Quote:

Justification

A Christian is justified once by faith because justification is a permanent declaration by God (Romans 8:30). However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness (Romans 4:5).

A Catholic is justified repeatedly by sacraments and works because he loses the grace of justification each time a mortal sin is committed. The sacrament of Penance offers a new possibility to convert and to recover the grace of justification (1446).

Here he actually misrepresents the Catholic teaching very badly. This ties into the error of OSAS/Eternal Security of the Believer and actually flies in the face of very specific New Testament teaching like Matthew 7:22 and Luke 13:24 (see context in all references please).

Quote:

Regeneration

A Christian believes he is regenerated at baptism of the Spirit. For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body (1 Cor. 12:13). God chose you to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth (2 Thes. 2:13).

A Catholic believes baptism of water imparts divine life, the water of Baptism truly signifies our birth into the divine life (694).

Here again he is in serious error. I have a couple of blog articles that probably deal with this as well as is needed. Here are the links. Who REALLY Preaches "A Different Gospel" and Baptism~ Necessary or Not?.

Here again, Gendron's error is in fundamental Christian doctrine, and not in what the Church teaches, which is one reason that Catholics and n-Cs disagree on these matters to begin with.

Quote:

Salvation

A Christian is saved by God’s unmerited grace. For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast (Eph. 2:8-9).

A Catholic is saved by meriting the graces needed for salvation. We can merit for ourselves and for others the graces needed for the attainment of eternal life (2010).

Here I'll take his statements apart separately because there are so many errors. In checking I find that the best refutation of this is found in the context of the very CCC reference that he cites. Here it is. As is typical of Gendron, he uses a reference and makes allegations that taken at a cursory glance might deceive his readers This is why it is important to check every source.

Quote:

A Christian is saved for good works. For we are God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do (Eph. 2:10).

A Catholic is saved by good works. The sacraments of the New Covenant are necessary for salvation (1129).

Here again he oversimplifies his attack in a specious way. Most of us have had this argument with various n-Cs/a-Cs and know it as the "Catholics save themselves by their works" bit. We also know that that is definitely not what we believe nor what the Church has ever taught, though Gendron would like to deceive his readers into believing it. As with every such misstatement it is wrapped around a kernel of truth, the problem for Gendron is that here again, his problem is not with Catholicism but with the fundamental teachings of the New Testament that the Christian Church has always taught. I think John Martignoni's excellent MP3 Bible study on Sola Fide is the best response to this. Here's the link. Sola Fide - Salvation By Faith Alone? and his notes are here.

Quote:

A Christian is saved for all eternity. And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance. (Eph. 1:13-14).

A Catholic is saved until a mortal sin is committed. Those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell (1035).

Here again the problem is not with Catholic teaching but fundamental New Testament Christian teachings that the modern post reformation step children like Gendron have departed from. Once more, I will turn to another of John Martignoni's fine MP3 Bible studies in which he refutes this serious error. Once Saved, Always Saved?, and again, his notes are here.

Quote:

A Christian believes salvation is offered to those outside the church. We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making His appeal through us (2 Cor. 5:20).

A Catholic believes salvation is offered through the Church. Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation. Anyone refusing to enter it or remain in it cannot be saved (846).

This one again is one that most of us who do any apologetics have dealt with many times, and of course Gendron speciously cites the CCC and fails to offer context. Instead, he should have been honest and cited CCC 830 - 848 which my link here will correctly explain.

Quote:

A Christian is purified by the blood of Jesus. The blood of Jesus...purifies us from all sin (1 John 1:7).

A Catholic is purified by the fires of Purgatory. They undergo purification in Purgatory, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven (1030-31).

Here again, he's speciously misrepresenting Catholic teaching so as to intentionally deceive his reader. Most knowledgeable and faithful will recognize this as the complete lie that it really is, and that the church has not ever, does not now, and will not ever, teach something like this. There are a couple of sources that i will use to refute him here. One is the following article from my blog. Biblical and Jewish Traditional Beliefs About Purgatory and the following from CA's own library. Purgatory

The Roots of Purgatory (Fathers*)

Quote:

Saints and Priests

A Christian becomes a saint when the Spirit baptizes him into the body of Christ. And He gave some...for the equipping of the saints...the body of Christ (Eph. 4:11-12).

A Catholic becomes a saint only if the Pope canonizes them. This occurs when he solemnly proclaims that they practiced a heroic virtue and lived in fidelity to God’s grace (828).

Here again he totally misleads his readers as to what we believe. He chooses to ignore the preceding context of the Catechism, but in refuting him on this I certainly won't.
II. THE CHURCH IS HOLY

Quote:

A Christian is a priest. But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God (1 Peter 2:9).

A Catholic needs a priest. Catholic priests are said to be apostolic successors and guarantee that Christ is acting in the sacraments to dispense divine life (1120-1131).

He grossly misinterprets all of this, (Hey, beginning to see a pattern here my friends? ) He can only make this specious case of his by deflecting his readers from the context of his citations, (one wonders if any bother to check them) he should have included CCC 1119 which says, "1119 Forming "as it were, one mystical person" with Christ the head, the Church acts in the sacraments as "an organically structured priestly community."36 Through Baptism and Confirmation the priestly people is enabled to celebrate the liturgy, while those of the faithful "who have received Holy Orders, are appointed to nourish the Church with the word and grace of God in the name of Christ."37" and 1132, which reads (and refutes his allegation) "1119 Forming "as it were, one mystical person" with Christ the head, the Church acts in the sacraments as "an organically structured priestly community."36 Through Baptism and Confirmation the priestly people is enabled to celebrate the liturgy, while those of the faithful "who have received Holy Orders, are appointed to nourish the Church with the word and grace of God in the name of Christ."37"

Quote:

The Lord’s Supper

A Christian believes the Lord’s Supper is a memorial. Do this in remembrance of me (1 Cor. 11:24-25).

A Catholic believes the Lord’s Supper is a sacrifice. The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice...the same Christ who offered Himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and offered in an unbloody manner (1367).

A Christian receives Jesus once, spiritually, in the heart. Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God (John 1:12). God... put his Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee (2 Cor. 1:22).

A Catholic believes he receives Jesus physically, frequently, in the stomach. The body, blood...soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ...is truly, really and substantially contained in the Eucharist (1374-78).

Here again...he shows that his problem is not with just the Catholic Church but with the New Testament as well as the clear writings of the early church on the Eucharist. I deal with this in the very first article on my blog.
The Eucharist IS Scriptural. Simply stated, Gendron is dead wrong about both what Christians have believed for 2,000 years as well as his opposition to it.

Quote:

Condemnation

A Christian is condemned by the Roman Catholic Church. Over 100 anathemas have been pronounced against Christians by the Roman Catholic Councils of Trent and Vatican II. These condemnations are still in effect today and can only be lifted if a Christian returns in submission to the authority of the pope.

Again, with the specious arguments. The Christian Church has leveled anathemas against every heresy to come down the pike in all of its 2,000 year history beginning in the New Testament and they were right to do so. The Church has done righteously in condemning the heresies that Gendron preaches and has displayed here in this tract. He was supposedly a Catholic prior to entering into his new career as an anti-Catholic evangelist who now sells himself as an expert on our most holy faith and gets paid for doing so. That's a real shame IMO. I think the New Testament speaks about this kind of person somewhere...

Quote:

A Catholic is condemned by the Word of God. There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; that very word which I spoke will condemn him at the last day (John 12:48). If we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! (Gal. 1:8; cf. Context of verses 6-9).

Yet what did Our Lord tell His apostles? Luke 10: [16] "He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me." , and I've already shown in a post above who Galatians 1:8 actually applies to.

Quote:

These thirteen teachings and traditions of Roman Catholicism demonstrate that a Catholic Christian is indeed an oxymoron. They also affirm how manmade traditions nullify the Word of God (Mark 7:7-13).

But as you have just seen, is Gendron telling the truth about either Christian doctrine or the Catholic Church?

Quote:

There are many Evangelicals and Roman Catholics who are unaware of how diametrically opposed Catholic dogmas are to the Word of God.

No...in fact there are many people who are not aware of the fact that they are being deceived into terrible error by men like Mike Gendron and John Ankerberg who put forth erroneous teachings of men and label them as Christian doctrine.

Look again at the refutation of this online tract of Gendron's. Has he told the truth? Has he misrepresented the Catholic Church's teachings? Has he asserted as Christian doctrines things which the Bible and the Catholic Church do not teach or agree with and that the Church has labeled as heresies?

Quote:

The truth must be told. Catholics who presume they are Christians must be lovingly confronted with the truth.

Yeah.. right...

The rest is just polemics. I think he's done enough damage to his position.

Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.
Blackie

Scriptures About Penance

2008-09-19T13:17:00.007-05:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by a Non-Catholic

pennitent and pennace are 2 entirely different things you'll find no support for pennance...

Here's over 60 references or so where the Bible speaks of sackcloth, most of them are in direct relation to penance, which is a demonstration of sorrow for sin. A physical way in which people have shown their contrition for sin.

Being penitent and penance are inexorably linked in both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible. This is also what was meant when the people in the Gospels were told to bring forth fruit worthy of repentance. Penitence is the like a second step that follows repentance, and penance is a scriptural aspect of that.

The Perpetual Virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

2008-01-05T22:35:00.000-06:00

According to the Word of God...

If Jesus had been the eldest among children then the others would have been responsible for taking care of their mother. This was not true of step children, who would not have had that responsibility.

If, as some ancient sources say, Joseph was a much older man and a widower with children by his previous wife, then this passage makes perfect sense.

Why then was one of the last things that Our Lord did from the cross the act of assigning his mother to the care of a non-family member?

If He had blood siblings instead of step siblings (who were not responsible for their step mother), why would he have done that?

John 19:26 When Jesus therefore had seen his mother and the disciple standing whom he loved, he saith to his mother: Woman, behold thy son. 27 After that, he saith to the disciple: Behold thy mother. And from that hour, the disciple took her to his own.

Furthermore, it was scandalous in Jewish society for a younger sibling to rebuke or mock the eldest, yet this is what we see happened in the New Testament. However, if His step brethren were older than He then this might occur. Look at Jacob's sons and Jesse's sons in dealing with Joseph and David.

Also, it was virtually criminal for a younger sibling to mock or rebuke the first born son, and yet the word of God shows that this happened to Our Lord This would only be possible if they were the older step siblings by another mother.

With historical documents that suggest that Joseph was a much older man and a widower with children, your assertions fails.
'Brethren of the Lord'
Mary: Ever Virgin (Fathers)
If Mary had other children, then where were they the day their eldest brother Christ was Crucified? Their mother was there and Jesus' best friend John? If she had other kids they would've been there too and they would've been responsible for taking care of Mary. Instead, from the cross and with almost his last breath Jesus gives her to St. John. Something that he wouldn't have done under Jewish customs back then IF HE HAD SIBLINGS.
The New Testament clearly indicates that they were his cousins...the children of Mary's cousin Mary (John 19:25-27).
"25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus, his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalen.

See! Even his mom's cousin was there...where are these supposed siblings of his? Nowhere...that's where, because they simply did not exist.

Even all three of the "pillars of the reformation" wrote in support of it.
My thanks to San Juan Catholic Seminars for publishing this in their Beginning Apologetics # 5 booklet.

The Perpetual Virginity of Mary:

Martin Luther: “ It is an article of faith that Mary is Mother of the Lord and still a virgin… Christ, we believe, came forth from a womb left perfectly intact.” ( Works of Luther, Vol. 11, pages 319-320; Vol. 6, page 510.)

John Calvin: “ There have been certain folk who have wished to suggest from this passage [Matthew 1:25] that the Virgin Mary had other children than the Son of God, and that Joseph had then dwelt with her later; but what folly this is! For the gospel writer did not wish to record what happened afterwards; he simply wished to make clear Joseph’s obedience and to show that Joseph had been well and truly assured that it was God who had sent His angel to Mary. He had therefore never dwelt with her nor had he shared her company… And beside this Our Lord Jesus Christ is called the first-born. This is not because there was a second or a third, but because the gospel writer is paying regard to the precedence. Scripture speaks thus of naming the first-born whether or no there was any question of the second.” (Sermon on Matthew 1:22-25. Published in 1562.)

Ulrich Zwingli: “I firmly believe that Mary, according to the words of the gospel, as a pure Virgin brought forth for us the Son of God and in childbirth and after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin.” ( Zwingli Opera, Vol. 1, page 424.)

More info:
http://www.catholic.com/library/Mary_Ever_Virgin.asp

Other ECF quotes about the Blessed Virgin:
http://www.catholic.com/library/Mary_Mother_of_God.asp
http://www.catholic.com/library/Mary_Full_of_Grace.asp

Other info about Catholic teaching about Mary
http://www.catholic.com/library/Imma..._and_Assum.asp

My Reformation Theory

2007-12-14T00:15:00.007-06:00

I have a theory...and that's all it is mind you, that one reason so many modern post reformation n-Cs reject the sacraments like the Eucharist, Confession, etc is because early on, the reformers realized that once the renegade priests who left the church with them had all died off, they would be left without anyone who could even remotely claim to validly celebrate and administer these sacraments and since most of their laity came from the Catholic faith they would soon recognize the deficiency because their clergy no longer maintained any semblance of apostolic succession and could not consecrate the Eucharist or absolve sins in confession, and that might well cripple the infant reformation faith communities. In order to handle that these leaders began to construct the errant interpretations that we see today that deny the sacraments. It's the only logical tactic that will keep people who knew and loved the Eucharist and the solace of Confession from turning back to the Catholic faith to have them validly available.

Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.
(The peace of the Lord be always with you all.)
Blackie

Who REALLY Preaches "A Different Gospel"?

2007-12-10T07:27:00.001-06:00

It is my own opinion that the majority of non-Catholic salvation messages actually present a different and deficient gospel than that of the New Testament, the early church and the Catholic Church for the last 2,000 years.

I believe that the essential "way of salvation" verses that are used in a great many non-Catholic evangelistic messages been have ripped from the pages of the Word of God and bandied about in the last 500 years to further a different and oversimplified deficient Gospel that anyone who sits down and reads the New Testament for themselves without some non-Catholic preacher breathing down their neck every Sunday and Wednesday will soon discover is not the same Gospel of salvation.

I have read the Word of God many times and that is why I am a Catholic. The salvation message of the Catholic Church is in line with the teachings of the New Testament, and I believe that the salvation message of the majority of non-Catholics is some different gospel, condemned by St. Paul and leads to something that I have dubbed "Christianity Lite".

This is the result of much internet discussion with a variety of non-Catholics which spawned the following post here on Apocalypsis. How Is A Catholic Saved?

Read your New Testament from cover to cover and see what the teachings are concerning salvation and then compare the various non-Catholic "ways" and "plans" of salvation with what you have read and see if the Holy Spirit does not show you the deficiencies and differences between the two.

