The release of The Catholic Project’s study of priests and the data revealed therein should be welcomed by all Catholics. I must say, however, that data did not surprise me in the least – especially the negative elements. The major fact that has already grabbed everyone’s attention is that most priests do not trust their bishops; that could surprise only those who do not listen to priests. The study maintains that this disturbing factoid is directly related to the worst aspects of the “Dallas Charter.” Here I disagree. I believe the more draconian measures of the Charter merely brought to light what had been simmering below the surface for years.
Given the nature of my work for decades, I generally visit fifteen or more dioceses every year, dealing with bishops, priests, and teachers. And I have daily phone contact with those groups. Further, I provide a “listening ear” for dozens of priests – most of them young. This affords me a unique perspective from which to evaluate situations.
Here is some of what I hear “on the ground.”
• When the chancery office phone number pops up on a priest’s phone, he freezes in fear.
• When called into the chancery, many priests now bring with them a civil lawyer for protection because they know they will be confronted with the diocesan Sanhedrin, comprised of bishop, vicar general, judicial vicar, priest personnel director and, yes, the diocesan attorney.
• When complaints are made against a priest – whether of a sexual, financial or personality nature – priests believe that they are already judged and found guilty.
• 100 positive letters in a priest’s file count for little or nothing against one negative letter, especially if that letter comes from a woman.
• Octogenarian dissenting parishioners all too often find strong chancery support when they grouse about the content of a young priest’s preaching or his ars celebrandi.
• The “generation gap” between the oldest priests and the youngest often makes rectory life a living hell.
• Priests grossly resent the drumbeat of unwarranted chancery intrusion into their pastoral ministry.
• One bishop, confronted by both clergy and laity seeking more just compensation for his priests, replied: “Keep them poor, keep control.” Truth be told, the episcopal desire for “control” is frequently manifested in a managerial demeanor, more reflective of a CEO than of the father or brother envisioned by the Church’s theology and the Code of Canon Law.
• Priests intensely resent the fact that when a bishop is accused of sexual abuse, he remains on the job, continues to wear clerical garb and to live in diocesan housing. When a priest is accused, he is given a matter of hours to vacate his residence, doff the collar, and be ready to be dispatched to one of the clerical gulags.
Pastors in the “old days” ruled as minor monarchs (not a good thing) and effectively held bishops at bay. It was not unknown that in a pastor-bishop conflict, the pastor would bar the bishop from his parish until a resolution was achieved. Today, bishops are absolute monarchs (also not a good thing), especially when dealing with “conservative” or “traditional” type priests, proving true the Irish adage that “the willing horse gets flogged the most.”
This imperious style transcends ideology, as one can find a hierarch on either side of the aisle operating in the same fashion. When rational discourse has been exhausted – if it even begins – all too many bishops resort to reminding the priest that on the day of his ordination, he put his hands into those of the bishop, promising “obedience and respect.” Most bishops forget that that beautiful medieval feudal gesture signified a two-way relationship. Yes, the knight indeed promised “obedience and respect,” in return for which the lord promised him loving protection!
This negative picture has consequences:
• Not a few younger priests remind bishops that “it’s a seller’s market” in the priesthood today, meaning that bishops need priests far more than priests need bishops. The adversarial relationship works both ways.
• Many priests – particularly those under the age of 40 – are prepared to leave active ministry, rather than submit to the horrors of the gulags or to live in fear of what could befall them at any moment.
• One concrete result of all this is that priests are not recruiting replacements for themselves. And, most interesting, not a few devout parents who would have prayed for years to have a priest-son, now actively discourage their boys because they don’t want them to experience what they have come to know so many priests experience. How many dioceses this past spring had not a single priestly ordination? How many dioceses did not have a single new seminarian this fall?
Priests are not perfect, as history well demonstrates. However, they are the indispensable links in the chain that keeps the whole structure alive. Mafia bosses, not known for humility, did know, however, that they had to keep the “foot-soldiers” content. To be sure, thankfully, there are many good bishops, and their dioceses are thriving because their priests feel supported and appreciated. This study should be received as a “wake-up” call: We cannot conduct business as usual.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
While Jesus’ Great Commandments are to Love God with all your heart, mind, strength and soul, and love your neighbor as yourself, The Catholic Church’s Great Commandment is, ‘Shroud everything in darkness!’.
Did everyone see the video on the Priest explaining to his flock that the Bishop had ordered that they no longer recite the Prayer to St. Micheal the Archangel after Mass? The video was pulled off the internet and the Bishop would not respond to Catholic News media.
Matthew 10:26 Courage Under Persecution.
“Therefore do not be afraid of them. Nothing is concealed that will not be revealed, nor secret that will not be known. What I say to you in the darkness, speak in the light; what you hear whispered, proclaim on the housetops. And do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather, be afraid of the one who can destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.
Ah, the number of good bishops is greatly exaggerated. They’re all part of the same system; it’s how they got where they are. And they won’t destroy the system that benefitted them.
1. 83% of bishops identify as “shepherds”. I just wonder what the other 17% think they are.
2. One of the other more telling revelations in this study is the remarkable disparity between what regard that bishops believe priests hold them compared to the regard that priests actually hold bishops. There’s a startling disconnect.
I believe they have a lupine identity.
“The major fact that has already grabbed everyone’s attention is that most priests do not trust their bishops; that could surprise only those who do not listen to priests.”
Here’s another shocker, Fr. Stravinskas: most Catholic faithful do not trust their priests or their bishops. In my 74 years as a Catholic I have witnessed this complete reversal in the way the faithful view their so-called “shepherds” who, by the way, are “shepherds” in only the same sense that hirelings are. The earth-shaking sexual abuse and homosexual crisis that continues without interruption even until today, the well-nigh apostasy and heresy by the clergy and hierarchy, the massive financial scandals, and the secularization of the Church as a left-wing NGO focused overwhelmingly on an ideological agenda that is confined solely to this world and this life have obliterated both the authority of the clergy and hierarchy and the reverential respect that once was theirs.
The words mod Scripture are strong and true. They are just ignored by many bishops and chancery functionaries. Ask the many cancelled priests. Do priests dying of broken hearts (and this happens) or leaving the priesthood help the Church. It is very easy to quote Scripture when one is not in the crosshairs.
I know a cancelled priest who is lionized by CM ( it helps their bottom line) who richly deserved the discipline even though his Bishop seems to be one of ‘them’.
When they were nailing the Beloved One to the Cross He said “Forgive them Father for they know not what they do.”.
The Father of Lies is the grand Accuser not the parish priest. So, yes, their charism is to preach the Gospel and preach it with great fervor. However they are not to enflame scandal in the Church by publicly naming their superiors as grave sinners. “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.”
