Many Catholic apologists are quick to laud the “ancient” traditions of their Church as proof of it being the one true body of Jesus.
I, for one, wonder how such a claim can honestly be made about the supposed thousands of years of tradition … that changes every few decades!
Don’t believe me? Think I’m just some hateful, lying Catholic basher? Then take, for example, one of the latest announcements of the Vatican concerning capitol punishment.
Not only is the Catholic Church changing its own position on a topic (which happens on a consistent basis, especially in connection to political pressure and power), it is also blatantly contradicting the plain, principled and authoritative writings of the word of God for the church (see Romans 13:1-7). But why should such be a shocker? After all, the Catholic Church insists, and practices thereby, that the “oral traditions” built by college of bishops and the Pope, amongst other influential leaders, have the right to guide the Church even when such practices and teachings contradict the doctrine of Christ and his apostles and prophets revealed and recorded during the first century (Ephesians 2:19-22, Jude 1:3) – not the twenty-first century!
I realize there are many Catholics who are genuine in their desire to please God and to serve Christ, and this is why I plead with such people to open their eyes to the undeniable truth that the Catholic Church is not what it claims to be. If one cannot become or be a practicing Catholic by simply following what the Bible teaches, and they obviously cannot, then why would one want to be a member of something the Bible refuses to identify, through emphatic and silent declaration, as true and honorable in relation to the undeniable teachings and understandings of the first century church?
Follow the true traditions that have guided the church for millennia, not ones that change before one generation takes the place of another.
A Catholic nun in Spain has found herself on the receiving end of an on-line petition and death threats from her fellow Catholics due to her “controversial” statements on Mary and Joseph’s martial relationship.
Now what kind of “controversy” could she create in order to receive such treatment? She simply suggested Continue reading
With its widespread influence through its practices, teachings, and traditions, Roman Catholicism has tainted the original idea of the word “saint” in the minds of many to the extent that very few in the world would ever think of calling what the Bible describes as a Christian a “saint.”
Notice the following concerning the process by which one may become a “saint” in the Catholic Church. “Canonization is an act or definitive sentence by which the Pope decrees that a servant of God, member of the Catholic Church and already declared blessed, be inscribed in the book of saints and be venerated in the universal Church with the cult given to all saints.” (New Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 3, Pg. 55). In other words, a person could read and study his Bible, obey the gospel through faith, repentance, confession and baptism, and thus be saved from past sins (Mark 16:15,16; Acts 2:38; Romans 10:10), do all he could to please God, die a faithful Christian and go to heaven eternally, but never be recognized as a “saint” because the Pope did not declare it and he never belonged to the Catholic Church. Continue reading
Here’s an article from the church in Wise, VA that I put in the bulletin at Keltonburg several years ago. I thought some of you might find it useful, specifically during this time of “conclave”:
Does the church produce the Bible…Or does the Bible produce the church?
Perhaps one of the biggest misconceptions regarding the Bible is that it is a product of the church. Many reject the Bible as our sole source of religious authority and instruction and belittle us for believing in the “Bible alone theory”. Thus, there is a great need to discuss the relationship between the Bible and the church. As always, we will appeal to the scriptures as our only source of authority and not our own wisdom (1 Corinthians 2:6-7).
For one to understand that the Bible is our only standard for all religious faith and practice, one must understand the church is the result of the Bible and depends on it for everything it preaches and practices. In other words, the Bible produces the church, not the other way around. We are told by some that since the “church is the pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15), the church itself establishes what truth is. On the contrary, truth emanates only from God (Psalm 86:11; John 1:17; 17:17). Or as Paul put it in Ephesians 3:10, “To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in the heavenly places might be made known by the church the manifold wisdom of God.” The church, just like individuals, must appeal to the Bible as the only source of authority for it alone contains the manifold wisdom of God (1 Corinthians 2:9-13; Ephesians 3:3-5). Just as Moses was admonished to “make all things according to the pattern” (Hebrews 8:5); we must use the Bible alone to ensure we are following God’s revealed pattern for His church. Thus, we must speak where the Bible speaks, remain silent where the Bible is silent, do Bible things in Bible ways, and call Bible things by Bible names (1 Peter 4:11).
We read in Acts 16:5 that the “churches were established in the faith.” We would like to emphasize very kindly, yet very firmly, that the one true church is established in the faith; it does not establish the faith. The faith which is spoken of in Acts 16:5 is simply the revealed truth of the gospel which was “once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3) by the end of the first century. As beings created with rights of freedom and choice, why would anyone bind themselves to decrees, councils and conventions of men? “God forbid; yea let God be true and every man a liar” (Romans 3:4). – Ryan Thomas
Been thinking here lately (I’m really opening myself up to zingers there!) about the catholic church situation and what the catholic church itself teaches about the pope and even Mary.
So the pope’s word is supposed to be infallible, right? When does it become so? Was his word as a “cardinal” infallible? And since he’s still alive does his word continue to be infallible? If not, how does one go from being fallible to infallible and back to fallible again? Talk about a rollercoaster ride! And also, is Benedict still the most-holy or is he only normal-holy? Or is he even Benedict anymore?
Now when it comes to Mary and her conception being “immaculate” from “original sin” how did she come to be that way? Jesus was born in the flesh according to her genetic material, right? Were her mother and father immaculate as well? How about her grandparents? And her great-parents and their great-grandparents? When did this whole “immaculate” thing start in the gene pool? Why didn’t the siblings of Jesus get the same benefits of their mother’s “immaculate” condition? Scratch that last question – seems like I remember something about sex between a husband and a wife not being allowed and no other children being born. But the other questions still stand.
And by the way, if you do give an answer in the affirmative, please give a scripture reference that affirms your affirmation along with it 🙂 That would be most helpful.