They stop far short of what the New Testament Gospel is while the teachings of the Catholic Church are in fact right in line with it.

I would suggest that the context of the New Testament does not teach the Reformed doctrine and that (as I have stated before) their's is a different and deficient gospel.

If no works are involved in our salvation, then how do you explain the Gospel message preached on the day of Pentecost (under the influence of the fullness of the Holy Spirit no less!) in Acts 2:37-38.
[37] Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Brethren, what shall we do?"
[38] And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

How do you explain the message delivered to St. Paul himself (especially since you assert that it is his teachings that convince you of the reformed position) in Acts 22:16
[16] And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.'

Obviously, from the message there, baptism is key to salvation and does indeed wash away and forgive sins. The reformed teachings contradict this in spite of the plain sense of the scriptures.

If our works have no merit with regard to our salvation, why then does Our Lord plainly tell us that we will be judged and either welcomed into the Kingdom of God or cast into hell based upon them in Matthew 25: 31-46
[31] "When the Son of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne.
[32] Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate them one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats,
[33] and he will place the sheep at his right hand, but the goats at the left.
[34] Then the King will say to those at his right hand, `Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world;
[35] for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me,
[36] I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.'
[37] Then the righteous will answer him, `Lord, when did we see thee hungry and feed thee, or thirsty and give thee drink?
[38] And when did we see thee a stranger and welcome thee, or naked and clothe thee?
[39] And when did we see thee sick or in prison and visit thee?'
[40] And the King will answer them, `Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.'
[41] Then he will say to those at his left hand, `Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels;
[42] for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink,
[43] I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.'
[44] Then they also will answer, `Lord, when did we see thee hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to thee?'
[45] Then he will answer them, `Truly, I say to you, as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me.'
[46] And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

The Gospel today is (and should be!) the same as that preached by the apostles in the New Testament. (See Acts 2:37-38 and 22:16 as well as John 3:5) If what is preached is not the same then that (IMO) would qualify as "a different gospel".

I, like many many Catholics, have heard and seen allegations that ours is a different gospel, but having read the Word of God carefully and prayerfully many times over many years, and comparing the messages of those who make those allegations to the salvation message of the Catholic Church alongside the New Testament, I have found that just the opposite is true.

If, as I suspect, you have read the New Testament all the way through, (more than likely many times over) you can understand what I mean when I say that the Gospel of salvation is actually the topic throughout and I submit that it is the Gospel that is preached by the Catholic Church that accurately aligns with that and not the one of the reformers or their modern step children.

Galatians 1:[8] But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we preached to you, let him be accursed.
[9] As we have said before, so now I say again, If any one is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed.
Blackie

The Origins of Halloween

2007-10-31T09:19:00.002-05:00

The Origins of Halloween

The All American Holiday (From the tract by Grotto Press)

The Date.

Pope Gregory III (d 741) moved All saints Day from May 13th to November 1st to coincide with the dedication of a new cathedral. Of course the evening vigil was celebrated on October 31st hence All Hallows Eve or Hallowe'en.

The Dead

In 997 St. Odillo of Cluny, S. France, added a feast of All Souls. (faithful departed in heaven and purgatory) However, the Irish wondered about those in hell. They thought that the damned might cause trouble if they weren't remembered. So, at least in Ireland, ALL the dead were remembered even though "All Damned Day" was never allowed in the church calendar.

The Costumes

In the 14th and 15th centuries the French started "The Dance Macabre" which was an artistic reminder of their own mortality at a time when the Bubonic Plague was sweeping their country. (Europe lost half her population.) To do this dance, held on All Soul's day, November 2nd, they dressed up in ghoulish costumes. In North America in the 1700s, the French and Irish settlers began to intermarry thus the two costumes were blended.

Trick or Treat

During the 1500s through the 1700s in Protestant England, Catholics were persecuted and many martyred. (It was a capitol offense for a priest to say Mass.)

One of their attempted uprisings against their oppressors backfired when Guy Fawkes, the man guarding the gunpowder, meant to blow up King James I, was captured and hanged.

So November 5th became a great celebration for the Protestants in England (to this day). During that period, bands of revelers would visit Catholics in the dead of night, dressed up in masks, demanding beer and cakes for their celebration. Thus "trick or treat".

Witches and Jack-O-Lanterns

In the late 1800s the greeting card industry tried introducing "The Halloween Card" and since Halloween was already creepy, why not add witches? Also in the 1800s, ill-informed folklorists thought that Halloween was druidic and pagan in origin. Since pagans had used lamps made of turnips (not pumpkins) in their harvest festival, these were added too.

Conclusion

So enjoy being an American, have fun at Halloween but remember its origins; it was a time to remember saints and loved ones, faithful souls who died. Obviously as Christians we stand against witchcraft ("There shall not be found among you any one who...practices divination, a soothsayer, or an augur, or a sorcerer, or a charmer, or a medium, or a wizard, or a necromancer. For whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD ." Deuteronomy 18:10-12) but we can still have wholesome fun and yet teach our children the real meaning of Halloween.

Catholic Confession

2007-09-20T19:12:00.000-05:00

In my opinion the passages are clear as in this case.

John 20:21-23 is so important.
"21 He said therefore to them again: Peace be to you. As the Father hath sent me, I also send you. 22 When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost. 23 Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained."

My thinking is that if our Lord had not intended to make the Sacrament of Reconciliation a means of grace unto salvation, then why in the world would He have made this statement and given both this power and command to the presbyters of His church?

James 5:16 & 1st John 1:9 also offer us more insight into this doctrine.

James 5: 14 Is any man sick among you? Let him bring in the priests of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. 15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick man: and the Lord shall raise him up: and if he be in sins, they shall be forgiven him. 16 Confess therefore your sins one to another: and pray one for another, that you may be saved. For the continual prayer of a just man availeth much.

1st John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all iniquity.

All these passages expressly speak of confession of sins and so I have to ask, then just how will those outside the Catholic Church explain the obvious link between these passages.

Here is a further outline for study on this sacrament courtesy of John Martignoni and his Bible Christian Society

Quote:

Confession

A. Confess your sins to men
~ Leviticus 5:5-6 (“All scripture…”: 2 Tim 3:16)
(Law is a shadow: Hebrews 10:1)
~ 1 John 1:9
~ James 5:16

B. Can men forgive sins?
~ Only God has the power to forgive sins but He exercises this power through men.
~ Mark 2:7
~ Matthew 9:1-8
When the crowds saw it, they were afraid , and the glorified God, who had given such authority to men.
- Matthew 9:8

To me, the scriptures are clear, and I can't help but praise and thank God for His wisdom and mercy that (knowing the weaknesses of mankind) equipped His church with the means to help His children overcome our weaknesses and sins.

How Is A Catholic Saved?

2007-09-17T23:19:00.005-05:00

Repentance and baptism (Acts 2:38 & 22:16 and John 3:1-21) and then following Christ, (John 14:15, Matthew 10:38, 16:24, & 25:31-46, Mark 8:34, Luke 9:23 and Revelation 3:5) which is a lifelong journey and not the oversimplified "plan of salvation" as presented by some non-Catholic communities.

Infallibility & How The Apostles Taught the Study of Sacred Tradition.

2007-08-31T09:23:00.000-05:00

Quote:

Originally Asserted by a Non-Catholic:

Any church arrogant enough to claim infallibility is elevating it's self above God and is blasphemy! There are other "churches" that claim to be infallible, how shall I know which one is lying and which one is telling the truth?

I will answer this for you, by reading the bible for myself and letting the Holy Ghost interpret it for me as He does. BTW any church claiming infallability is a false church.

A rant without any support from the Word of God.

And yet Christ Himself promised that assurance of infallibility to His church when He said. 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.Matthew 16.

So then you claim this infallibility for yourself? That is precisely what this statement does, while denying what Our Lord promised to His church and actually attempting to usurp that authority and promise of assurance for yourself. I wouldn't do that. So then you are telling us that you are never wrong? Yet I have already proved you wrong several times in this discussion alone.

By this statement you have logically condemned yourself.

Quote:

Originally Asserted by non-Catholic

2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

I love this verse! I don't suppose that you've noticed here that St. Paul does not say to St. Timothy. "Study the Bible", or "Study the scriptures", and so based on what this verse says (and the context nowhere changes this...) then sacred Tradition is included in what Paul is telling Timothy to study. In this he would be following the apostles.

Example: (I asked you to look all this up and apparently you dismissed my request, so now I'm going to show you why that was so important.)

Look at these verses from the letter of St. Jude, the next to last book in the New Testament. (You do accept Jude as inspired canon of scripture, right?)

Jude Chapter 1:9: But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, disputed about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a reviling judgment upon him, but said, "The Lord rebuke you."

Where is that found in the Old Testament? Please show me chapter and verse.

Jude Chapter 1:14: It was of these also that Enoch in the seventh generation from Adam prophesied, saying, "Behold, the Lord came with his holy myriads, 15: to execute judgment on all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness which they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."

Where is that in the Old Testament please? Again, I need chapter and verse?

Jude Chapter 1:9: But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, disputed about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a reviling judgment upon him, but said, "The Lord rebuke you."....Jude Chapter 1:14: It was of these also that Enoch in the seventh generation from Adam prophesied, saying, "Behold, the Lord came with his holy myriads, 15: to execute judgment on all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness which they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."

2nd Timothy Chapter 3:8: As Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men of corrupt mind and counterfeit faith;

The first 1st is quoting The Assumption of Moses. Not the Old Testament, yet the apostle Jude quotes it as a fact of belief.

The 2nd is quoting The Book of Enoch. Not the Old Testament, yet the apostle Jude quotes it as a fact of belief.

The 3rd is quoting the Book of Jannes and Jambres and not the Old Testament. (Go ahead and look...their names are nowhere found in the OT!), yet here again...St. Paul refers to something as fact that is not stated in the inspired canon. So then... he is clearly telling Timothy to study both scripture and traditional sources, since that is clearly shown here as apostolic practice.

So much for the idea that the apostles taught Sola Scriptura.

Quote:

Originally Asserted by non-Catholic

You see it all the time. People don't agree on everything, even within any church, including your catholic church. At the same time, if you go to the same source of truth (the bible) and study it though the Holy Spirit, you can understand no matter who you are.

If this were actually true then all faithful believers would hold the exact same doctrines and beliefs...but that is not so among n-Cs, though with in the Catholic Church one single authority is acknowledged and there is indeed one authoritative and knowledgeable source of doctrinal interpretation.

Your comments that some Catholics might dissent or disagree does not indict that infallible authority in faith and morals but instead indicts the consciences of those who dissent or oppose those teachings.

The Case For Infant Baptism

2007-08-27T08:38:00.000-05:00

I noticed in someone's forum profile that they asserted that only adults are baptized in the Bible.

The imperative is the fact that Jewish babies were circumcised on the 8th day by the command of God and since Paul & Peter both compare baptism to circumcision, that we see the type and example. The fact that the parents had the child circumcised as an entrance into their faith and professed their faith on behalf of the child while accepting the responsibility of seeing that they were raised in their faith, carries over into Christianity. It's as scriptural as "Train up a child in the way that he should go and when he is old he will not depart from it." The more relevant passages are those that show that entire households were baptized, which implies that people of all ages were included. If God commanded that babies be brought into the faith in the OT, why would that logical and family oriented practice cease with the coming of the Messiah? ALL Christianity is about family...that's about as NT as it gets.

If you think that one has to make a profession of faith to enter the Kingdom of God, but then don't believe that baptism is crucial for salvation, there is something scripturally wrong with your belief...yet the NT is almost adamant about that.

I do not believe that "only adults are baptized in the Bible" is accurate, and here is a good article that explains why.

Quote:

Infant Baptism (LINK)

Fundamentalists often criticize the Catholic Church’s practice of baptizing infants. According to them, baptism is for adults and older children, because it is to be administered only after one has undergone a "born again" experience—that is, after one has "accepted Jesus Christ as his personal Lord and Savior." At the instant of acceptance, when he is "born again," the adult becomes a Christian, and his salvation is assured forever. Baptism follows, though it has no actual salvific value. In fact, one who dies before being baptized, but after "being saved," goes to heaven anyway.

As Fundamentalists see it, baptism is not a sacrament (in the true sense of the word), but an ordinance. It does not in any way convey the grace it symbolizes; rather, it is merely a public manifestation of the person’s conversion. Since only an adult or older child can be converted, baptism is inappropriate for infants or for children who have not yet reached the age of reason (generally considered to be age seven). Most Fundamentalists say that during the years before they reach the age of reason infants and young children are automatically saved. Only once a person reaches the age of reason does he need to "accept Jesus" in order to reach heaven.

Since the New Testament era, the Catholic Church has always understood baptism differently, teaching that it is a sacrament which accomplishes several things, the first of which is the remission of sin, both original sin and actual sin—only original sin in the case of infants and young children, since they are incapable of actual sin; and both original and actual sin in the case of older persons.

Peter explained what happens at baptism when he said, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38). But he did not restrict this teaching to adults. He added, "For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him" (2:39). We also read: "Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name" (Acts 22:16). These commands are universal, not restricted to adults. Further, these commands make clear the necessary connection between baptism and salvation, a
connection explicitly stated in 1 Peter 3:21: "Baptism . . . now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ."

Some apparently feel that the early church did not baptize infants, but that can be disproved by reading the historical citations if the following article. Early Teachings of Infant Baptism (Fathers *) and from the very early account of the martyrdom of Polycarp (a disciple and friend of St. John as well as bishop of the Church in Smyrna) in which Polycarp plainly says the following when the proconsul tries to get him to deny Christ because of his old age. He shows that he was infant baptized.

Quote:

CHAPTER 9 (LINK) 9:1 But to Polycarp, as he entered the arena, there came a voice from heaven, saying, Be strong, and play the man, O Polycarp. And the speaker no man saw; but the voice those of our people who were present heard. And when he was brought in there was a great tumult, when men heard that Polycarp was apprehended.
9:2 Then, when he had been brought in, the proconsul asked him if he was Polycarp. And when he confessed, he would have persuaded him to deny, saying, Have respect unto thine age, and other things like these, as is their custom to say: Swear by the fortunes of Caesar; Repent; Say, Away with the Atheists. But Polycarp, when he had looked with a grave face at all the multitude of lawless heathen in the arena, having beckoned unto them with his hand, sighed, and looking up unto heaven, said, Away with the Atheists!
9:3 And when the proconsul pressed him, and said, Swear, and I will release thee, revile Christ; Polycarp said, Eighty and six years have I served him, and in nothing hath he wronged me; and how, then, can I blaspheme my King, who saved me?

Response to Hard Questions to Ask Good Catholics (By Mike Gendron)

2007-08-22T13:38:00.001-05:00

Mike Gendron is a professional anti-Catholic preacher.
Understand that he now makes his living with this propaganda.
Look at the list of stuff he comes off with.

Where do you go to find the truth about life's most critical issues?