If you listen to the Christ, Fathers, you will change your tone and handle your grievances in the confessional with your ordinary. I think this must also apply to one priest for whom I have great admiration and who was foully mistreated it seems for preaching the Truth but subsequently allowed his anger to mislead him into naming names in a threatening manner as if he has assumed the role of Christ as judge.
I have met 4 young priests in the last few years. They are quite orthodox in comparison to the aged hippie-flower child priests of my era. At the March For Life in DC we asked a young seminarian in a collar how he thought the chaos in the church might be resolved. He gave a one word answer: Biology. These young priests are heroic figures to me. They see the utter mayhem in our suffering church and the venality and impurity of the ecclesial class yet they still choose to give their entire lives to the service of Christ’s church and the salvation of souls. I pray for them that they will not become discouraged or disheartened by the apostasy of Rome or mendacity in the diocese. These good young men are truly courageous, forsaking their own lives, to run into a burning edifice to rescue souls. The Holy Spirit is at work in our suffering Church. God bless them.
That was quite an uplifting post. You gave me hope (which I have any way in the greatest Hope of all of us) but sooner hope rather than later hope. Maybe the young are already on the right side!
I guess Biology’s the answer all around. The folks influenced by the culture of the 1960’s & ’70’s are ageing out. And Traditional & orthodox Catholics are pretty much the only ones with large families these days. So as often the case, it’s about demographics.
But we shouldn’t take that for granted. US Catholic families had very large families just a couple generations ago. My mother’s 1st cousin had 7 children in the 50’s & early ’60’s and I don’t think a single one practices their Catholic faith today. Growing up in the 1960’s we had neighbors across the road with 15 children.
The answer’s about having more children *and* retaining them in the faith & culture. Raising more children per couple can be the easier part of the solution. Providing community & countering the influence of popular culture is the tricky part.
“The folks influenced by the culture of the 1960’s & ’70’s are ageing out.”
Not a moment too soon, thankfully. The harm that they have done and the damage they leave behind, however, may take a generation or two to fix.
As an aging out 70 plus guy, the aging out story is probably good for the Church, but has a personal downside.
Well, the folks who were *influenced *by the culture of the 1960s and 70s.
Not you.
🙂
And Jesus gets lost in the procedural processes.
It’s more like Jesus was put in the witness protection program! He’s nowhere to be found, tragically.
The CEO bishop. It’s so true, and that’s a massive problem. “Keep them poor and keep control”, said one bishop? I don’t know about the “control” part, but the solution to this is precisely “keeping everyone poor”. The CEO type bishops are just too comfortable. They live too well. The spirit of poverty is gone. They love being “princes”, fawned over, “they love places of honor at banquets”, and they love banquets (give talks, go to dinners, give talks, go to dinners, talks and dinners, …). Where’s that missionary zeal? Where is that spirit of poverty?Instead, there is an excessive love of the interior, the warm indoors of the rectory with the smell of baked pies in the air or a slow cooking pot roast, and an aversion to “going out” into the cold to proclaim Christ to a hostile world. We need real men for bishops, not the metrosexual or asexual effeminate types who throw bones to the secular culture, determined to keep their consciences conflict free. Gosh, we got big problems.
The coverups ruined the facade of high class and holy bishops. There are many wonderful bishops out there but in this day of transparency they should be held to the same standards as those in their charge.
One of the best things bishops could do is encourage priests to be out in the community where they live – made tougher by multi parish assignments. Visiting the sick etc… too much is done over the computer and e communications
Religious superiors are no better than bishops. It’s all about power and control. The reason religious priests are seemingly so content is they live comfortable lives, always have cash in their pockets, a vehicle at their disposal, go to fine restaurants, go to the theater, and travel around the world. (I know this because I was one, much to my shame.) Young men see them for what they are…. and what they aren’t.
No man serious about his eternal salvation would go near a modern religious order or diocese. It’s a sure road to Hell. I write as a religious priest in a modern religious order that has abandoned Jesus Christ and its sainted founder’s vision and wonders why no one is joining and why those very few that do enter formation leave.
I, for one, actively discourage all candidates and recommend they explore the SSPX and those affiliated with it, or, when absolutely necessary, the FSSP, ICKSP, FSSR, and similar groups where they have a chance to save their souls and the souls of others.
Nothing, absolutely nothing, is more important than the salvation of souls, something the clergy and laity of the Vatican II church have wholly abandoned to their eternal peril.
JSB: Sadly, there have been many scandals in the traditional communities as well. The SSPX covered up abusive priests and moved them around. I don’t know why, but there is deep moral rot among Catholic leaders of all theological stripes. Trust me, if you acted as whistleblower while in a traditional community they would come down on you like a pile of bricks. They would be no different than their liberal counterparts.
JSB, thank you for sharing, and I want to thank you for your vocation. I have more than one son, and I want to encourage them to the priesthood. I have long been weary of sending them to a diocesan seminary. At this point, do I even bother encouraging my young boys to be priests?
You seemed to have reservations about the FSSP and ICKSP, but I appreciate them both. For fathers with young sons, do we even bother encouraging a vocation to the priesthood at this point? Coupled with Fr. Stravinskas’ observations in the article, I really wonder if I should…
The SSPX, according to Cardinal Burke, is outside the church. “Extra ecclesiam nulla salus” still applies to everybody, including you and me.
Not according to Pope Benedict, Francis or even Schneider. How can Catholics who practice the faith the same way as padre Pio or every Catholic before the 1970’s be outside the church? The answer is that there are two churches, the one holy Catholic church and the new church.
There is no “new” church, or old church! There is ONE HOLY APOSTOLIC CHURCH, the Mystical Body of CHRIST and it is global with many different nations, different customs and even different rites. God looks at the heart and at all the hearts in the whole world. The small number of Traditionalists today condemns all others while of the 1.3 billion Catholics all who are in the Church, love, believe and adore their Lord Jesus Christ and have loving communities. The Church is made up of sinners who accept the gift of God, His mercy and grace.
Oh, really? Then why all the talk these past thirtysome years of “reuniting” the society with Rome. Why all the negotiations between Rome and the society leadership? You can’t have it both ways. If they are in union with the church, then there is not and never has been anything to negotiate with the Holy See. But the fact that there have been such talks, and they have never yet produced a final agreement, is the definitive refutation of the nonsensical assertion that they are not in schism from the church. They are, because Francis does not have the power to fire the head of the SSPX and appoint someone in his place. No one ever wonders whether the FSSP is or is not in union with Rome. Because they are.
Dear Mark: “A new mass that has more in common with a Lutheran service…” HOLY MASS within the Body of Christ the Church is always a holy Mass of the blessed holy sacraments that streamed from the pierced Sacred Heart of Christ. You keep saying the “old mass” but for over 2000 years every century and every age has their own plagues of evil interruptions, you just do not to know about. Be at peace because as the Exult states: “Christ yesterday and today…all time belongs to HIM and all the ages, to Him be power and glory through every age and forever. Amen.” I know many holy priests and holy people of God celebrating the “new” mass, committing their life following Jesus our Redeemer and Lord Jesus Christ.