Answer: In the pillar and ground of the truth according to the New Testament. The Catholic Church.

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.

Did you know there is only one way to be saved?
Answer: Of course!

Acts 2 37: Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Brethren, what shall we do?"
38: And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
39: For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him." and Acts 22:16: And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.'

Did you know those who distort the Gospel are condemned?
Answer: Certainly! But in "carefully studying to show ourselves approved unto God", we do not find the modern post reformation churches preaching the same gospel as the New Testament.

Galatians 1:6: I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and turning to a different gospel --
7: not that there is another gospel, but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ.
8: But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we preached to you, let him be accursed.
9: As we have said before, so now I say again, If any one is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed.

Did you know that Jesus put an end to the ordained priesthood?
Answer: Really? Then why does St. Paul make statements like, "24: Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church," (Colossians 1) and why then does the disciple of St. John, Ignatius of Antioch write the following?

Quote:

CHAP. VIII.--LET NOTHING BE DONE WITHOUT THE BISHOP. (LINK)

See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution(17) of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper(18) Eucharist, which is[administered] either

See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Christ Jesus does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles. Do ye also reverence the deacons, as those that carry out[through their office] the appointment of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper(18) Eucharist, which is[administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude[of the people] also be; by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude[of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.(2) even as where Christ is, there does all the heavenly host stand by, waiting upon Him as the Chief Captain of the Lord's might, and the Governor of every intelligent nature. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize, or to offer, or to present sacrifice, or to celebrate a love-feast.(1) But that which seems good to him, is also well-pleasing to God, that everything ye do may be secure and valid.

Do you really believe Catholic priests have the power to call the Lord Jesus down from heaven every day?

Answer: Yes indeed. By the authority and command of Our Lord Jesus Christ both at the last supper and in John 6 the Real Presence of Our Lord Jesus Christ is made present.

In fact, St. Paul speaks of his own teaching concerning this is 1st Corinthians 10 & 11.

1st Corinthians 10:15: I speak as to sensible men; judge for yourselves what I say.
16: The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?
17: Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread. and 11:23: For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread,
24: and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, "This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me."
25: In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me."
26: For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.
27: Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord.
28: Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup.
29: For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself.
30: That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died.

Why do Catholic priests continue to offer Jesus as a sacrificial victim when He said "It is finished" (John 19:30)?

Answer:By the very command of Christ Himself. See the passages on the Eucharist above. Does not the sacrifice of Christ transcend time and space in all directions in order to apply to those all the way back to creation and forward until the end of time?

The fact is that here you have misrepresented the Catholic teaching in that the Eucharist is not a re-sacrifice, but a re-presentation of that sacrifice. The New Testament is clear that every time we celebrate the Eucharist the body and blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ is made present again.

What better way to confront a sinful world with the sacrifice of Christ. The Eucharist is not only scripturally sound, but more so than "altar calls" and "a sinner's prayer", or "accepting Christ as your personal Lord and savior", none of which are in the Word of God.

Did you know Jesus has already obtained redemption for believers?

Answer: Of course! Here you misrepresent Catholic belief and show that you either

Don't understand Catholic teaching.
or, deliberately intend to indict Catholic belief by misrepresentation.

It's impossible to tell which. The fact is that his quotes are out of context and that any honest person who took the time to read all the Catechism has to say on this would see the inaccuracy of his remarks. (Also at this point, an honest person, might very well begin to question Gendron as a good source.)

Why do you call Jesus the Savior when you have to save yourself?

Answer: Produce an authentic Catholic teaching to this effect. You can't...because there is no such thing.

There are, however, passages like Matthew 25:31-46, which teach the critical importance of a believer's good works at his judgment.

31: "When the Son of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne.
32: Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate them one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats,
33: and he will place the sheep at his right hand, but the goats at the left.
34: Then the King will say to those at his right hand, `Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world;
35: for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me,
36: I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.'
37: Then the righteous will answer him, `Lord, when did we see thee hungry and feed thee, or thirsty and give thee drink?
38: And when did we see thee a stranger and welcome thee, or naked and clothe thee?
39: And when did we see thee sick or in prison and visit thee?'
40: And the King will answer them, `Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.'
41: Then he will say to those at his left hand, `Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels;
42: for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink,
43: I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.'
44: Then they also will answer, `Lord, when did we see thee hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to thee?'
45: Then he will answer them, `Truly, I say to you, as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me.'
46: And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

Why do you believe a place caller Purgatory can purify your sins?

Answer: Because it's in the Word of God.

Biblical and Jewish Traditional Beliefs About Purgatory

Why do you pray to Mary?

Answer: Because she is the first believer and demonstrated a ministry of intercession with her Son even from the very beginning of His public ministry in John 2. Because we believe in the Communion of Saints, a scriptural teaching in the New Testament. and here is a link to an MP3 Bible study on this topic.

Why aren't these Catholic traditions found in the 1st century Church?
Answer: * Priests offering sacrifices for sins
See Ignatius of Antioch's letter quoted above.
* Indulgences remitting sin's punishment
John 20:21-23, and Matthew 16:18 and 18:18
* Church leaders forbidden to marry
Well, gee. What did the Lord Himself say? Answering this allegation.
* Infallible men
Matthew 16:18 and 28:19-20. 1st Timothy 3:15

Did you Know that whenever you believe a doctrine, you must also for sake that which opposes it?

Answer: Indeed! And I'm quite alright with that.

Which Jesus will you trust?

Answer: The real one. The one who founded a church to carry on His mission and ministry on Earth, but nowhere commissioned any writings to replace the sole authority that He Himself exercises through His Church by the ministry of the Holy Spirit.

From the very moment that you embrace the belief that the Bible is the sole authority for all Christian belief and practice you have already erred into "another gospel", and all further teachings based upon that fundamental error are then subject to error because of that basis. This Sola Scriptura is not a Biblical doctrine at all so then the question turns back on it's author.

Answer: "Which Jesus will you trust?"

The Deuterocanonical Books of the Catholic Bible

2007-08-11T12:45:00.002-05:00

From my friend Wolseley:
And while we're on the subject of "extra-canonical books", here's a good question, posed to me by many Protestants: "If the books of the Apocrypha are supposed to be canonical, then why didn't Jesus ever quote from them?"

And the answer is, He did...and so did the Apostles:

Matthew 6:12, 14-15---"Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors; if you forgive others their transgressions, your heavenly Father will forgive you. But if you do not forgive others, neither will your heavenly father forgive your transgressions."
Sirach 28:2---"Forgive your neighbor's injustice; then when you pray, your own sins will be forgiven."

Luke 1:17 (describing John the Baptist)---"He will go before him in the spirit and power of Elijah to turn the hearts of fathers towards children and the disobediant to the understanding of the righteous, to prepare a people fit for the Lord."
Sirach 48:10---"You are destined, it is written, in time to come, to put an end to wrath before the day of the Lord, to turn back the hearts of fathers towards their sons, and to re-establish the tribes of Jacob."

Luke 1:28, 1:42---"And coming to her, he said, 'Hail, favored one! The Lord is with you!'.....Most blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb."
Judith 13:18---"Then Uzziah said to her: 'Blessed are you, daughter, by the Most High God, above all the women of the earth; and blessed be the Lord God, the Creator of heaven and earth.

Luke 1:52---"He has thrown down the rulers from their thrones, but lifted up the lowly."
Sirach 10:14---"The thrones of the arrogant God overturns, and establishes the lowly in their stead."

Luke 12:19-20---"I shall say to myself, 'Now as for you, you have so many good things stored up for many years, rest, eat, drink, be merry!' But God said to him, 'You fool, this night your life will be demanded of you; and the things you have prepared, to whom will they belong?'"
Sirach 11:19---"When he says: 'I have found rest, now I will feast on my possessions,' he does not know how long it will be till he dies and leaves them to others."

Luke 18:22---"When Jesus heard this, he said to him, 'There is still one thing left for you: sell all that you have and distribute it to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven.'"
Sirach 29:11---"Dispose of your treasure as the Most High commands, for that will profit you more than the gold."

John 3:12---"If I tell you about earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you about heavenly things?"
Wisdom 9:16---"Scarce do we guess the things on earth, and what is within our grasp we find with difficulty; but when things are in heaven, who can search them out?"

John 5:18---"For this reason the Jews tried all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the Sabbath, but he also called God his own Father, making himself equal to God."
Wisdom 2:16---"He judges us debased; he holds aloof from our paths as from things impure. He calls blest the destiny of the just and boasts that God is his Father."

John 10:29---"My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one can take them out of the Father's hand."
Wisdom 3:1---"But the souls of the just are in the hand of God, and no torment shall touch them."

Paul and James allude to them as well:

Romans 2:11---"There is no partiality with God."
Sirach 35:12---"For he is a God of justice, who knows no favorites."

Romans 9:21---"Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for a noble purpose andanother fo an ignoble one?"
Wisdom 15:7---"For truly the potter, laboriously working the soft earth, molds for our service each several article: both the vessels that serve for clean purposes, and their opposites, all alike; as to what shall be the use of each vessel of eiother class, the worker in clay is the judge."

Romans 11:24---"For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counsellor?"
Wisdom 9:13---"For what man knows God's counsel, or who can conceive what the Lord intends?"

1 Thessalonians 2:16---"(The enemies of Christ persecute us), trying to prevent us from speaking to the Gentiles that they may be saved, thus constantly filling up the measure of their sins. But the wrath of God has finally begun to come upon them."
2 Maccabees 6:14---"Thus, in dealing with other nations, the Lord patiently waits until they reach the full measure of their sins before he punishes them; but with us he has decided to deal differently"

James 1:13---"No one experiencing temptation should say, 'I am being tempted by God'; for God is not subject to temptation to evil, and he himself tempts no one."
Sirach 15:11-12---"Say not: 'It was God's doing that I fell away'; for what he hates he does not do. Say not: 'It was he who set me astray'; for he has no need of wicked man."

James 5:2-3---"Your wealth has rotted away, your clothes have become moth-eaten, your gold and silver hav corroded, and that corrosion will be a testimony against you; it will devour your flesh like a fire."
Judith 16:17---'The Lord Almighty will requite them; in the day of judgement he will punish them: he will send fire and worms into their flesh, and they shall burn and suffer forever."

Now, of course, you may say that these don't sound like exact quotes, and you'd be right; but there are thousands of allusions in the New Testament from the Old, both Deuterocanon and not, which are not exact quotes. Romans 11:34, for example, also has an allusion to Job 15:8, but ironically the allusion to Wisdom 9:13 is closer in actual wording to it than Job is. And, of course, if you want to get into loose allusions, we could expand the above list to ten times the size it is. Then there are also the cases of outright error in some New Testament quotes, such as Matthew 27:9, in which Matthew quotes "the prophet Jeremiah", when the allusion is actually found nowhere in Jeremiah but rather in Zecheriah 11:12-13.

There is also the case of some Old Testament books not being quoted by Jesus in the New Testament: He didn't quote from Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, or the Song of Solomon. And yet they are still considered to be canonical Scripture even though He did not reference them.

From my friend Randy Carson:

New Testament References to Deuterocanonical Books

Matthew 6:14-15
14 For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. 15 But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.

Sirach 28:2
Forgive your neighbor's injustice; then when you pray, your own sins will be forgiven.

+++

Luke 6:31
31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.

Tobit 4:15
Do to no one what you yourself dislike. Do not drink wine till you become drunk, nor let drunkenness accompany you on your way.

+++

Matthew 27:41-43
41 In the same way the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the elders mocked him. 42 "He saved others," they said, "but he can't save himself! He's the King of Israel! Let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in him. 43 He trusts in God. Let God rescue him now if he wants him, for he said, 'I am the Son of God.' "

Wisdom 2:15-18
15 Because his life is not like other men's, and different are his ways. 16 He judges us debased; he holds aloof from our paths as from things impure. He calls blest the destiny of the just and boasts that God is his Father. 17 Let us see whether his words be true; let us find out what will happen to him. 18 For if the just one be the son of God, he will defend him and deliver him from the hand of his foes. 19 With revilement and torture let us put him to the test that we may have proof of his gentleness and try his patience. 20 Let us condemn him to a shameful death; for according to his own words, God will take care of him." 21 These were their thoughts, but they erred; for their wickedness blinded them, 22 And they knew not the hidden counsels of God; neither did they count on a recompense of holiness nor discern the innocent souls' reward.

+++

Luke 14:13
13 But when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind,

Tobit 4:7
"Give alms from your possessions. Do not turn your face away from any of the poor, and God's face will not be turned away from you.

+++

John 10:22
22 Then came the Feast of Dedication at Jerusalem. It was winter,

1 Maccabees 4:59
Then Judas and his brothers and the entire congregation of Israel decreed that the days of the dedication of the altar should be observed with joy and gladness on the anniversary every year for eight days, from the twenty-fifth day of the month Chislev.

+++

Romans 9:20
20 But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?' "

Wisdom 12:12
12 For who can say to you, "What have you done?" or who can oppose your decree? Or when peoples perish, who can challenge you, their maker; or who can come into your presence as vindicator of unjust men?

Romans 9:21
21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?

Wisdom 15:7
For truly the potter, laboriously working the soft earth, molds for our service each several article: Both the vessels that serve for clean purposes and their opposites, all alike; As to what shall be the use of each vessel of either class the worker in clay is the judge.

+++

Romans 9:22
22 What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction?

Wisdom 12:20
20 For these were enemies of your servants, doomed to death; yet, while you punished them with such solicitude and pleading, granting time and opportunity to abandon wickedness,

+++

Romans 11:34
34 "Who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been his counselor?"

Wisdom 9:13
For what man knows God's counsel, or who can conceive what our LORD intends?

+++

2 Corinthians 9:7
7 Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.

Sirach 35:9
Give to the Most High as he has given to you, generously, according to your means.

+++

Hebrews 1:3
3 The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.

Wisdom 7:26
For she is the refulgence of eternal light, the spotless mirror of the power of God, the image of his goodness.

+++

Hebrews 11:35
35 Women received back their dead, raised to life again. Others were tortured and refused to be released, so that they might gain a better resurrection.

2 Maccabees 7:7
Do not be afraid of this executioner, but be worthy of your brothers and accept death, so that in the time of mercy I may receive you again with them."

Tradition? No way!

2007-08-11T12:28:00.000-05:00

I love those who come along and make statements like this. As if tradition has no place in Christianity. Which is simply not true.

Here's a really good example. Jude 9: But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, disputed about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a reviling judgment upon him, but said, "The Lord rebuke you."

Find this for me in the Old Testament.

Also, Jude 14: It was of these also that Enoch in the seventh generation from Adam prophesied, saying, "Behold, the Lord came with his holy myriads,
15: to execute judgment on all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness which they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."

Find this for me in the Old Testament.

Remember that this is an apostle writing this and we know that this is inspired by the Holy Spirit. If what he is quoting is from God then where is it in the Old Testament?

If it's from a source other than the Old Testament, then what does the fact that the apostle quoted it into scripture tell you about that source?

Verse 9 is from The Assumption of Moses.
Verses 14 & 15 are from The Book of Enoch.

Both are traditional Jewish writings.

Tradition is bad? Better tell St. Jude.

Ask your average n-C where they can get the names of the two guys who resisted Moses in the Old Testament. St. Paul names them in 2nd Timothy 3:8. "Now as Jannes and Mambres resisted Moses, so these also resist the truth, men corrupted in mind, reprobate concerning the faith."

Just where exactly did the Jewish scholar St. Paul get those names from to include in his Holy Spirit inspired epistle? They're not named in the canonical books of the OT.

Looks to me like another apostle used Jewish traditional non-canonical sources to teach.
From another Protestant commentator, Matthew Henry:

Quote:

In one sense we must all be ever learning, that is, growing in knowledge, following on to know the Lord, pressing forward; but these were skeptics, giddy and unstable, who were forward to imbibe every new notion, under pretense of advancement in knowledge, but never came to a right understanding of the truth as it is in Jesus. 3. He foretells the certain stop that should be put to their progress (2Ti_3:8, 2Ti_3:9), comparing them to the Egyptian magicians who withstood Moses, and who are here named, Jannes and Jambres; though the names are not to be met with in the story of the Old Testament, yet they are found in some old Jewish writers.

In fact,
Just having a set list of what books are canonical for scripture is a tradition in itself.

Do Catholics Read the Bible?

2007-08-09T11:15:00.000-05:00

How often do you read your Bible?
Daily.	238	47.50%
More than 4 times a week.	170	33.93%
Before I attend Mass.	47	9.38%
I have my own personal Bible (Specify version)	172	34.33%
I sometimes carry a Bible to church.	46	9.18%
I own several Bibles. (List please)	236	47.11%
I am a convert or revert to the Catholic Faith	139	27.74%
I am a "cradle Catholic".	151	30.14%
I am "the other" kind of Catholic	8	1.60%
I really need to read the Bible more	121	24.15%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 501.

The Posts that discuss this poll can be found at Catholic Answers Forums.

The Intercession & Communion of Saints

2007-08-06T13:25:00.004-05:00

Have you noticed Hebrews 12:1? And therefore we also having so great a cloud of witnesses over our head, laying aside every weight and sin which surrounds us, let us run by patience to the fight proposed to us:

Now I have never seen the "witnesses" (Fans) of any race that just sat stoically by, have you? How much more so would the saints in heaven intercede for us in our own races knowing of the eternal consequences of it?

Now if the New Testament says that we are surrounded by a great cloud of witnesses as we run our race for the Lord, just what do we think those folks are doing? Ever been to a race? No one sits there stoically, do they?

To me this passage makes it pretty clear that the faithful departed are not only aware of what we do (This of course by the will and power of God!), but they are actively interceding for us the way that race fans do.

I find it even harder to grasp how any soul that has won through so far as heaven or purgatory (knowing the struggles and spiritual warfare that all the "church militant" endures) would not be busily interceding for those of us running our race that has such eternal consequences. That just doesn't sound like any of the faithful believers that I have ever heard of.

These witnesses can see the race.

How much more would the saints in heaven intercede (Oh look! Evidence for the intercession of Saints!) for those of us still running our races, especially since that race has such eternal consequences?

Here's a link to a great Bible study on the Communion of Saints. Here's the basic notes.
Well worth it.

As to the charge of necromancy:
It's not necromancy, you need to understand the Communion of Saints.

If our dead brothers and sisters are not aware of us then why does Hebrews 12:1 say that we are surrounded by a great cloud of witnesses in our race for the Kingdom of God?

Romans 8:38: For I am sure that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers,
39: nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

To non-Catholics who might disagree:
So you never ask anyone else to pray for you?

When you "got saved", did anyone else pray along with and for you? By your thinking that was wrong since all you needed was to pray for yourself.

Yet what does the Word of God say? I desire therefore, first of all, that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men: (1st Timothy 2:1)

The saints pray in Heaven:
Revelation 5:8 And when he had opened the book, the four living creatures, and the four and twenty ancients fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints:

Revelation 8:3 And another angel came, and stood before the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given to him much incense, that he should offer of the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar, which is before the throne of God. 4 And the smoke of the incense of the prayers of the saints ascended up before God from the hand of the angel.

Iconoclasm: Or: Catholics Worship Graven Images NOT

2007-07-28T01:24:00.000-05:00

View Poll Results: Allegation of Catholic Idolatry
I agree: Catholics worship Mary, the saints and statues	6	3.85%
That is completely wrong and here's why.	150	96.15%
Voters: 156.

Okay let's try this again...

Welcome!
A graven image according to the context of the 1st commandment is anything that a person would construct in order to give it the worship that is due only to God. Now, that said, it could also include anything that we choose to make more important than God in our lives, such as money, career, or power. The Catechism of the Catholic Church gets into it more here: http://www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/comm1.html#GRAVEN so you can peruse that at your convenience.

Islam forbids the display of ANY images (It's called Iconoclasm, this forbidding) and the iconoclastic heresies that have arisen in Christianity were the result of Islamic influence in about the 800's. you can find that history here at New Advent: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07620a.htm

Read the graven image part of the first commandment here:
Exodus 20:1-5

"1 And the Lord spoke all these words: 2 I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. 3 Thou shalt not have strange gods before me. 4 Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, nor of those things that are in the waters under the earth. 5 Thou shalt not adore them, nor serve them: I am the Lord thy God, mighty, jealous, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me:"

It is clear that the prohibition is not iconoclastic as you preach, but based upon the intent of the one making and using the image. Since NO CATHOLIC EVER kneels down before any image to worship it we are not idolators at all. We are not stupid enough to confuse a mass of rock, plaster, metal, or any other created thing with the almighty and ever living God of the Universe

New Advent entry on Iconoclasm. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07620a.htm

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

IV. "YOU SHALL NOT MAKE FOR YOURSELF A GRAVEN IMAGE . . ."

2129 The divine injunction included the prohibition of every representation of God by the hand of man. Deuteronomy explains: "Since you saw no form on the day that the Lord spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire, beware lest you act corruptly by making a graven image for yourselves, in the form of any figure...."[66] It is the absolutely transcendent God who revealed himself to Israel. "He is the all," but at the same time "he is greater than all his works."[67] He is "the author of beauty."[68]

2130 Nevertheless, already in the Old Testament, God ordained or permitted the making of images that pointed symbolically toward salvation by the incarnate Word: so it was with the bronze serpent, the ark of the covenant, and the cherubim.[69]

2131 Basing itself on the mystery of the incarnate Word, the seventh ecumenical council at Nicaea (787) justified against the iconoclasts the veneration of icons - of Christ, but also of the Mother of God, the angels, and all the saints. By becoming incarnate, the Son of God introduced a new "economy" of images. 2132 The Christian veneration of images is not contrary to the first commandment which proscribes idols. Indeed, "the honor rendered to an image passes to its prototype," and "whoever venerates an image venerates the person portrayed in it."[70] The honor paid to sacred images is a "respectful veneration," not the adoration due to God alone:
Religious worship is not directed to images in themselves, considered as mere things, but under their distinctive aspect as images leading us on to God incarnate. The movement toward the image does not terminate in it as image, but tends toward that whose image it is.[71]

If the making of images is wrong as the Moslems and these misgiuded iconoclasts say then how do they account for God COMMANDING the making of images to adorn the top of the Ark of the Covenant and the brass serpent that Moses lifted up to save the Israelites that had sinned and which in fact is mentioned in the NT as a type of the lifting up of Christ for our sins? The temple of Solomon is described as having been adorned with all manner of images yet God was pleased to be present there and did not condemn them for it.

The "Boettner List": Fact or Fiction?

2007-07-15T20:06:00.000-05:00

By: Wolseley

Anyone is free to reproduce the following material in any form, as long as the author is given full credit for the material reproduced.

"ROMANISM" REVISITED: A FACTUAL AND HISTORICAL REFUTATION OF THE THE "BOETTNER LIST"

(Copyright 2003 by Wayne A. Ariss; all rights reserved.)

In the years since the Internet became a worldwide communications tool, many types of "bulletin board" have become popular. These are a type of forum where a topic is introduced, and others may "post" replies to the topic by typing their thoughts into the bulletin board's online system, and clicking on the "reply to topic" button on their computer screen. Their reply will then appear below the previous post, often with highlighted quotations from preceding posts, and the discussion will progress, sometimes with dozens of people joining in.

Some of these bulletin boards, naturally, are Christian discussion boards, where Christians and others can discuss topics such as theology, eschatology, doctrine, current events, and so on, from various Christian perspectives. Inevitably, the old dichotomies between Catholics and Protestants will make their appearance in these discussions, and the doctrinal positions from both sides will be endlessly debated. On boards of a generic Christian nature, or on boards that are of a primarily Protestant makeup, Catholics and Catholic doctrine will often take quite a pounding from non-Catholics---but I can attest from personal experience that the major differences have little to do with what Catholics actually teach and believe, but misunderstandings, misrepresentations, and old canards which sometimes go all the way back to the 16th century.

Having spent years now discussing topics on these Internet bulletin boards, I have seen various claims and charges leveled at the Catholic Church, sometimes over and over again. One of the most common sources for this material consists of a familiar "laundry list" of charges against Catholicism, which I have seen posted literally dozens of times---either in part or in whole---usually verbatim, and tossed out as "proof" of the errors of Catholicism. Although the author of this list is not often identified, anyone familiar with the material will immediately recognize it as the work of one of the 20th century's premier anti-Catholic screedists, Loraine Boettner.

Boettner was born in Missouri in 1901, and graduated with a Master's degree in Theology from Princeton Theological Seminary in 1929. He held a variety of teaching positions around the country, and was an eminent and well-respected Reformed theologian; he died in 1990. Boettner wrote several books, including The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination, Studies in Theology, The Millennium, Immortality, and A Harmony of the Gospels. Unfortunately, what he seems to be the most remembered for was his 1962 book Roman Catholicism, published by the Reformed and Presbyterian Publishing Company of Philipsburg, New Jersey.

On pages 7, 8, and 9 of Roman Catholicism, Boettner included a "list" of claims against the Catholic Church---the very same "list" that is repeatedly posted, verbatim, on the Internet by those who disagree with Catholicism and who wish to point out its "errors". Subtitled "Some Roman Catholic Heresies and Inventions, and the dates of their adoption over a period of 1650 years", the grouping contains 44 items running from 300 AD to 1950 AD, with the addition of one item from 1965 in subsequent printings. Thus we have the source of the infamous "Boettner List", as it is sometimes known.

For each item, Boettner first spells out the "heresy" or "invention" he claims the Church concocted, which is then followed by the date when it supposedly appeared. My purpose in this treatise is to refute each one of the items on Boettner's list, both by correcting Boettner when he misrepresents the material in his item, and by providing primary source documents---or of materials which quote the primary source documents---that give the actual date of the practice in question, and thereby illustrating that the practices Boettner condemns actually existed in the Church much earlier than he claims. They were not "invented" at very late dates---indeed, many of them existed from the Patristic Era, or at least much earlier than Boettner would have us believe.

This is not meant to be an all-encompassing treatise, nor is it meant to be a deep scholarly endeavor. It is merely meant to highlight the wild inaccuracies in Boettner's chronology, and let the reader decide for him or herself whether a man who manages to miss the mark so many times has any credibility in other areas as well. I do not present this as a condemnation of Boettner, or of his Reformed theological works or viewpoints; I am concerned with Roman Catholicism alone, and the claims which he makes against the Catholic Church which he provides early on in the book. Whatever the merits of his other works may be, I hope to show that in Roman Catholicism, Boettner truly has little to say with any factual credibility.

I have employed a variety of sources, making heavy use of the old Catholic Encyclopedia; but not all of my sources are Catholic, and all of the works I have used contain further cites from other works in which the material may be found. It remains only for the reader to locate the references I have provided to corroborate my sources and to do his own research to prove, or attempt to disprove, my findings.

1. Prayers for the dead, began about....300 AD.

The first Scriptural mention of prayers for the dead occurs in the Deuterocanonical book of 2 Maccabees, chapter 12, verses 39 through 46, in which Judas Maccabeus and his men pray for their fallen comrades, that God may forgive the sins of the dead men. 2 Maccabees was written sometime after 124 BC [1], which makes Boettner's date more than 400 years off.

Examples of Christians offering supplication for the dead are found in grave scripts such as the Epitaph of Abercius, the Bishop of Hierapolis, written in 180 AD. On this grave marker, Abercius asks all who may read his marker to pray for him [2].

Other examples can be found in the works of the Christian apologist Tertullian, who lived approximately from 155 AD to 250 AD. In his work The Crown (211 AD), Tertullian mentions Christians offering sacrifices for the dead on the anniversary of their deaths [3], and makes a similar reference in his work Monogamy (213 AD), where he mentions widows offering prayers and sacrifices for their deceased husbands [4].

In even the very latest of these two examples, Boettner is still nearly a hundred years off.

[1] Introduction notes to the book of 2 Maccabees, New American Bible. New York: Catholic Book Publishing Company, 1969; pg 546.

[2] William Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Volume 1. Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1970, pg 78.

[3] Jurgens, pg 151.

[4] Jurgens, pg 158.

2. Making the sign of the cross....300.

Again we go back to Tertullian's The Crown of 211 AD: "In all the occupations of our daily lives, we furrow our foreheads with the Sign" [5]. This makes Boettner's date 89 years off.

[5] Jurgens, pg 151.

3. Wax candles, about....320.

The extant Roman record of the execution of Cyprian of Carthage (Acta Proconsularia) indicates that his funeral included the use of candles and torches; this occurred in September of 258, more than 60 years before Boettner's date [6].

[6] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 3, "Candles". New York: Encyclopedia Press, Inc., 1907; pg 246.

Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, "Cyprian of Carthage", pg 588.

Patrick Hamell, Handbook of Patrology. New York: Alba House, 1968; pg 75.

4. Veneration of angels and saints, and use of images....375.

The veneration (or respect) paid to angels can be found in the First Apology of Justin Martyr (148 AD). In Chapter VI, he states that "the host of the other good angels who follow and are made like to Him...we worship and adore" [7].

Likewise, Athenagoras of Athens wrote in Chapter X of the Supplication For the Christians (c.177 AD): "Nor is our teaching in what relates to the divine nature confined to these points [the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit]; but we recognize also a multitude of angels and ministers" [8]. It will be noted in both these examples that Boettner is off by approximately 200 years.

The earliest reference to veneration of the saints can be found in The Martyrdom of Polycarp, a document dating from around 155 AD: "Christ we adore, because He is the Son of God. To the martyrs, on the other hand, we offer the love which is due to disciples and ministers of the Lord, on account of their unsurpassable devotion to their King and Lord" [9]. This again makes Boettner's date 200 years off.