Larry: I think it’s a bit more complicated than that. Besides, what does being “outside the Church” even mean anymore? Canonically the super liberal bishops of Germany and Belgium are inside the Church, in good standing and in full communion. Surely being “in the Church” has deeper meaning than mere canonic approval.
PS: I’m not a trad or SSPX supporter.
Being “outside the church” means being not subject to priests incardinated to a bishop who was appointed to his post by the pope and who serves at the pleasure of whatever man is recognized as the current reigning pope, and that man is definitely Francis. SSPX beyond any doubt whatsoever does not recognize the authority of Francis and is not obedient to that authority, just as it was insubordinate to the authority of Benedict XVI and John Paul II. If they were not outside the church, then there would be no talk of “reuniting” the society with Rome, because such words would be meaningless.
The SSPX do recognise the authority of the Pope they even mention him in the canon of the mass. What they reject are the errors that have infected the church over the last several decades. A new mass that has more in common with a Lutheran service than the ancient catholic mass and an interpretation of ecumenism which denies the the dogmas of the Church. It always amuses me that the same bishops that disobeyed the Vatican regarding communion on the hand in the 70’s or more recent acts of disobedient clergy go unnoticed.
As a former seminarian (who left by choice) I would NOT recommend that a young man go straight from high school to seminary. I would advise him to get a trade or useful/ marketable degree before seminary (and avoid debt). The problem is that seminary formation is so laser focused on philosophy and theology that if a man later discerns he isn’t called to priesthood or is railroaded as a priest by his bishop he has nothing to fall back on. I’ve seen guys invest years in an education and then be destitute when they leave (some dioceses even saddle you with school debt). St. Paul had a practical skill (he was a tent maker – Acts 18:1-4). Dioceses are going bankrupt. Things won’t be like they used to be. Have a safety net! BTW – if you have a trade and/or some savings then you aren’t trapped by your bishop. The happiest guy at seminary I knew was a veteran in his mid-40’s with a full pension. He was a good solid guy and not paranoid like most seminarians because as he said “if they have a problem with me, I’ll go do something else for the Lord.” It was awesome watching him not have to play the seminary games because he was truly free to say “no thanks” to stupidity. He is a pastor today. 🙂
Carthusian: You are correct. Every group has its criminals and sinners, but the traditional groups, in my experience, are about the mission of the Church, the salvation of souls. In my 9 years of formation that was never mentioned. Nor we we formed to be holy men. Novitiate was an absolute joke when it came to spiritual formation. And it only got worse. Theology was as far left as it could possibly have been, and they were proud of it. And the homosexuality. Faculty and seminarians participated in that unholy cabal. And just about every religious order on the east coast attended that den of iniquity.
I think your council that before going to the seminary a man learns a trade or has a profession to fall back on is absolutely spot on. I worked in high school and for a couple of years in a variety of jobs but I was not prepared to fend for myself after blowing the proverbial whistle. I will never have financial security. But keeping silent wasn’t an option. Being a cancelled priest is hell. It’s one hell or another. You live knowing you kept silent or you live knowing you could end up sheltering in a box in your old age. Talk about a rock and a hard place. I know many priests who would leave, but when you enter the seminary at 13 and know nothing else courage flees.
Young men have to take care of themselves because the Church will drop you in a New York Minute if you don’t play their game. It’s sad to say this but it’s the truth. I never wonder why young men don’t answer the call. I wonder why they do.
JSB: Thanks for your thoughtful comment. I’m so sorry for your horrible experience. I too experienced similar things. The problem is you don’t really know what a community or seminary is really like until you are in for a few years. If a man wakes up to the problems too late it can hard (sometimes impossible) to leave…especially if you don’t have a trade or useful degree. No matter the community, I would advise any young man going to the seminary or religious life to be very careful and make sure they have a back
up plan. A young man is not being unfaithful or ungenerous with God by doing that. In fact, he is positioning himself to be truly free to discern and serve God without fear or intimidation.
I’ll keep you in my prayers.
There is a new book published on Amazon entitled “Pope Adam: A Dream for the Future”. It is a brief novel that offers some concrete possibilities for a way out of this mess.
“As a former seminarian (who left by choice) I would NOT recommend that a young man go straight from high school to seminary. I would advise him to get a trade or useful/ marketable degree before seminary (and avoid debt). The problem is that seminary formation is so laser focused on philosophy and theology that if a man later discerns he isn’t called to priesthood or is railroaded as a priest by his bishop he has nothing to fall back on”
This is maybe the most important observation one will see on here. The idea that candidates for the priesthood should be universally identified in high school with interest and a prospect for academic accomplishment wouldn’t be helpful even if “all was well”, but for more than a personal exit strategy.
Christ chose men familiar with hard work and the Priesthood should have men with calluses, who know what its like to face deadlines, deal with an overbearing micromanager and the prospect of being terminated or furloughed. That is the reality for pewsitters and you can’t understand those situations until you’ve experienced them. Obviously, most priests will never understand arguing about money with a wife or dealing with the unconstrained wants of children, but being economically independent and accountable lends insight and maturity.
When I read episcopal pronouncements of matters of filthy lucre; I can tell I am dealing with men pontificating from profound ignorance. Many Bishops have spent their too much of their lives being supported, first by parents then by parishioners. Even when they aren’t buying beach houses like Theodore McCarrick; they are free from the need to produce.
Follow the Master.
I agree with the advice about learning a trade– and a priest (even a bishop, sad to say– they now get fired too) should always have a marketable skill polished, honed, and at the ready just in case. If a priest has savings, at least he can afford to hire a civil lawyer to defend himself should an accusation arise. Working in the world for a while in some sort of honorable profession before ordination can be a benefit to a priest’s ministry as well.
The promise of Christ that He will not abandon His Church guarantees she will continued to exist and in places thrive.
You obviously don’t know the many families who are living devout and holy lives, passing on the Faith to their children or priests young and old who sit in the confessional for hours, priests are there and people come.
With the attitude that 99% will fall away why not just give up?
Believe me I have seen all sorts of filthy sin, horrible betrayal, abuse of authority and bad clergy. If I had the attitude that is mentioned above I would have been gone long ago.
My question is what are you doing (other than making dire and discouraging comments) to actually help the situation?
We need more priests. Perhaps opening the door to permanent deacons could be considered. Perhaps devout retired, married men could be considered. There are more worthy potential priests out there.
Alan: I think that is the obvious solution to this. There are way too many priests who have personality disorders, and the degree of clerical envy is scandalous. Deacons seem to be far more stable emotionally and psychologically, they’ve lived and worked in the real world, have had to deal with uncertainty and the hard knocks of daily life, raising a family, etc. Their preaching is much more relatable and “real”. If there is a desperate need for priests to say Mass and hear Confessions, just take a few mature Deacons who have been at it for years and ordain them. They don’t have to be salaried, priests can call on them whenever they need a holiday or help with Confessions or whatever. The situation that is being described in many of these comments reveals a profound sickness, a situation that is profoundly sick. It’s such an obvious solution to the problem, at least to a certain extent. The idea of learning a trade or having something to fall back on is also a no-brainer, but the fact that someone has insisted on that shows there is something deeply wrong with the situation as it stands. Pastors with serious control issues, insecurities, narcissistic characteristics, envy, etc., seem to be par for the course today. Normal emotionally healthy priests seem to be few and far between these days. It is certainly true that a good number of young guys that come out of the seminary are pretty good in terms of orthodoxy, but many of them are still not all there, i.e., heavily preoccupied with liturgical rubrics, not a whole lot of life experience, like to come across as the big experts, not very good listeners, and frankly some of them would have made good Nazis–very obedient and ready to go along in order to survive. Not good. Instead of ordaining married Anglican priests who have not lived as Catholics, ordain experienced Deacons who have lived as Catholics all their lives. If you have to, send them to the seminary for a year to take whatever courses are necessary, i.e., more canon law, a bit more on liturgy, etc. But let’s start doing that, please. For the sake of the people in the pews, let’s start now.
Thomas James: Good insights. I would also add that the
seminary experience itself often messes good guys up. You spend close to a decade being watched intensely, often being criticized and corrected for things that have nothing to do with priesthood or the faith. You have professors and formation directors who have no qualms about laying their own agendas for the priesthood and the Church on you. They also don’t mind blowing up your vocation if you don’t mirror their vision for the Church or you politely disagree with them or speak up for yourself. So guys often spend most of their seminary years hiding; ”wear beige and get ordained” was the unofficial motto. Living like that for years can warp anyone. It’s also a horrible way to train leaders. If your priest seems sheepish and indecisive and fearful. It’s because he was trained that way. The ones with control issues are overcompensating for those years when they had no control. They were also shown a form of “leadership” from seminary that is about control and manipulation/gas lighting. In some ways it’s not their fault. Watch most priests. They are usually good men, but they have a strange combo of fear, passiveness and control issues.
BTW: Almost all the guys I studied with in the early 2000’s who either left seminary by choice (like I did) or were told to leave because they didn’t fit whatever made up vision of the priesthood the rector etc had, all went on to be successful. Cops, doctors, teachers, lawyers. business owners…even priests in another religious community. The point is, the problem wasn’t with the men but with the seminary. But the seminary (like the Church) believed that if a man left or stayed in the seminary it had done its job. In other words, they believed that no matter what the outcome, they were always right. They couldn’t imagine that they had destroyed multiple vocations and that these good young men picked up the pieces and built a life for themselves DESPITE what the seminary and the Church had done to them. I actually feel bad for the guys who stayed. A lot of them (just like the above news article notes) are priests but miserable. They are trapped. Late forties. Too young to retire, too old to leave and start over. Often bullied by their bishop and parishioners alike. Pray for your priests and help him. They have a tough job and are often fighting very personal battles.
October 31, 1517…God used 1 man to point out the errors of a church that had drifted far way from the scriptures. The Catholic church has been self-imploding ever since. The hearts and minds of the Pharisees and Sadducees have filled the hierarchy of the Catholic church. I’m hoping God uses this time in history to draw you people to Himself and His word……..reading the 95 Theses would be a great start to becoming a Christian.
“October 31, 1517…God used 1 man to point out the errors of a church that had drifted far way from the scriptures.”
That same man approved the polygamy of Philip of Hesse (1 Corinthians 6:9), added a word to the Bible at Romans 3:28 that it did not contain (Revelation 22:18), advocated the slaughter of German peasants, advocated the killing of Jewish rabbis (“On the Jews and Their Lies”), and discarded 7 books from the Old Testament and 4 books from the New (again, Revelation 22:18).
No, thanks.
The Catholic Church is the one true church; all others are false, to one degree or another.
Malachi 1:11 (KJV): “For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name shall be great among the Gentiles, AND IN EVERY PLACE INCENSE SHALL BE OFFERED UNTO MY NAME and a pure offering, for my name shall be great among the heathen, saith the LORD of hosts.
Early Church, Didache 14:
14:1 And on the Lord’s own day gather yourselves together and break bread and give thanks, first confessing your transgressions, that your SACRIFICE may be pure.
14:2 And let no man, having his dispute with his fellow, join your assembly until they have been reconciled, that your SACRIFICE may not be defiled;
14:3 for this SACRIFICE it is that was spoken of by the Lord;
14:4 {In every place and at every time offer Me a pure SACRIFICE;
14:5 for I am a great king, saith the Lord and My name is wonderful among the nations.
Protestants do not, and cannot, fulfill the prophecy of Malachi because they do not belong to the one true Church.
“I am the Lord; that is my name! I will not give my glory to another or my praise to idols.” Isaiah 42:8
For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. 1 Timothy 2:5
The true church doesn’t worship the Creator’s creatures…..Mary, dead people, etc.
“The true church doesn’t worship the Creator’s creatures…..Mary, dead people, etc.”
You are correct. The true Church, which is the Catholic Church, doesn’t worship the Creator’s creatures… Mary, dead people, etc. Catholics don’t worship anyone except the Holy Trinity.
Unbiblical Protestant beliefs:
1. 66 book canon. Where is that in the Bible?
2. Salvation by faith ALONE is unbiblical (Romans 8:24).
3. Justification by faith ALONE is false (James 2:16-26).
4. Baptism being symbolic is false (1 Peter 3:21, “Whereunto baptism being of the like form, now saveth you also…”)
5. Bishopless churches.
6. Congregations that hire and fire their pastors. (Where in the Bible is that?)
7. The church is invisible. (Where does the Bible teach that?)
8. Sola Scriptura (nowhere taught in the Bible).
9. Private interpretation of Scripture (2 Peter 1:20).
10. The idea that Christians would have to wait 15 centuries after Christ in order to properly understand Christianity and the true interpretation of the Bible (and yet once that time hits, the interpretations of the Bible give us thousands of thousands of contradicting denominations). The Bible tells us about that: 2 Peter 2:1, 2 Peter 3:3, 1 Corinthians 14:33, et al.
The list could be multiplied.
A quarter century ago, having just entered the Catholic Church, I had a phone conversation with my father, who was (and still is) a Fundamentalist Protestant.
Me: “Dad, give me your Top 3 reasons why I shouldn’t be a Catholic…”
My Dad: “Well…you have to worship Mary, worship the pope, and believe the pope cannot sin.”