Insofar as images go, both Exodus 25:18 and Numbers 21:8 mention images being constructed at God's command. Boettner apparently gets his date of 375 AD from Basil the Great, who writes in his treatise The Holy Spirit from that same year that honor paid to an image is honor paid to God Himself [10]. Basil appears to be merely offering a definition of the use of images, however, since images go as far back as the late 2nd century; archaeological discoveries have revealed paintings on the walls of Roman catacombs depicting Christ, the saints, and scenes from Scripture, which gradually developed into frescoes, then mosaics, and finally bas-relief and statues [11]. Eusebius, who lived from 263 to 340 AD, described a statue he had personally seen, depicting Christ healing the woman of Caesarea Philippi (History of the Church, VII, xviii; 300-325 AD). All of these examples place Boettner anywhere from 50 to 200 years off the mark.

[7] http://www.ccel.org/fathers/2/

[8] ibid.

[9] Maxwell Staniforth, Early Christian Writings. New York: Penguin Books, 1968; pg 131.

Ludwig Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma. Rockford, IL: TAN Books, 1960; pp 318-319.

[10] Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers. Volume 2, pg 18.

[11] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 3, "Catacombs", pp 422-424.

Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 7, "Images", pp 665-668.

5. The Mass, as a daily celebration....394.

The Mass, in the earliest years of the Church, appears to have been celebrated on Sunday only, but it was gradually extended to a daily celebration by the time of Augustine (d.430 AD). This, however, was by no means universal, being confined to specific geographical areas until the end of the 500's AD. In some places, priests began to celebrate multiple daily Masses, until Pope Alexander II (d.1073) decreed that priests should content themselves with one or at the most two Masses, one being a requiem Mass, and then only if necessary [12]. What remains unclear is why Boettner felt this to be something sinister, to be labeled a heresy or an invention.

[12] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 2; "Bination", pp 568-569.

6. Beginning of the exaltation of Mary, the term "Mother of God" first applied to her by the Council of Ephesus....431.

The Third Ecumenical Council, held at Ephesus in 431 AD, did indeed declare that Mary was the Mother of God. However, Mary bore this title long before Ephesus; Ignatius of Antioch states in his Epistle to the Ephesians (110 AD): "For our God, Jesus Christ, was conceived by Mary in accord with God's plan" [13]. Irenaeus of Lyons writes in Against Heresies (180-199 AD), "The Virgin Mary...being obedient to His word, received from an angel the glad tidings that she would bear God" [14]. Finally Ephraim the Syrian (d.373 AD) composed a hymn with the words "This Virgin became a Mother while preserving her virginity....and the handmaid and work of His wisdom became the Mother of God" [15]. In these three examples, Boettner is off by 321 years, 232 years, and 58 years, respectively.

[13] Jurgens, Vol. 1. pg 18.

[14] ibid., pg 101.

[15] ibid., pg 312.

7. Priests began to dress differently than laymen....500.

Boettner here is half right. In the 6th century the manner of dress between clergy and laity was different; however, it wasn't the clergy that changed and began dressing differently, it was the laity.

In the early years of the Church, clergy dressed no differently from the people around them, and indeed, priests were chastised for dressing in any manner that brought attention to themselves (letter of Pope Celestine to the bishops of Gaul, 428 AD; Council of Gangra, 340 AD). This seems to have remained the case up until the 500's AD.

By then, the Western Roman Empire had collapsed, and the influx of northern Germanic tribesmen that came into Italy had begun to mix with the native Roman population. The clergy retained the common manner of dress that Romans had always worn---the long tunic and a toga or cloak; the laypeople, however, began to quickly adopt the style of dress of the Germans, being a short tunic, breeches, and a mantle.

A local council in Portugal in 572 and another in Germany in 742 mention clerical attire, but only insofar that clerics should be seemly attired and decently covered. The first actual indication of specific clerical dress comes in 875 AD, when Pope John VIII instructs the Archbishops of York and Canterbury to make sure that their clergy was wearing specific ecclesiastical attire. Universal enactments regarding clerical attire came in 1215, 1589, 1624, and finally 1725, when Pope Benedict XIII decreed that a cleric wearing lay garments was an infraction of the most serious order [16]. Boettner is thus off by a margin of 375 years in the earliest example.

[16] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 4; "Costume, Clerical". pp 419-420.

8. Extreme Unction....526.

Extreme Unction (or the Anointing of the Sick) is mentioned in the Epistle of James, 5:13-15, written sometime between 60 and 100 AD. In light of this fact, how Boettner came up with the idea that the Catholic Church "invented" it in 526 AD is a total mystery.

9. The doctrine of Purgatory, established by Gregory I....593.

The concept of sins being remitted after death is found in the Deuterocanonical book of 2 Maccabees, 12:38-46, which was probably written about 124 BC. This in itself makes Boettner more than 700 years off the mark, but the Catholic concept of Purgatory still pre-dates Boettner's claim by hundreds of years; for further examples, see #1 of this list under "Prayers for the dead".

10. Latin language, used in prayer and worship, imposed by Gregory I....600.

Latin was, of course, the language of the ruling culture in Western Europe at the time of Christianity's inception, being the Roman Empire. As early as 180 AD, the Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs mentions that the Gospels and Epistles of Paul had been translated into Latin, and pagan Romans such as Arnobius dismissed such translations as being of a trivial, common, and vulgar form of Latin [17].

The de facto "official" language of the Church appears to have been Greek up until the 3rd century, when official Papal documents began appearing in Latin. This was probably due to the overwhelming majority of Christians being located in the eastern, or Greek-speaking, half of the Empire. Paul, for example, in the 16th chapter of Romans, greets more than twenty people by name, and only six of the names are Latin, the remainder being Greek. However, Latin began to slowly gain more usage, especially in the Roman provinces of Africa, and moving northward. By the 4th century, Jerome had translated the Scriptures into Latin, and the liturgy was being celebrated almost exclusively in Latin in the western parts of the Empire [18].

Although there is no exact date when Latin took precedence in the western Church, virtually all authorities agree that it was during the period from the early 3rd to late 4th centuries. That, along with the lack of evidence of a definitive decree from Gregory I stipulating the use of Latin in his liturgical reforms after 590, places Boettner in a chronological error of several hundred years.

[17] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 9; "Latin, Ecclesiastical", pg 20.

[18] Peter Stravinskas, Our Sunday Visitor's Catholic Encyclopedia; "Latin". Huntington, IN: OSV Publishing, Inc., 1991, pp 575-576.

11. Prayers directed to Mary, dead saints and angels, about....600.

The most complete ancient prayer which was addressed to Mary asked for her intercession in times of difficulty and danger; entitled Sub Tuum Praesidium, or "Under Your Protection", it dates from approximately 250 AD, making Boettner's date approximately 350 years off [19]. Besides this, Marian devotions flourished after the Council of Ephesus in 431 AD, nearly 200 years before Boettner's date [20].

For prayers directed to saints and angels, see Number 4 above.

[19] Mark Miravalle, Introduction to Mary. Santa Barbara, CA: Queenship Publishing Co., 1993, pg 27.

[20] ibid., pg 28.

12. Title of Pope, or universal bishop, given to Boniface III by emperor Phocas....607.

Boettner apparently wishes to give the impression that the office of Pope was invented by the Byzantine Emperor Phocas in 607, and conferred upon Boniface. The actual facts are not so simplistic.

To begin with, the title of the Bishop of Rome---Pontifex Maximus---is a term meaning "bridge-builder", which the Popes inherited from governmental functionaries of the pagan Romans. "Pope" is merely a derivation of a Latin word meaning "father"; and use of that term for various clerics is also found in both the Orthodox and Coptic churches.

Tertullian, writing in his treatise Modesty (written in 220 AD), cites a quote from "a pontiff---sovereign, of course---that is, a bishop of bishops" [21]. This places use and understanding of the term 387 years before Boettner's claim. Two other instances of the term in the definition of a patriarch are found applied to the Bishop of Carthage in 250 AD [22], and to the Bishop of Alexandria in 320 AD [23]. However, the Bishop of Rome was always held to be Head of the entire Church, (as attested to by Ignatius, Hermas, Dionysius, Hegesippus, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Cyprian, and others).

Shortly before Boniface III was elected, a dispute had arisen about the way that Cyriacus, the Patriarch of Constantinople, was using the term "ecumenical patriarch"; the manner in which Cyriacus was employing the title seemed to minimize the proper office of the Pope as universal head of the Church.

Once Boniface had been elected Pope, Emperor Phocas issued a decree---aimed directly at Cyriacus---which stipulated that the See of Rome was the head see of all the churches, and that the title "Universal Bishop" belonged only to the Bishop of Rome [24]. There was imperial precedent for this action, since Emperor Justinian (527-565 AD) had issued a similar acknowledgment some eighty years before [25].

The wrangling over jurisdiction between Rome and Constantinople would continue for another 400 years, and would eventually contribute to the final East-West schism in 1054 AD; but the examples provided here more than dispose of Boettner's claim that the title of Pope was "invented" by the Byzantine Emperor in 607 AD.

[21] Jurgens, Vol. 1, pg 159.

[22] ibid., pg 227.

[23] ibid., pg 277.

[24] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 2; "Boniface III". pg 600.

J.N.D. Kelly, The Oxford Dictionary of Popes. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pg 68.

[25] ibid.

13. Kissing the pope's foot, began with pope Constantine....709.

This is a practice which was absorbed from the Roman emperors; Roman court officials kissed the Emperor's foot as a sign of respect for the head of the Empire. In like manner, kissing the foot of the Pope is a sign of respect for the head of the Christian Church, not the man himself---or, as Pope Innocent III described it, it is an act of "reverence due to the Supreme Pontiff as the Vicar of Him Whose feet were kissed by the woman who was a sinner".

Boettner is incorrect to say that the practice began with Pope Constantine, since there is at least one earlier extant example of Emperor Justin kissing the foot of Pope John I (523-526 AD) some 180 years before [26].

[26] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 8; "Kiss", pg 665.

14. Temporal power of the popes, conferred by Pepin, king of the Franks....750.

During the years 741 through 747, the Frankish kingdoms that had been the domain of Charles Martel were in a state of rapid change and upheaval. By 750, Pepin the Short was in a position to take charge of the kingdom and establish stability. However, having been educated by Christian monks, and being well acquainted with St. Boniface, Pepin sought advice from Pope Zacharias as to whether he should take charge of the kingdom or not.

Pope Zacharias replied that since Pepin held de facto power over the Franks, it was better, indeed, that he should take charge of the kingdom. This confirmation disposed of the last Merovingian claimant to the throne (Childeric III), and Pepin was crowned king and anointed as such (by Boniface, acting as the Pope's representative) the next year as Soissons [27].

In light of this examination of Frankish history, it can be seen that Boettner essentially has his facts reversed: Pepin didn't confer temporal power on the Pope; rather, the Pope confirmed the temporal power of Pepin.

[27] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 11; "Pepin the Short", pp 662-663.

Kelly, pg 90.

15. Worship of the cross, images and relics, authorized in....786.

Boettner appears to get this date from the 2nd Council of Nicaea, even though he is off by one year (the council actually took place in 787). The council stipulated that the Cross should receive an "adoration of honor" [28}. However, the veneration of the Cross is mentioned as far back as 380 AD, in documents such as the Peregrinatio Etheriae, making Boettner's claim 400 years off the mark [29].

Veneration of the relics of saints is mentioned much earlier than Boettner's claim; The Martyrdom of St. Polycarp, written in 155 AD, mentions that the bones of Polycarp, "more precious than costly gems and finer than gold", were carefully gathered up after his execution, and put "in a suitable place" [30].

For more on veneration of images, see Number 4 above.

[28] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 4; "Cross", pg 524.

[29] ibid., pg 530.

[30] Jurgens, Vol. 1, pg 31.

16. Holy water, mixed with a pinch of salt and blessed by a priest....850.

The Apostolic Constitutions, a document dating back to the 5th century, attributes the use of holy water to the Apostle St. Matthew; likewise, two more ancient documents called the Pontifical of Serapion of Thmuis and the Testamentum Domini contain liturgical formulas for the blessing of both oil and water at Mass.

The Council of Constantinople in 691 AD makes mention of the blessing of holy water at each church at the beginning of each lunar month. In any event, Boettner is off by anywhere from 400 to 159 years, depending on the source cited [31].

[31] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 7; "Holy Water", pp 432-433.

17. Worship of St. Joseph....890.

All Catholic saints are "worshiped", of course, but only in the sense of dulia, or veneration, and not latria, the actual worship given only to God. In the case of St. Joseph, he was venerated by the Copts as early as the start of the 300's AD; and an oratory was dedicated to him in a basilica erected by St. Helena around the same general time [32]. The apocryphal work The History of Joseph was widespread in the East from the 4th to the 7th centuries, although his cult was not widespread in the West until the 15th century, when his feast was introduced into the Roman calendar in 1479 [33].

In either event, Boettner has missed the mark by a margin of approximately 600 years in both directions.

[32] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 8, "Joseph"; pg 505.

[33] John J. Delaney, Dictionary of Saints. New York: Doubleday, 1980, pg 330.

18. College of Cardinals established....927.

At the Council of Rome, held in 499 AD, Pope Symmachus divided the City into various parochial units, each under the control of a priest known as a cardinale. Pope John VIII published a constitution between 873 and 882 which specifically mentions these cardinal priests, or presbyteri cardinales [34]. The office gradually developed into what we now have, meaning the body of higher clerics who meet to elect the next Pontiff upon the death of the reigning Pope; the actual term collegium comes into general use after 1150 AD [35]. The College of Cardinals was never so much an establishment as it was a development; but in any case, Boettner has again erred by anywhere from 200 to 500 years in either direction.

[34] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 3, "Cardinal", pg 333.

[35] ibid., pg 340.

Baptism of bells, instituted by pope John XIII....965.

The phrase "baptism" of bells has been in use for hundreds of years, but it was a "pop" usage, which was never instituted by the Church. The actual practice involved the blessing of the bell and application of holy water, the same way that the Church blesses any object which is devoted to the service of God, i.e., an altar, a church, sacred vessels, vestments, vehicles, etc. In no way is the blessing of a bell (or any other object) the same thing as the Sacrament of Baptism, in which a new child of Christ is washed clean of original sin.

The blessing of bells is mentioned in documents dating at least as far back as Egbert, Archbishop of York, in the mid-700's AD; thus we see that Boettner is about 200 years off [36].

[36] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 2, "Bells", pp 420-421.

20. Canonization of dead saints, first by pope John XV....995.

Since veneration of Christian martyrs is mentioned by Eusebius, Augustine, Cyprian, and Cyril of Alexandria (see also Number 4 above), not to mention the religious celebration of the day of St. Polycarp's martyrdom (155 AD), the veneration of saints has been around since the earliest days of the Church. Usually the bishop of a specific diocese would promulgate the veneration of a local martyr; when this veneration was confirmed by the Pope, it then became universal [37].