Me: “None of those are actual Catholic beliefs. And I can show you if you want to. With that established, looks like the way is open for you to consider becoming Catholic!”
My Dad: “….I need to go. Talk to you later.”
Approx. dates of doctrines, decrees, etc.:
300..prayers for the dead
375..use of images
431..The worship and exaltation of Mary and the use of the term “Mother of God”.
593..The doctrine of purgatory, instituted by Gregory I
600.. The Latin language used in worship and prayer-Gregory I
600..Prayers directed to Mary, dead saints,and angels
607..Title of “pope” or “universal bishop” first given to Boniface III
709.. Kissing the pope’s foot, began with pope Constantine
786..Worship of the cross, images, and relics
11th century..the mass developed as a sacrifice and attendance made mandatory
1090… the rosary, used in prayer
1184.. the Inquisition, instituted by the Council of Verona
1190.. the sale of indulgences
1215..Transubstantiation, proclaimed by pope Innocent III
1220..adoration of the wafer, decreed by pope Honorius III
1251..the scapular, invented by Simon Stock, an English monk
1439..purgatory proclaimed as a dogma by Council of Florence
1439..the doctrine of seven sacraments affirmed (God only established 2–baptism and communion)
1545..tradition declared to be of equal authority with the Bible by Council of Trent
1950..assumption of the Virgin Mary (bodily ascension into heaven shortly after her death), proclaimed by pope Pius XII
1965..Mary proclaimed mother of the church by pope Paul VI
This list could be multiplied. ALL unbiblical.
No answer was given to the unbiblical things listed for Protestants. Why?
Approx. dates of doctrines, decrees, etc.:
1. 300..prayers for the dead
Answer: Prayers for the dead come to us from the JEWISH people and PREDATE Christianity. This information is found in 2 Maccabees 12:43-46 (1611 KING JAMES BIBLE):
43 And when he had made a gathering throughout the company, to the sum of two thousand drachmes of siluer, hee sent it to Ierusalem to offer a sinne offering, doing therein very well, and honestly, in that he was mindfull of the resurrection.
44 (For if he had not hoped that they that were slaine should haue risen againe, it had bin superfluous and vaine, to pray for the dead.)
45 And also in that he perceiued that there was great fauour layed vp for those that died godly. (It was an holy, and good thought) wherupon he made a reconciliation for the dead, that they might be deliuered from sinne.
The books of Machabees are canonical Scripture, as the Catholic Church has ruled in numerous councils, some of which predate Luther by over 11 centuries, and they are even contained in the original 1611 King James Bible, right in the middle. See above.
Regardless of whether a Protestant considers those books canonical, the point is that those books do not originate with the Catholic Church; therefore, the Catholic Church is not the originator of prayers for the dead. The books are Jewish in origin, were penned prior to the birth of Christ, and prove that praying for the dead was a Jewish practice long before Christianity came into existence.
Google the books of Machabees to find out when they were written. The statement above is demonstrably false by about 400 years, as the books of Machabees were written circa 100 BC.
THE ANCIENT JEWISH PEOPLE PRAYED FOR THE DEAD, AND THEY CONTINUE TO DO SO.
Google the term “Kaddish prayers.”
From Chabad.org, a JEWISH website: “The sanctification of G-d’s name that takes place through the child of the deceased reciting the kaddish, BRINGS GREAT SATISFACTION AND ELEVATION TO THE SOUL, THE NESHAMAH, IN HEAVEN. IT ASSISTS THE SOUL THROUGH THE CLEANSING OF WRONGDOINGS IT MAY HAVE DONE WHILE IN THE PHYSICAL WORLD and it raises it to higher levels in the Garden of Eden, what we would refer to as “paradise.”
Contrary to Protestant assertions, the Catholic Church did not create the concept of purgatory or prayers for the dead. It comes to us from the Jewish people.
Prayers for the dead: 100% Jewish and 100% biblical.
2. 375. use of images
Answer: Read the Bible.
Exodus 37:7-8 (KJV): And he made TWO CHERUBIMS of gold, beaten out of one piece made he them, on the two ends of the mercy seat; One cherub on the end on this side, and another cherub on the other end on that side: out of the mercy seat made he the CHERUBIMS on the two ends thereof.
1 Kings 6:21-28 (KJV):
21So Solomon overlaid the house within with pure gold: and he made a partition by the chains of gold before the oracle; and he overlaid it with gold.
22And the whole house he overlaid with gold, until he had finished all the house: also the whole altar that was by the oracle he overlaid with gold.
23And within the oracle he made two cherubims of olive tree, each ten cubits high.
24And five cubits was the one wing of the cherub, and five cubits the other wing of the cherub: from the uttermost part of the one wing unto the uttermost part of the other were ten cubits.
25And the other cherub was ten cubits: both the cherubims were of one measure and one size.
26The height of the one cherub was ten cubits, and so was it of the other cherub.
27And he set the cherubims within the inner house: and they stretched forth the wings of the cherubims, so that the wing of the one touched the one wall, and the wing of the other cherub touched the other wall; and their wings touched one another in the midst of the house.
28And he overlaid the cherubims with gold.
NOTE: A cubit is 1.5 feet. Therefore, these IMAGES OF ANGELS OVERLAID WITH GOLD WERE 15 FEET TALL.
Isaiah 19:19: “In that day shall there be an altar to the Lord in the midst of the land of Egypt, AND A PILLAR at the border thereof TO THE LORD.”
Hebrew word for “pillar” from Strong’s Concordance: matstsebah; something stationed, i.e., a column or memorial stone, by analysis, AN IDOL, garrison, STANDING IMAGE, pillar.
In other words, a standing IMAGE, aka STATUE… TO THE LORD.
This is a prophecy fulfilled in the New Testament, when altars were established throughout the world. After the building of the temple, the Jews were not permitted to have an altar anywhere but in the Jerusalem temple.
Use of images: 100% biblical.
3. 431..The worship and exaltation of Mary and the use of the term “Mother of God”.
Answer: Catholics do not “worship” the Blessed Virgin. She is venerated and honored but NOT worshipped. Catholics venerate and honor ALL angels and saints, but we WORSHIP the Holy Trinity only. Because Protestants do not have the highest form of prayer, they do not understand the distinction.
Luke 1:48 (KJV): “For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden, for, behold, FROM HENCEFORTH ALL GENERATIONS SHALL CALL ME BLESSED.”
The Bible teaches that Mary is the Mother of God. To deny that, is to deny that Jesus is God and deny what the Bible clearly contains.
The term “God” applies to each of 3 divine persons: God (the Father), God (the Son), and God (the Holy Spirit). It can be used for one, two, or all three of them together.
When Catholics use the term “Mother of God,” we do not mean that She is the mother of the Holy Trinity; rather, we mean that She is the Mother of God (the Son), with the words “the Son” being understood without being stated.
The Bible makes use of this way of speaking.
John 3:16 (KJV): “For GOD so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life.”
The term “God” in that passage refers to God (the Father) ONLY, with the words “the Father” being understood without being stated. To believe otherwise would necessitate that the Holy Trinity has a son, making Jesus a son to Himself.
First biblical proof Mary is the Mother of God.
1) Mary is the Mother of Jesus. See John 2:3: “And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine.”
2) Matthew 1:21 (KJV): “And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS, for he shall save his people from their sins.”
3) Matthew 1:22-23 (KJV): “Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name EMMANUEL, which being interpreted is, GOD WITH US.”
The name JESUS and EMMANUEL are INTERCHANGEABLE and refer TO THE SAME PERSON. But the name “Emmanuel” has a meaning and can be translated.
Thus, WITHOUT QUESTION, the Bible teaches that Mary is THE MOTHER OF JESUS, and is therefore THE MOTHER OF EMMANUEL, which means She is “THE MOTHER OF GOD (WITH US).”
To deny that, is to deny the Bible.
Second biblical proof Mary is the Mother of God.
Isaiah 9:6-7 (KJV):
“For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, THE MIGHTY GOD, The everlasting Father, THE PRINCE OF PEACE.” Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even forever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.
Compare Luke 1:32 (KJV):
“He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David.”
Question for you, Brian: Do you DENY that JESUS is the person spoken of in Isaiah 9:6-7, and do you DENY that Mary is the Mother of the person spoken of in that passage?
DO YOU DENY THAT?
I don’t believe you deny that.
But do you see one of the terms used for Jesus: THE MIGHTY GOD? Do you see that?
Thus, if Mary is the Mother of the person spoken of in Isaiah 9:6-7, and if Jesus is that person, then the only biblical conclusion one can come to is that MARY IS THE MOTHER OF THE MIGHTY GOD because Jesus is referred to as THE MIGHTY GOD in that passage, and Mary is the Mother of the person referred to in that passage. Hence, She is the Mother of the Mighty God.
It’s right there in your Bible!
There is proof of prayers to the Blessed Virgin and Her queenship as well, but I’ll stop here, as this is too long already.
Veneration of the Blessed Virgin and use of the term “Mother of God”: 100% biblical.
593..The doctrine of purgatory, instituted by Gregory I
Answer: The concept of purgatory PREDATES Christianity and is found in the Bible in several places. See above.
Doctrine of purgatory: a Jewish concept and 100% biblical.
600.. The Latin language used in worship and prayer-Gregory I
Answer: For goodness sake, what language do you think many of the people of the Roman Empire spoke for centuries before Pope Gregory I was born?
Why would the Romans, WHOSE LANGUAGE WAS LATIN, pray in any other language than their own language, WHICH WAS LATIN?
Use of the Latin language in worship is neither biblical nor unbiblical. It’s irrelevant. Is use of the English language in prayer and worship “biblical”?
I’ll stop here.
ISSUE: 600..Prayers directed to Mary, dead saints, and angels
ANSWER, PART 1:
Number 1, the saints are not dead; they are very much alive. As Christ said, “you therefore do greatly err.” See Matthew 22:32 and Mark 12:27.
Number 2, again, prayers to “dead saints” come from the Jewish people. The Catholic Church did not originate this concept. Taken from Judaism/stackexchange.com, in answer to the question whether ancient Jews prayed to the dead: “In a nutshell, yes. There are many stories in the talmud and medrash where great men prayed to their ancestors. It is halachically accepted as seen in Shulchan Aruch Orach Chayim siman 579 with Magen Avraham 11.”
It is an old Jewish practice.
Number 3, the Jewish people addressed themselves to the angels. Read the Bible; it’s in the psalms. The psalms were what the Jews used in their liturgical worship.
Number 4, Saint Paul tells Christians to address the angels. See Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16, where he tells Christians to pray the psalms.
Ephesians 5:19: “Speaking to yourselves IN PSALMS and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord.”
Colossians 3:16: “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another IN PSALMS and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.”
So, we know that, as Christians, Saint Paul has counseled us to pray the psalms. Well, the psalms contain the following statements, ADDRESSED TO THE ANGELS:
Psalms 148:2: ““Praise ye him, all his angels: praise ye him, all his hosts.”
Psalms 103:20-21: “Bless the LORD, ye his angels, that excel in strength, that do his commandments, hearkening unto the voice of his word.” Bless ye the LORD, all ye his hosts; ye ministers of his, that do his pleasure.”
When we Christians pray the psalms, as Saint Paul teaches us to do and as the Catholic Church does publicly on a daily basis, we are addressing the angels. It’s right there in the Bible!
A person who denies those things is contradicting the passages of the Bible above.
PRAYERS TO ANGELS: 100% BIBLICAL.
ANSWER, PART 2:
It is biblical teaching that there is a true Queen of Heaven, and the Blessed Virgin Mary is that queen, the Protestant references to the false queen of heaven (merely a reference to the moon) found in Jeremiah notwithstanding.
Proof 1: Saint Paul explains Psalm 45 (KJV) in Hebrews 1:6, et seq. He quotes it directly (from the Greek Septuagint, not the Hebrew):
Hebrews 1:6, et seq: [6] And again, when he bringeth in the first begotten into the world, he saith: And let all the angels of God adore him. [7] And to the angels indeed he saith: He that maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire. [8] BUT TO THE SON: THY THRONE, O GOD, IS FOR EVER AND EVER, a sceptre of justice is the sceptre of thy kingdom. [9] Thou hast loved justice, and hated iniquity: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.
Thus, we know from Hebrews that Psalm 45 (in Catholic Bibles, Psalm 44) is addressed to the Son, that is, to Christ.
Proof 2: The THRONE of Christ is IN HEAVEN. See Revelation 3:21, 4:2, 4:5, 4:6, 7:15, Matthew 5:34, 23:22, among many others.
But Psalm 45, ADDRESSED TO THE SON, MENTIONS A QUEEN that stands at the right hand of His throne, which is in Heaven.
Proof 3: THERE IS A QUEEN standing next to the THRONE OF CHRIST. See Psalm 45:10: “The queen stood on thy right hand, in gilded clothing; surrounded with variety.”
If Psalm 45 is ADDRESSED TO CHRIST (and Saint Paul tells us via Hebrews that it is), and if Christ’s THRONE is in HEAVEN (and the Bible tells us it is), and if there is a QUEEN standing on the right of Christ’s throne (and Psalm 45 tells us there is), then we can come to only ONE CONCLUSION: There is a Queen in Heaven.
The Bible clearly states this; it’s right there in black and white. Words addressed to Christ in Heaven: “The queen stood on thy right hand in gilded clothing…”
Questions for the Protestant would be:
A) Does Hebrews 1:6, et seq., quote from Psalm 45 and tell us that Psalm 45 is addressed to Christ? Yes or no?