The specific instance mentioned by Boettner here, however, was the canonization of St. Ulrich, the Bishop of Augsburg (890-973). Pope John XV announced the canonization---much in the same way that any local bishop might---at a synod held at the Lateran Palace on 31 January 993, and also published the same in a bull to the German and French bishops dated 3 February [38].

This is the first time that a Pope solemnly canonized a saint, so Boettner is half right; however, it is not the first instance of a saint being recognized as officially canonized, as we have seen, although this is clearly what Boettner meant to imply. The striking part is that even when Boettner is partially correct, he still can't seem to get his dates right, since he states this event took place in 995, when it was actually 993, making him two years off the mark.

[37] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 2, "Beatification and Canonization", pp 364-365.

[38] ibid., Vol. 8, "John XV", pg 428.

21. Fasting on Fridays and during Lent....998.

Fasting on Fridays is mentioned as far back as the Didache (140 AD) [39], thus rendering Boettner more than 800 years off the mark. As for the Lenten fast, Athanasius, writing in his Festal Letters of 331 AD, stated that the faithful should fast for 40 days during Lent [40]. This makes Boettner 667 years off the mark. Canon 69 of the Apostolic Canons, which pre-date 341 AD, admonishes bishops, clergy, and laity to fast during Lent; Canon 56 of the Trullan Synod of 692 AD contains similar regulations [41]. Here Boettner is anywhere from 657 years to 306 years off.

[39] Maxwell Staniforth (trans.), Early Christian Writings. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin Books, 1968, pg 194.

[40] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 9, "Lent", pg 152.

[41] ibid., Vol. 5, "Fast", pg 791.

22. The Mass, developed gradually as a sacrifice, attendance made obligatory in the 11th century.

The Didache, written somewhere around 140 AD, mentions that Christians should assemble on the Lord's Day for the Eucharist, but that they should confess their sins beforehand, so that their "sacrifice may be a pure one" [42]; this sacrificial language is echoed layer by both Ignatius and Irenaeus. Thus, Boettner's "gradual development" occurred, rather precipitously, within 50 years of the death of the Apostle John, and not over a course of ten centuries as he implies.

As for obligatory attendance at Mass, the Council of Elvira in 300 AD decreed temporary excommunication as a corrective measure for anyone who missed Mass three weeks in a row [43], 700 years before Boettner's date.

[42] Staniforth, Early Christian Writings, pg 197.

[43] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 14, "Sunday", pg 335.

23. Celibacy of the priesthood, decreed by pope Gregory VII (Hildebrand)....1079.

Celibacy, of course, is mentioned as an ideal by St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 7, although not as a mandatory injunction. Several early Fathers, including Tertullian, Origen, Eusebius, and Epiphanius appear to have viewed the practice favorably as well; but it was the local Council of Elvira in Spain (295-302 AD) where celibacy was first imposed on bishops, priests, and deacons. The practice was held as the ideal for clergy, but was adopted---or imposed---piecemeal in various locations until it was decreed Church-wide for all clergy by the 1st Lateran Council in 1123 [44]. Boettner is thus off by 700 years in the first instance and 40 years in the second.

In the case of Gregory VII, he did indeed seek to strengthen the practice of clerical celibacy, but it was in two Lenten synods in 1074 and 1075, not in 1079 as Boettner asserts [45]. The second of these synods forbade married priests from saying Mass and laypeople from attending Masses celebrated by married priests [46]. Boettner is thus still off the mark by a margin of four to five years.

[44] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 3, "Celibacy", pp 483-486.

[45] Kelly, Oxford Dictionary of Popes, pg 155.

[46] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 3, pg 486.

24. The Rosary, mechanical praying with beads, invented by Peter the Hermit....1090.

The Rosary had a long and slow development, going back to knots tied in cords and holes drilled in pieces of wood, both dating from the 300's AD. The current prayer, and system of a crucifix and 59 beads, appears to be the result of the devotion as it was practiced in the 12th century; in this state of evolution, it was popularized by St. Dominic Guzman (1170-1221) and later by Alan de Rupe, around 1470 [47].

Peter the Hermit was one of the popular promoters of the 1st Crusade. Along with Walter the Penniless, he helped organize volunteers for the Crusade in 1096, and died in 1115, but there is no body of evidence indicating that he "invented" the Rosary devotion as it is presently known [48].

[47] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 13, "Rosary", pp 184-186.

Matthew Bunson, Encyclopedia of Catholic History. Huntington, IN: Our Sunday Visitor Publishing, 1995; "Rosary", pg 733.

25. The Inquisition, instituted by the Council of Verona....1184.

Although there were both ecclesiastical and secular investigative bodies and tribunals which dealt with various heresies throughout the first 1200 years of Christian history [49], the actual first Papal Inquisition was established by Gregory IX in 1233 to investigate the Waldensian and Albigensian heresies; this was under the auspices of the Pope, as distinguished from episcopal bodies under the control of diocesan bishops [50].

Boettner is off by nearly 50 years for the establishment of the Papal Inquisition, and he is likewise inaccurate in calling the convocation at Verona in 1184 a "council"; more properly, it was a synod, and while severe measures were pronounced against the Cathari, Waldensians, and Arnoldists, the synod was a cooperative measure between Pope Lucius III and Emperor Frederick I, rather than an established Inquisition of later years [51].

[49] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 8, "Inquisition", pp 26-30.

[50] Stravinskas, OSV's Catholic Encyclopedia, "Inquisition", pg 512.

Kelly, Dictionary of Popes, pg 190.

[51] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 9, "Lucius III", pg 412.

26. Sale of Indulgences....1190.

Indulgences, or the remission (through the ministry of the Church) of temporal punishment due for forgiven sins, was bestowed upon the Apostles by Christ in John 20:23, and was thereafter mentioned by Tertullian (Ad Martyres, c.200 AD), St. Cyprian (Letter to His Clergy, 250 AD), and St. Basil (Letter to Amphilochius), 374 AD), as well as the Councils of Ancyra (314 AD), Laodicea (320 AD), Nicaea (325 AD), and Arles (320 AD) [52]. The abuse of indulgences has popped up from time to time throughout Church history, and has been condemned by the Church. The English Council of Clovesho in 747 AD sternly rebuked those who tried to hire penitents to perform austerities for them by means of proxy, with the indulgence thus gained supposedly going to the client of the penitent [53].

Boettner neglects to specify where he gets his date of 1190, which he apparently pulls out of the air at random; even later in his own book (pages 262-267) he blithely skips over this specific date. He is, however, in the general ballpark---the 12th century was about the time that indulgence "sales" gained popularity. Pope Urban II granted a plenary indulgence to all participants of the 1st Crusade (1095), and after this, "sales" came into prominence, the monies thus gained being used for such projects as building churches, roads, and bridges, care for the poor and the ill, or education of the young. William of Auvergne, the Bishop of Paris (1228-1249) justified these actions as acts of Christian charity [54].

[52] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 7, "Indulgences", pg 785.

[53] ibid., pg 786.

[54] H.R. Loyn, editor, The Middle Ages: A Concise Encyclopedia. London: Thames and Hudson, Ltd., 1989; pg 1

27. Transubstantiation, proclaimed by pope Innocent III....1215.

As a concept, transubstantiation can be traced back at least to Tertullian, who states "He took bread, offered it to His disciples and made it into His body by saying, 'This is My body'" (Against Marcion 212 AD); likewise Cyril of Jerusalem says "Once at Cana in Galilee by a mere nod He changed water into wine; should it now be incredible that He changes wine into blood?" (Catechetical Lectures [Mystagogic], 350 AD) [55].

As a term, transubstantiation was first used by the theologians Magister Roland about 1150, Stephen of Tournai about 1160, and Peter Comestor about 1170 [56]; this terminology was then used by the 1st Lateran Council in 1215, which is apparently where Boettner got his date from. As can be seen, however, Boettner is off by anywhere from 865 to 1003 years in the first instance, and anywhere from 45 to 65 years in the second.

[55] Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, pp 381-382.

[56] ibid., pg 379.

28. Auricular confession of sins to a priest instead of to God, instituted by pope Innocent III, in Lateran Council....1215.

Cyprian of Carthage, in The Lapsed (251 AD) speaks of penitents "making confession of their crime", and of "having their conscience purged in the ceremony and at the hand of the priest" [57]. Likewise, Ambrose, in Penance (387-390 AD) writes "Christ granted [the power of penance] to the Apostles and from the Apostles it has been transmitted to the office of priests" [58]. From this, it can be seen that Innocent III certainly did not "institute" the practice of auricular confession to a priest; in fact, it existed 964 years before Boettner's claim.

[57] Jurgens, Vol. 1, pg 218.

[58] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vil. 11, "Penance", pg 620.

29. Adoration of the wafer (Host), decreed by pope Honorius III....1220.

The implication here, of course, is that Catholics worship a piece of bread. Catholics do not worship bread, they worship Jesus Christ, Whose flesh and blood the bread has beome. The fact that Christians considered the bread and wine to be transformed into the flesh and blood of Christ can be found as far back as Ignatius of Antioch, who wrote in his Epistle to the Romans (110 AD), "I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the Bread of God, which is the Flesh of Jesus Christ...and for drink I desire His Blood" [59].

As for the practice of perpetual adoration of Christ in the Blessed Sacrament, the first recorded instance took place in 1226, although the practice did not become widespread until the 15th century [60]. From these examples it seems that Boettner erred more than 1000 years one way and about 200 years the other way.

[59] Jurgens, Vol. 1, pg 22.

[60] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 1, "Adoration", pg 153.

30. Bible forbidden to laymen, placed on the Index of Forbidden books by the Council of Valencia....1229.

The Index of Forbidden Books was a gradual development. The first general listing of proscribed books was under Pope Paul III in 1542. The Inquisition had an expanded list by 1559, which was intended to be world-wide, and was also the first list to bear the title "Index". The "Index Tridentinus" was issued by the Council of Trent in 1564, and in 1571, Pope Pius V established a specific Congregation of the Index, which remained in effect until 1917 [61]. Since the earliest date for the formation of the Index is 1542, it would be rather difficult to place the Bible (or any other book, for that matter) on it in 1229, which is more than 300 years before the Index existed. This is Boettner's first blunder.

The 1962 edition of Boettner's tome opines that this proscription of the Bible took place at the Council of Valencia; however, as Karl Keating points out, there has never been a Catholic church council held in Valencia, Spain---neither local, regional, nor ecumenical. This is Boettner's second blunder [62]. Keating likewise explains that even if there had been a council in Valencia, it couldn't have been held in 1229, since in 1229, Valencia was under the control of the Muslims, who were extremely unlikely to allow a Christian church council to be held in their territory; a quick check of any encyclopedia or historical atlas will bear this out [63]. This is Boettner's third blunder, and as may be seen, his chronology has completely missed the mark along with both his history and his geography.

[61] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 3, "Censorship of Books", pg 521.

Stravinskas, OSV's Catholic Encyclopedia, "Index of Forbidden Books", pg 507.

[62] Karl Keating, Catholicism and Fundamentalism. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1988; pg 45.

[63] The Columbia-Viking Desk Encyclopedia, Vol. 2, "Valencia". New York: Viking Press, 1953; pg 1310.

Hammond Illustrated Family Atlas, Vol. 2; Map, "Europe, c.1200 AD". Glen Cove, NY: Bobley Publishing Corporation, 1969; pg H-15.

31. The Scapular, invented by Simon Stock, and English monk....1251.

Boettner finally has something right. The brown scapular of Our Lady of Mount Carmel is, according to pious tradition, based on a vision had by Simon Stock in Cambridge, England, on July 16, 1251. In the vision, the Virgin Mary gave Simon a scapular, with the explanation that it was a "badge of her confraternity" [64].

Scapulars have always been associated with "third orders", in which lay people affiliate themselves with one religious order or another, pledging themselves to live good Christian lives; so what Boettner found so awful about this remains a mystery.

However, Simon Stock's vision falls into the category of "private revelation", which means that even when approved by the Church, it is not a required belief of any Catholic by any means, remaining entirely the option of the individual believer. The so-called "scapular promise" given to Simon Stock is likewise nothing more than private revelation, and is certainly not a doctrine, much less a dogma, of the Church.

[64] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 13, "Scapular", pg 511.

32. Cup forbidden to the people at communion by Council of Constance....1414.

Instances of Holy Communion under the auspices of bread alone can be found as far back as the Council of Laodicea in the 4th century and the 2nd Council of Trullo in the 7th, both of which specified Communion under the species of bread alone during all fast days in Lent; this makes Boettner about 1000 years off in the earliest example [65]. After this, the gradual removal of the Sacred Blood from laypeople was introduced, apparently for a variety of reasons; one of them was the Church's desire to reinforce the Church's authority against heretics and the Reformers, who rejected the idea that Communion could be received under only one species. This idea they enforced on their own, apart from the authority of the Church [66]. Another reason was to prevent spillage of the Sacred Blood, and another was to abolish the practice of self-communication by means of intinction [67].

Constance did indeed impose restricting the Sacred Blood from laymen (not in 1414 as Boettner asserts, but a year later in 1415, at the 13th session of the council), but this was a reiteration of previous rulings, including the councils above, the monastic rule of Columbanus (in which the Blood was restricted from novices), and the Council of Lambeth in 1281. It was by no means a new, novel introduction [68].

[65] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, "Communion", pg 177.

[66] ibid., pg 175.

[67] ibid., pg 178.

[68] ibid., pp 177-178.

33. Purgatory proclaimed as a dogma by the Council of Florence....1439.

As was mentioned in #1 and #9 of this list, the concept of Purgatory pre-dates the Catholic Church, and the doctrine has been around since the 2nd century; the assembled bishops at Florence merely defined the existing doctrine; they did not invent it.

34. The doctrine of the seven sacraments affirmed....1439.

Seven sacraments are mentioned by Peter Lombard (who died in 1164) in the fourth Book of Sentences; seven are likewise numbered by Otto of Bamberg in 1139; the Council of London in 1237; and the Council of Lyons in 1274, all of which pre-date Florence [69]. Boettner is thus off by 300 years in his claim of when the seven sacraments were affirmed.

[69] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 13, "Sacraments", pp 299-300.

35. The Ave Maria (part of the last half was completed 50 years later and approved by pope Sixtus V at the end of the 16th century)....1508.

If Boettner is asserting that the "Hail Mary" prayer was invented in 1508, that is nonsense, since the first part of the Hail Mary is found in Scripture; Luke 1:28 finds Gabriel saluting Mary with "Hail, favored one! The Lord is with you", followed by Luke 1:42, in which Elizabeth continues, "Most blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb". The prayer remained thus until the 15th century, when the words "Jesus Christ, amen" came into common usage.