B) Does Psalm 45 make reference to the throne of God? Yes or no?
C) Is God’s throne in Heaven? Yes or no?
D) Does Psalm 45 state that there is a queen standing on the right hand side of Christ? Yes or no?
Now that we have established that there is a true Queen of Heaven, who is that queen? The Bible tells us that it is the Blessed Virgin (who is the true Ark of the Covenant, as She held the true manna that came down from Heaven within her womb, i.e., Christ the Lord).
Proof 1: The sign prophesied in Isaiah is the Blessed Virgin.
See Isaiah 7:11, et seq: “ASK THEE A SIGN of the Lord thy God, either unto the depth of hell OR UNTO THE HEIGHT ABOVE. [12] And Achaz said: I will not ask, and I will not tempt the Lord. [13] And he said: Hear ye therefore, O house of David: Is it a small thing for you to be grievous to men, that you are grievous to my God also? [14] Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign. BEHOLD A VIRGIN SHALL CONCEIVE AND BEAR A SON, and his name shall be called Emmanuel.”
Now, compare to Revelation 11:19, 12:1, et seq:
“And the temple of God was opened in heaven: and the ARK OF HIS TESTAMENT was seen in his temple, and there were lightnings, and voices, and an earthquake, and great hail. AND A GREAT SIGN APPEARED IN HEAVEN, A WOMAN clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, AND ON HER HEAD A CROWN OF TWELVE STARS. [2] And being with child, she cried travailing in birth, and was in pain to be delivered. [3] And there was seen another sign in heaven: and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads, and ten horns: and on his heads seven diadems: [4] And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman who was ready to be delivered; that, when she should be delivered, he might devour her son. [5] AND SHE BROUGHT FORTH A MAN CHILD WHO WAS TO RULE ALL NATIONS WITH AN IRON ROD, AND HER SON WAS TAKEN UP TO GOD AND TO HIS THRONE.”
Questions for the Protestant:
1) Who is the man child who is to rule with an iron rod? (See, e.g., Revelation 19:11-15 for the answer.)
2) Who is the great red dragon? (See verse 9 of Revelation 12 for the answer).
3) Who fights the great red dragon? (See verse 7).
4) What woman in history gave birth to the “man child who was to rule all nations with an iron rod”? See Luke 2:1, et seq., for the answer.
Every single one of the persons mentioned in Revelation, chapter 12, is a real person: Christ, God the Father, the devil, Saint Michael the archangel. They are not symbols.
If that is true (and it most certainly is), then who is the woman that is A SIGN THAT APPEARS IN HEAVEN while wearing a CROWN, who gives birth to the person we call EMMANUEL?
Who is that?
Having established 1) that the Bible teaches there is a true Queen of Heaven (Psalm 45), and having established 2) that a woman crowned as a queen gives birth to the man child who will rule all nations with an iron rod (Revelation 12), and having established 3) that that queen can be none other than the Blessed Virgin Mary (the sign that appears in THE HEIGHT ABOVE per Isaiah), what does the Bible also tell us?
The Bible tells us that people will be praying to the Queen of Heaven who stands at the right hand of Christ.
Psalm 45 shifts from addressing Christ (“thy throne, O God”) to addressing itself to the Queen standing at the right side of His throne at verse 10: “Hearken, O daughter, and consider…”
Reading through the psalm, we come to these verses:
Psalm 45: 10-12: Hearken, O daughter, and consider, and incline thine ear; forget also thine own people and thy father’s house.
11So shall the king greatly desire thy beauty: for he is thy Lord; and worship thou him.
12And the daughter of Tyre shall be there with a gift; EVEN THE RICH AMONG THE PEOPLE SHALL INTREAT THY FAVOUR.”
Thus, the Bible establishes that EVEN THE RICH AMONG THE PEOPLE SHALL INTREAT the FAVOUR OF THE QUEEN standing NEXT TO THE THRONE of Christ, which is IN HEAVEN.
It’s right there in the Bible!
And then, lastly, what does Psalm 45 say to the Queen at the end?
Psalm 45:17: I will make thy name to be remembered IN ALL GENERATIONS. Therefore SHALL THE PEOPLE PRAISE THEE FOR EVER AND EVER.”
Compare Luke 1:48: “For behold, from henceforth ALL GENERATIONS SHALL CALL ME BLESSED.”
Thus, Catholics can prove the following from the Bible:
1. Psalm 45 (KJV) is addressed to Christ (Hebrews 1:6, et seq).
2. Christ’s throne is in Heaven (Revelation 3:21).
3. There is a Queen who stands at the right hand of Christ’s throne (Psalm 45:10).
4. If Christ’s throne is in Heaven, and there is a Queen standing right next to it, then the Queen is also in Heaven (common sense).
5. Isaiah states that “a sign” that God will give is a Virgin who bears Emmanuel (Isaiah 7:14).
6. The Blessed Virgin is the one who bears Emmanuel (Matthew 1:22, et seq.)
7. The great sign of Revelation, a woman who appears in Heaven wearing a crown, gives birth to the man child who will rule the nations with a rod of iron and fulfills the prophecy of Isaiah (Revelation 12:5).
8. That man child is Jesus Christ (Revelation 19:11, et seq.)
9. The woman who appears as a queen in Heaven wearing a crown and who gives birth to Christ is none other than THE BLESSED VIRGIN.
10. Thus, now that we know the Blessed Virgin is the Queen of Heaven, we know from Psalm 45 that EVEN THE RICH AMONG THE PEOPLE SHALL INTREAT Her favour.
11. Psalm 45 also tells us that the people shall praise Her “for ever and ever.”
12. Luke tells us that “all generations shall call me blessed.”
It’s all there in the Bible, every bit of it, and we Catholics can demonstrate it by merely providing the books, chapters, and verses.
PRAYERS TO THE BLESSED VIRGIN: 100% BIBLICAL.
ISSUE: Skipping to the last one for now, which is related to the info above: 1965..Mary proclaimed mother of the church by pope Paul VI
ANSWER: The Bible teaches that Mary is the Mother of the Church.
We have established that the woman who appears as a queen in Heaven and who gives birth to the man child who will rule the nations with an iron rod can be none other than the Blessed Virgin Mary. Thus, the woman mentioned in Revelation 12 is the Blessed Virgin Mary.
At Revelation 12:!7, we read: “ And the dragon was angry against THE WOMAN and went to make war with THE REST OF HER SEED, WHO KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD AND HAVE THE TESTIMONY OF JESUS CHRIST.”
Who are the people who “keep the commandments of God and HAVE THE TESTIMONY OF JESUS CHRIST” other than Christians, i.e., THE CHURCH?