The prayer as we now know it first appears in the "Calendar of Shepherds", which was published in France in 1493; a book written by Girolamo Savonarola in 1495 also contains the entire prayer as we know it, minus the word "us" [70]. Thus, Boettner is off by 15 years for the "first half" of his chronology for the end of the prayer, and by 65 years for the "second half".

[70] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 7, "Hail Mary", pp 111-112.

36. Jesuit order founded by Loyola....1534.

Ignatius Loyola did indeed found the Society of Jesus in 1534, although the Society did not receive Papal approbation until 1540. Why Boettner seems to feel that the Jesuit Order (as opposed to the Benedictines, Dominicans, Passionists, Franciscans, etc., whom he never mentions) is a "heresy" or an "invention" is puzzling, especially in light of the fact that his own Calvinist denomination did not exist prior to 1536.

37. Tradition declared of equal authority with the Bible by the Council of Trent....1545.

None other than the Apostle Paul warned about the importance of Tradition, or the oral teachings of the Apostles (1 Corinthians 11:2, 2 Thessalonians 3:6); and he equated Tradition with written Scripture (2 Thessalonians 2:15). Trent re-confirmed the authority and equality of Apostolic Tradition with Scripture in the face of the Reformation, which denied the inspiration and authority of Tradition---along with every doctrine it contained which the Reformers disagreed with. The view of the early Christians, however, is borne out in texts such as these:

"What if the Apostles had not in fact left writings to us? Would it not be necessary to follow the order of tradition, which was handed down to those to whom they entrusted the churches?" (Irenaeus of Lyons; Against Heresies, 3,4,1; 180 AD) [71].

"The teaching of the Church has indeed been handed down through an order of succession from the Apostles, and remains in the churches even to the present time. That alone is to be believed as the truth which is in no way at variance with ecclesiastical and apostolic tradition." (Origen; Fundamental Doctrines, 1, Preface, 2; 220 AD) [72].

"Of the dogmas and kerygmas preserved in the Church, some we possess from written teaching and others we receive from the tradition of the Apostles, handed on to us in mystery. In respect to piety both are of the same force." (Basil the Great; The Holy Spirit, 27,66; 375 AD) [73].

"It is needful also to make use of Tradition; for not everything can be gotten from Sacred Scripture. The holy Apostles handed down some things in the Scriptures, other things in Tradition." (Epiphanius of Salamis; Against All Heresies, 61,6; 374 AD) [74].

These examples could be multiplied, but these few more than suffice to render Boettner's idea that Trent "added" Tradition to the Church's Deposit totally null; he again off by 1,365 years in the case of Irenaeus, and 1,171 years in the case of Epiphanius.

[71] Jurgens, Vol. 1, pg 91.

[72] ibid., pg 190.

[73] Jurgens, Vol. 2, pp 18-19.

[74] ibid., pg 73.

38. Apocryphal books added to the Bible by the Council of Trent....1546.

Canon 36 from the Council of Hippo (October 8, 393) lists the following Old Testament books:

"Sunt autem canonicae Scripturae: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numeri, Deuteronominum, Iesu Nave (Joshua), Iudicum (Judges), Ruth, Regnorum libri quator (1 & 2 Samuel and 1 & 2 Kings), Paralipomenon libri duo (1 & 2 Chronicles), Iob, Psalterium Davidicum, Salomonis libri quinque (Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, Sirach), Duodecim libri prophetarum (the twelve minor prophets---Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi). Esaias, Ieremias (comprising the books of Jeremiah, Lamentations, and Baruch), Daniel, Ezechiel, Tobias, Iudith, Hester, Hesdrae libri duo (Ezra and Nehemiah), Machabaeorum libri duo" [75].

(Bolding mine for emphasis of the disputed books.)

Likewise, Augustine in Christian Instruction (2,8,13; 397 AD), lists the following:

"The whole canon of the Scriptures...is contained in these books: the five of Moses, namely, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy; and one book of Jesus Nave (Joshua), one of Judges; one little book is called Ruth...the the four of Kingdoms (1 & 2 Samuel, 1 & 2 Kings); and the two of Paralipomenon (1 & 2 Chronicles)...Job and Tobias and Esther and Judith and the two books of Maccabees; and the two of Esdras (Ezra and Nehemiah)...the Psalms of David...Proverbs, Canticle of Canticles, and Ecclesiastes...Wisdom...Ecclesiasticus (Sirach)...the individual books of the twelve (minor) prophets...Isaias, Jeremias (including both Lamentations and Baruch), Daniel, and Ezechiel. With these forty-four books the authority of the Old Testament is concluded" [76].

(Bolding mine for emphasis of the disputed books.)

Again, these examples could be multiplied by examining the texts of the Decree of Damasus (382 AD), the 3rd and 4th Councils of Carthage (397 AD and 418 AD), and the Council of Florence in 1441 AD. Since the extant texts of these documents include the seven Deuterocanonical books within their lists of canonical Scriptures, it remains a mystery as to how the Council of Trent could have added them to the Bible (1,164 years later, in the earliest example) as Boettner claims.

[75] Mario Romero, Unabridged Christianity. Goleta, CA: Queenship Publishing Company, 1999; pg 16.

[76] Jurgens, Vol. 3, pg 53.

39. Creed of pope Pius IV imposed as the official creed....1560.

There are three creeds used in the Catholic Church: the Apostle's Creed, dating at least as far back as Tertullian; the Nicene Creed, formulated at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD; and the Athanasian Creed, dating from the 4th century. The "Creed of Pius IV" however, was not a creed, but a profession of adherence to Catholic doctrine that all ecclesiastical office holders had to swear allegiance to. Contained in Pius' bull Injunctum nobis, issued November 13, 1565 (not 1560 as Boettner erroneously claims), it contained a long list of doctrines, such as belief in seven sacraments, purgatory, the sacrifice of the Mass, obedience to the Roman Pontiff, acceptance of the Holy Scriptures, and so on, that any candidate for an office in the Church had to proclaim his belief in and adherence to [77]. As such, Boettner's implication that Pius IV "invented a new creed" is baseless.

[77] Bunson, Encyclopedia of Catholic History, "Pius IV, Creed of", pp 667-668.

40. Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary, proclaimed by pope Pius IX....1854.

The Immaculate Conception of Mary (meaning the doctrine that she was conceived free from stain of original sin) goes back at least to St. Ephraim of Nisbis, who wrote in 370 AD that Mary was "immune from all stain...no spot...nor any taint" could be found in her [78]. Various other Patristic Fathers also described Mary in like terms---St. Ambrose said she was "free from all stain of sin"; Severus of Antioch said she was "pure from all taint"; Sophronius of Jerusalem called her "pre-purified"; Andrew of Crete called her the "pure and Immaculate Virgin"; and Theognastes of Constantinople said she was "conceived by a sanctifying action" [79].

Pius IX officially defined this existing doctrine and declared it to be a dogma in his bull Ineffabilis Deus in 1854 [80]---but as with many things Boettner misinterprets, Pius did not invent the Immaculate Conception; it existed as a concept more than 1400 years before 1854.

[78] Mark Miravalle, Introduction to Mary. Santa Barbara, CA: Queenship Publishing Company, 1993; pg 40.

[79] ibid., pg 40.

[80] ibid., pg 41.

41. Syllabus of Errors, proclaimed by pope Pius IX, and ratified by the Vatican Council; condemned freedom of religion, conscience, speech, press, and scientific discoveries which are disapproved by the Roman Church; asserted the pope's temporal authority over all civil rulers....1864.

The Syllabus of Pius IX ignited a firestorm when it was issued in 1864---condemned by Germany's Bismarck and Italy's Victor Emmanuel, forbidden to be published in Russia and France. Many saw it as the Pope's declaration of war against the modern state [81].

However, Pius' document is merely a list of viewpoints which, insofar as Catholic teaching is concerned, are erroneous. Among them are the contention that there is no God (#1); that the existance of Jesus Christ is a myth (#7); that all religions are equally legitimate (#16); that the Church has no right to possess property (#26); that bishops may not publish letters to their congregations without the permission of the state (#28); that the state may intrude on the governance of the Church, up to and including the specification of how the sacraments may be administered (#44); that the Church has no right to establish schools; that even seminaries must be subject to the state (#46 and 47); and that the state has the right not only to appoint and depose bishops, but to prevent them from communicating with the Vatican (#49 and 51) [82].

A careful reading of the Syllabus does not reveal a condemnation of freedom of religion or conscience, but rather an assertion that Catholics have the right to freedom of religion and conscience free from interference by the secular state. There appears to be little or no mention of freedom of speech or press, outside of condemning the viewpoint that the state has the right to interfere in the communication of individual Catholics, both lay and clerical, with the Holy See. There is likewise no specific condemnation by the Pope concerning scientific discoveries, as Boettner asserts; but rather a refutation of the wholesale idea that the Church "impedes the true progress of science" (#12). Further, far from asserting the Pope's rights over temporal rulers, the Syllabus repeatedly asserts the right of the Pope to be free from the interference of the secular state in matters pertaining to the governance of the Church.

In short, Boettner created a monster of his own imagination in what he perceives the Syllabus to contain, while conveniently ignoring the stipulations upheld by Pius IX that call for the protection of not only the individual rights of Catholics, but of all Christians---the same rights which would prove to be especially important in the century which followed the issuance of the Syllabus---a century which saw the flourishing of atheism, Communism, Nazism, and secular humanism.

[81] Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 14; "Syllabus", pg 368.

42. Infallibility of the pope in matters of faith and morals, proclaimed by the Vatican Council....1870.

The concept of Papal infallibility has been around for a long time. The letter of Pope Clement I to the church in Corinth in approximately 80 AD issues instructions to that church, and Clement makes it clear that he is to be obeyed [83]; likewise, Irenaeus in Against Heresies (180 AD) states that all churches must conform to the church of Rome and be in agreement with it [84]. Augustine, in Against the Pelagians (420 AD) quotes a letter from Pope Innocent I, and declares, "Rome's reply has come; the matter is closed" [85].

As a last example, Peter Chrysologus, the Archbishop of Ravenna, wrote to Eutyches in 449 AD, "We exhort you in every respect, honorable brother, to heed obediently what has been written by the Most Blessed Pope of the City of Rome; for Blessed Peter, who lives and presides in his own see, provides the truth of faith to those who seek it. For we, by reason of our pursuit of peace and faith, cannot try causes on the faith without the consent of the Bishop of the City of Rome" [86]. These examples more than suffice to show that the 1st Vatican Council merely defined the doctrine of Papal infallibility; as a concept it pre-dated the council by nearly 1800 years, and was not "invented" in 1870, despite what Boettner tries to imply.

[83] Jurgens, Vol. 1, pg 12.

[84] ibid., pg 90.

[85] ibid., Vol. 3, pg 142.

[86] ibid., pg 268.

43. Public schools condemned by pope Pius XI....1930.

Boettner is apparently referring to a document issued by the Catechetical Office of the Holy See on January 12, 1935 (not 1930, as he stipulates), entitled "Provido Sane Consilio: On Better Care for Catechetical Teaching". The document nowhere condemns public schools, but merely insists on the right of Catholic students in public schools to receive proper catchetical instruction from the Church, as a safeguard against academic instruction hostile to the Catholic Faith.

For example, #12 of the document states that "in some nations, the very right of the Church to direct the Christian education of children is called into question or even denied by reason of political policy"; #15 states that this interference is exacerbated by "the fact that ravening wolves have come into the world, not sparing the flock; likewise, pseudo-teachers given to atheism and the new paganism have made their appearance, giving expression to clever falsehoods and sheer nonsense by writings and by other means cunningly attempting to destroy the Catholic belief in God, in Jesus Christ, and in the divine work of the Church" [87].

Clearly the purpose of the Pope, as evidenced by the issuance of this instructional letter, is not the condemnation of public schools, but a concern that Catholic students, whatever their educational disposition, are allowed access to proper religious instruction under the legitimate supervision of the Church---a right that was being denied even then in countries like Nazi Germany. Boettner has not only misinterpreted the purpose of the letter, but he is also off by five years concerning the date of its issuance.

[87] http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CATTEACH.HTM.

44. Assumption of the Virgin Mary (bodily ascention into heaven shortly after her death), proclaimed by pope Pius XII.....1950.

As with the cases of the Immaculate Conception and Papal infallibility, Boettner tries to give the impression that the Assumption of Mary is something that the Vatican "invented" in recent years. While the Assumption was admittedly a gradual development within the belief of the Church, the fact is that the concept pre-dates its definition by better than 1300 years.

The first explicit reference to this doctrine is from Gregory of Tours (d.593), who states in his letter Libri miraculorum that Mary's body was borne to heaven after her death; other references come from Germain of Constantinople, Andrew of Crete, and John Damascene, who mentions in his Second Homily on the Dormition of Mary (c.745 AD) that three days after Mary's death, her coffin was opened, to reveal empty grave wrappings, but no trace of her body [88]. Although all of these references date from the 8th century, liturgical feasts in honor of the Assumption began to appear in Christian churches in Syria and Egypt during the 6th century; in Gaul in the 7th century; in Rome by the 8th century; and were universally celebrated by the whole of East and West by the 13th century [89].

[88] Romero, pg 282.

[89] Miravalle, pp 52-53.

45. Mary proclaimed Mother of the Church, by pope Paul VI.....1965.

This was an addendum to Boettner's original book, as the first publication date for Roman Catholicism was 1962; however, Boettner remains off in his dates, since the proclamation of Mary as Mother of the Church was issued by Pope Paul VI not in 1965, but on November 21, 1964: "Therefore, for the glory of the Blessed Virgin and our consolation, we declare most holy Mary Mother of the Church, that is of the whole Christian people" [90].

As with most of the other items in Boettner's list, the subject of Mary's title as Mother of the Church in neither anything new nor terribly controversial; the earliest reference to Mary as "Virgin Mother of the Church" can be found in a work by Berengaud of Treves (d.1125) in which he says "By the Woman (Revelation 12:1), we may understand Blessed Mary, for she is Mother of the Church for having engendered the one who is head of the Church" [91]. Rupert of Deutz (d.1135) in his Canticum Canticorum refers to Mary as the "Mother of Churches"; and Denis the Carthusian (d.1471) refers to Mary as "Mother of the whole Church" [92].

Further references to Mary under this title can be found in the writings of St. Antoninus of Florence, St. Lawrence, St. Peter Canasius, Matthias Scheeben, and St. John Bosco. As can be clearly seen, Mary was being referred to as "Mother of the Church" 840 years before Boettner's implication that Pope Paul VI "invented" the title.

[90] Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd Edition. Washington, D.C.: United States Catholic Conference/Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1997; pg 251.

[91] Leon Suprenant, Jr., "Mary, Mother of the Church". Catholics United For the Faith, http://www.cuf.org/member/motherofthechurch.pdf.

[92] ibid.

The forty-five "heresies and inventions" that Loraine Boettner lists at the beginning of Roman Catholicism did, indeed, develop over the course of Church history; but as we have seen, none of them are "heretical"; and neither were they "invented" at some point in time---and Boettner is a dismal failure at pinning down the correct dates of the development of these doctrines. As I stated at the beginning, I will leave it up to the individual reader to decide for themselves whether a man who is so grossly erroneous in the fixing of simple historical dates (leaving aside all of his other errors) can be trusted to to be correct in instructing his readers whether a Catholic doctrine is a heresy, and invention, or not.

Perhaps Karl Keating put it best in his assessment of Boettner's magnum opus: "No effort is made to give sources for his charges, and little effort is made to say what the significance of the 'inventions' might be. That task is left to innuendo. What Boettner implies is that any belief or practice not found in the pages of the New Testament in plain words must be spurious and must have been instituted for some nefarious purpose" [93].

I believe that Boettner himself had a "nefarious purpose" in creating the infamous "list" on pages 7, 8, and 9 of his book: to discredit, malign, and denigrate the Catholic Church, at all costs---even if he had to prefabricate the charges against her. The sad thing is that so many good and sincere Christians, Protestant and Catholic alike, have been taken in by his falsehoods. With God's kindness and grace, perhaps those who read this paper of mine will be helped to see that the only "inventions" to be found in Boettner's book are the ones he concocted and wrote down himself.

[93] Keating, Catholicism and Fundamentalism, pg 47.

Someone Has Lied to You About Our Pope Pius XII

2007-07-09T15:39:00.000-05:00

Quote:

PIUS XII AND YAD VASHEM
by Sister Margherita Marchione, Ph.D.

Sister Margherita Marchione is the author of several books on Pope Pius XII, the latest being Crusade of Charity: Pius XII And POW's 1939-1945.

Below the portrait of Pope Pius XII in the Israeli Holocaust Memorial, Yad Vashem, there is a statement which is contrary to the truth and is unjust. It must be repudiated. I contacted the director of Yad Vashem and asked him to consider the efforts of the Pope who helped save hundreds of thousands of Jews and other victims of the Nazis. But will Yad Vashem at least correct the errors beneath his photo?

LINK

Quote:

Pius XII and the Jews
RABBI DAVID G. DALIN

Even before Pius XII died in 1958, the charge that his papacy had been friendly to the Nazis was circulating in Europe, a piece of standard Communist agitprop against the West.

It sank for a few years under the flood of tributes, from Jews and gentiles alike, that followed the pope's death, only to bubble up again with the 1963 debut of The Deputy, a play by a left-wing German writer (and former member of the Hitler Youth) named Rolf Hochhuth.

The Deputy was fictional and highly polemical, claiming that Pius XII's concern for Vatican finances left him indifferent to the destruction of European Jewry. But Hochhuth's seven-hour play nonetheless received considerable notice, sparking a controversy that lasted through the 1960s. And now, more than thirty years later, that controversy has suddenly broken out again, for reasons not immediately clear.

LINK

Quote:

JEWISH HISTORIAN PRAISES PIUS XII'S WARTIME CONDUCT

Michael Tagliacozzo Works at a Center for Holocaust Studies

VATICAN CITY, OCT. 25, 2000 (ZENIT.org).- The closed-door meeting of the Judeo-Christian Historical Commission, which has been meeting in Rome since Monday 23, ends today.

The commission was established last October by Cardinal Edward I. Cassidy, president of the Committee for Religious Relations with Jews, to examine the 11 volumes of archives documents relating to the Holy See's activities during the Second World War.

In recent years Pius XII and the Holy See have been accused of not doing enough to save Jews persecuted by the Nazis.

To shed light on the Pope's role in this part of the war, ZENIT interviewed Jewish historian Michael Tagliacozzo, responsible for the Beth Lohame Haghettaot (Center of Studies on the Shoah and Resistance) in Italy. Beth Lohame Haghettaot in western Galilee in Israel is one of the world's largest museums and centers of documentation on the Holocaust.

* Tagliacozzo: I know that many criticize Pope Pacelli. I have a folder on my table in Israel entitled 'Calumnies Against Pius XII,' but my judgment cannot but be positive. Pope Pacelli was the only one who intervened to impede the deportation of Jews on Oct. 16, 1943, and he did very much to hide and save thousands of us. It was no small matter that he ordered the opening of cloistered convents. Without him, many of our own would not be alive.

LINK

Quote:

A Righteous Gentile: Pope Pius XII and the Jews

About The Author

Rabbi David G. Dalin, a widely-published scholar of American Judaism and the history of Christian-Jewish Relations, is the author or co-author of five books, including Religion and State in the American Jewish Experience, published by the University of Notre Dame Press in 1997 and, most recently, The President of the United States and the Jews. His article, "Pius XII and the Jews," was published in the February 26, 2001 issue of the Weekly Standard, and was reprinted in the August-September issue of Inside the Vatican, published in Rome. Rabbi Dalin is a member of the Editorial Advisory Board of the journal First Things, and a member of the Board of Governors of Sacred Heart University's Center for Christian Jewish understanding. He is now writing a new book, tentatively entitled: Two Popes and the Jews: Pius XII and John Paul II.

In recent years, Eugenio Pacelli, who became Pope Pius XII in 1939, has been the subject of considerable public criticism, and even vilification, for his alleged failure to speak out against Hitler during the Holocaust. Pope Pius' alleged "silence," in the face of the worst Nazi atrocities, has led some of his harshest critics to accuse him of being a Nazi sympathizer or an anti-Semite. In 1999, the British journalist John Cornwell created an international sensation with the publication of his best-selling attack on Pius XII, vilifying Eugenio Pacelli as "Hitler's Pope."

LINK

Quote:

PIUS XII AND THE JEWISH HOLOCAUST

Since 1963, when Rolf Hochhuth's play THE DEPUTY indicted Pius XII for complicity in the Nazi genocide, it has been a commonplace of editorial writers that the Vatican was a silent, and therefore guilty, bystander to the murder of six million Jews.

But an examination of the facts puts to rout all the charges which are made against the pope by certain parties, none of whom are serious historians. The following are the main points to consider:

--Before he became Pope Pius XII, Cardinal Pacelli drafted the papal encyclical, MIT BRENNEDNDER SORGE, in which Pius XI denounced Nazi paganism and racism; the document was smuggled into Germany in March, 1937 and read from all Catholic pulpits, which infuriated the Nazis;

LINK

You want more? I got 'em! If they "misinformed" you about this, then what else have they done so on and why?
"Nazi" Pope helped Jews flee holocaust
You Be the Judge (This Rock:January 2001)
Historical Dishonesty
A Pius Legend (This Rock: November 2006)
The Framing of Pius XII
HOW PIUS XII PROTECTED JEWS (This Rock: February 1997)

Pope Benedict XVI

Early Life
Communio and Later Works
Ratzinger, the Jews and Israel
Election as Pope
Controversy
Acts As Pope
Visit to German Synagogue
Blackie

My Testimony

2007-07-05T19:37:00.002-05:00

Hi,

I would like to offer you my own personal testimony so you can see where I’m comin’ from and WHY I returned to Catholicism.

I am a cradle Catholic and a “revert” to the faith after being gone for about 34 years. I had left the Church at about age 17 because I was on drugs and then “got saved” at a Campus Life Bible study that was run by a very cool minister. I had always gone to church but never really taken it seriously or read the Bible, even though it was in the house and other members of my family read it. The lack was not in the church (I see that now) but within me. I began to read the Bible for the first time in my life…(the epistle of St. James) and it really hit home. I have always believed in God, but I saw that that was not enough. I did alright for a couple of years, got married and we moved here to Florida, where I stayed out of establishment churches because I figured they were all messed up and did my thing as a “Jesus freak”, witnessing on the streets and handing out Christian underground papers and tracts, and “witnessing” to anyone who would listen.

Eventually I and my little family joined a Baptist church because the preacher convinced me that we believed the same things and he liked my no fear witnessing. That was fine until I admitted that I figured that the gifts of the Holy Spirit did not end with the death of the last apostle. That ended my path to being a Baptist minister so we joined a local Assembly of God where we stayed for many years in spite of some really unscriptural and uncharitable things they did. I became a deacon there, but finally we left after they pulled some really lame stuff and blew me off when I pointed out that what they were doing was unscriptural. My letter telling them why we were leaving was 10 pages long.

I intended to find another church, but we never did and so we remained out of any church for many years.

About 7 years ago I hit a real crisis and decided to turn back to the Lord. I found that Jesus meant every word of the parable of the prodigal son. I began to read the Bible again and got a New American Bible which is about like the NIV except this one has all the books (which I liked even though at the time I was still a Protestant). This particular edition was fairly big, with a bright green paperback cover that said “The Catholic Bible” in big orange letters. I went diddy-bopping into a meeting one day with that in hand and wasn’t in there a hot minute when some guy jumped my case.

“Are you Catholic?’ he asked me. “Well…yeah”, says I, (since technically I was). “You Catholics worship Mary.” “Say what?” I responded. “You Catholics worship Mary. You pray to her.” “Look, I know I been outta the church for a long time, and we do pray to her but we DON'T worship her and no Catholic that knows his ear from his elbow would ever even SAY such a crazy thing. We worship God alone. End of story, Dude.”

He persisted so severely that I finally told him that I’d get some books, check it out and get back to him with what I found out, and that if he was right then I would never enter a Catholic Church ever again.

I found a great book by a priest named Father Oscar Lukefahr of Catholic Home Study Service (The Catholic Home Study Service ) and read it carefully and prayerfully. I was happy to find that not only were the Catholics right and that they do not worship anyone but Almighty God, but that their doctrines about Mary are soundly based upon the Bible and that the early Christians believed the very same things. Even the three pillars of the Reformation ( Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli) believed the same things about Mary that Catholics do today. In the end I went back to church and met another Catholic guy, who like myself was returning to the faith as well. We studied and talked and found ourselves having to dig up real answers for people we knew who didn’t like the Catholic Church.

I continued to study Catholic teaching and discovered that a great deal of what I had been taught about the Bible and Christianity was wrong. I found that non-Catholics ignore and “read around” Bible passages that support Catholic teaching and that they completely ignore the history of Christianity prior to the 1500s. Now I know what I believe and why and I will never change, though I promise every non-Catholic that I dialog with that if they can prove that the Catholics are wrong that I’ll be in their church with them every Sunday from now on. No one even comes close…

Now I participate at Mass as often as I can, pray the Rosary and the Divine Mercy Chaplet almost every day, abstain from meat on most Fridays (just out of devotion to God), and of course read and study my Bible, as well as other Catholic writings. I am Catholic because I know and believe with all my heart and soul that the Catholic Church IS the New Testament church and I believe that the Eucharist is everything that the church teaches it is, the same as the early church did…all the way back to the last supper and the 6th chapter of the Gospel of St. John. I believe it’s really the body and blood of our risen Lord because St. Paul said that if you take communion while living in sin that you become guilty of the body and blood of the Lord, and that wouldn’t be possible if His body and blood weren’t really present in the form of bread and wine…just like the last supper. It is the most powerful miracle in all of Christianity, and I love it.

My Christian life is stronger than ever before, my prayer life is powerful, and I have great answers to my prayers like never before. I have always been a soul winner and that has not changed at all. God has used me to win some people that I sure couldn’t have won on my own. Some were very anti-Catholic and now are very MUCH Catholic and very happy and forthright about their faith. It’s really very humbling…I feel like a raggedy (unworthy) Styrofoam cup at a feast, filled with the very finest wine.

So… God Love ya, That’s it. I’m nothing special. There are thousands of people like me who are returning to the faith each week and many more who are finding their way into it as well. It’s been here for over 2,000 years…it won’t die off or go away, and the very gates of hell have not prevailed (and will not prevail) against it. Jesus promised and He has kept that promise in spite of the human failings of individual members of His one true church.

This is the real thing. The fullness of truth, and the most beautiful Christianity you can possibly imagine. Nothing outside the Catholic Church even comes close. I cry tears of humble joy during the consecration at Mass because I am so wrapped up in worship of my risen Lord and Savior. I don’t care who notices or what they might think. I’m more concerned with making sure that Jesus hears me when I say, “My Lord and my God.”

Someone asked me recently, “How did you realize the RCC was the true church?” My answer is what follows:

Study man study. I challenged everything I heard about the Catholic faith and all that turned out to be rubbish. I went looking into Catholic teaching to see if what I was hearing was true and found it all to be untrue and not only that but I found that there is more than ample reason to follow the Catholic faith than any of the other churches.

I didn't go out to prove or disprove anything, I just went in search of the facts and the facts led me to realize that the Catholic faith is the original, New Testament, "full Gospel" church that Christ founded. Every other church has a man as it's founder, no matter what they may claim, and every single one of them has at least one doctrinal divergence from what the New Testament teaches as well as what the early church believed and practiced.

I feel that I was misled and deceived by well intentioned people with Bibles.

I was one of the most no fear "witnesses" you could ever encounter. I was never rude, but I ain't scared of the devil himself nor any of his minions.

Now I apply all those "witnessing" skills and the other gifts that God has blessed me with to share my Catholic faith with anyone who will listen, and to counter the propaganda of anti-Catholics who seek to deceive my Catholic brothers and sisters into leaving the faith for their "Christianity Lite".

If you've debated or discussed with me for any length of time around here you already know that I won't insult you, but I'll rip rhetoric and propaganda apart without mercy.
Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.

Blackie

The Rapture?

2007-07-04T05:12:00.000-05:00

Quote:

Do Catholics believe in "the rapture"?

"Rapture" is often known as an "Ecstasy" in Catholic discussion and refers to visions and such that some very holy saints have experienced. I think one example would be St. Padre Pio and another would be St. Francis of Assisi.

However, if you mean the second coming teaching that a great many (not all) n-Cs believe and the "Left Behind" series of books and movies propagates as fact...no we do not.

That whole teaching has only been around from around 1825 and was concocted by a Church of Ireland preacher named John Nelson Darby. It wasn't even held by many n-Cs until it was included in the notes of C. I. Scofield's reference Bible.

Quote:

The Scofield Reference Bible is a widely circulated annotated study Bible edited and annotated by the American Bible student Cyrus I. Scofield. Published by Oxford University Press and containing the traditional King James Version text, it first appeared in 1909 and was revised by the author in 1917.
(From Wikipedia)

Prior to that the teaching was virtually unknown and the only supposedly Catholic to even talk about it was a known heretic from about the 3rd or 4th century (I think).

One of the very best Bible studies on this is offered on a FREE MP3 download from John Martignoni called The Rapture and the Bible and his study notes are here.
It is very much worth your time. If someone is trying to tell you you should believe this, then you might want to download that and then burn them a CD and give it to them. Be sure to listen to it yourself first of course...

Simple answer: No, Catholics do not believe in the rapture because (in spite of all the hype to the contrary) it is not actually taught in the Bible, and it was never believed by the early church...or the rest of the church during it's 2,000 year history.

That would make it a new wind of doctrine and a teaching of men.
Neither is something that Christians are supposed to get into.