Who else could that possibly be? Jewish people? Muslims? Hindus? Atheists?
If the woman of Revelation 12 is the Blessed Virgin (and Catholics can establish that without doubt), and if THE REST OF HER SEED are those people who keep the commandments and have the testimony of Jesus Christ (ditto), and if such people constitute THE CHURCH, then the only logical conclusion one can come to is that Mary is the (spiritual) Mother of the Church, which is THE REST OF HER SEED.
THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY AS (SPIRITUAL) MOTHER OF THE CHURCH (“the rest of Her seed”): 100% BIBLICAL.
All scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness. so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:16
For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Timothy 2:5
Jesus corrects a sincere, but mistaken, woman in Luke 11:27-28…As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, “Blesses is the the mother who gave you birth and nursed you.” He replied, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.”
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.
Ephesians 2:8,9
For although they knew God, the neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles. Romans 1:21-23
Brian quoted: “All scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness. so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:16”
Yes, and if my doctor told me that all green, leafy vegetables are useful for providing nutrients and that eating them is healthy, it does not mean that *ONLY* green, leafy vegetables are useful for providing nutrients and that eating them is the only thing that is healthy.
“For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Timothy 2:5”
Yeah. So? Jesus chose to give to some the power to act for him.
“Jesus corrects a sincere, but mistaken, woman in Luke 11:27-28…As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, “Blesses is the the mother who gave you birth and nursed you.” He replied, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.””
Yes. And Our Lady heard the word of God and obeyed it. She’s not just some random woman who happened to bear and nurse the Lord. She was the woman who said, “My soul doth magnify the Lord,
And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour
Because He hath regarded the humility of his handmaid: for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.”
So why are you refusing to call her blessed, since it is in the Bible?
“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.
Ephesians 2:8,9”
You’re ignoring James 2:26: “For even as the body without the spirit is dead; so also faith without works is dead.” Of course faith is required; but so are works.
“For although they knew God, the neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, ”
Catholics glorify God and give thanks to Him. Clearly none of the passage is referring to Catholics. And Catholics do not worship statues as God. Instead of being so gullible, swallowing whole the lies told by those who hate the Church, why don’t you do some basic research? Even a quick online search will give you plenty of information; for example, https://www.catholic.com/tract/do-catholics-worship-statues
October 31, 1517…God used 1 man to point out the errors of a church that had drifted far way from the scriptures.(sic)
Ah yes, the sin of presumption. God’s permissive will allowed a paranoid, schizophrenic, alcoholic, rabidly antisemitic, feces consuming Monk who refused to control his libido to poorly exercise his free will. The Almighty has also allowed you and many others to do the same thing, Brian.
reading the 95 Theses would be a great start to becoming a Christian.
The unlearned would be largely misled by what the mad Monk wrote. However, all should heed that which the mad Monk got right:
“71. Let him be anathema and accursed who denies the apostolic character of the indulgences;”
Much of the focus in the article and the corresponding report is on sexual abuse. There is no mention of homosexual bishops, some of whom wear red hats. I recall that a few years ago, at a USCCB meeting, Cardinal Cupich took to the floor to make clear that sex between consenting adults does not constitute abuse. While homosexuality in the episcopate may not be a new phenomenon, it should be weeded out.
A thoroughly modern functionary, that Cardinal Cupich! The “consenting adults” thingy. It’s a bit like the “new math.” If the abuse is mutual, then both abuses cancel each other out…
What about the unmentioned “chastity”? The standard position, so to speak, is that homosexual activity is not a violation of chastity, since chastity applies only to binary sex between a man and woman, and not to (exempted) homosexual frolicking and such.
I’m reminded of a prominent and retiring cardinal who had been charged with abusing a minor, and then the charge was retracted, for one reason or another. When asked on prime time whether he had ever abused a minor, he responded/elided “I have never violated my vow of chastity.”
In my view, without supernatural intervention, the institutional church will be rendered extinct in 99% of North America well before 2050, perhaps well before 2040.
It might be even sooner than that, sad to say.
The promise of Christ that He will not abandon His Church guarantees she will continued to exist and in places thrive.
You obviously don’t know the many families who are living devout and holy lives, passing on the Faith to their children or priests young and old who sit in the confessional for hours, priests are there and people come.
With the attitude that 99% will fall away why not just give up?
Believe me I have seen all sorts of filthy sin, horrible betrayal, abuse of authority and bad clergy. If I had the attitude that is mentioned above I would have been gone long ago.
My question is what are you doing (other than making dire and discouraging comments) to actually help the situation?
“The promise of Christ that He will not abandon His Church guarantees she will continued to exist and in places thrive.” The guarantee does not mean that it will continue to exist and thrive in all places and at all times unto the end of the world. As an example, I give you North Africa. You also ignore the qualifiers that I attached, such as “institutional church,” (meaning the church as a visible, above-ground organization, with churches, dioceses, the Vatican, the College of Cardinals, etc–until Constantine, we were an underground band) “99% of North America,” which means I am well aware of the faithful families in faithful places which you mention–I correspond regularly with such a family in the Salina, Kansas diocese–and “without supernatural intervention.” I live in the Archdiocese of Chicago, and when you go to mass here and look around at the congregation, you might think this is a retirement community. I think it is outrageously optimistic to think that the church in Chicago will survive until 2050 without a miracle. I would predict extinction here by 2035 at the latest. As for what I am doing–one thing is telling the truth as I see it. I don’t find that to be the futile endeavor you seem to think it is.
Yes, I expect so.
But to whom shall you go? If you want to live in communion with the Church and live a Sacramental life there is nowhere else. You might have experienced bad priests and there are many. Yet I’m sorry, Sir, there are many more good, faithful and devout priests (and some bishops too).
All we hear about are the bad ones.
Reading all of this is extremely disheartening. However, I am missing the mention of Jesus and of hope; hope and trust in the Lord God Jesus Christ. He does not sleep, He sees everything, His Sacred Heart bleeds for His priests. We are living in the most evil Anti-Christ time and evil reigns in the Church and the nations. Jesus said: “I am freezing, I am hungry, I am thirsty. Tell my Priests to give me warmth by their love for Me to bring me souls….how far away are most to comprehend the inexhaustible treasures of my Sacred Heart….My holy Mother urges me to pour out these treasures…My priests who I love so much, they are my other Me.” (The Servant of God Johann Baptist Reus, by F. Baumann, a.a.O.) Only Divine Intervention will restore the Church. Meanwhile Priests and the faithful should offer themselves up and consecrate themselves to the Sacred Heart of Jesus.
Mark: “The SSPX do recognise the authority of the Pope they even mention him in the canon of the mass.” They claim they recognize the authority of the pope, but the claim is an obvious lie. It is not backed up by acts of obedience towards the pope and Holy See. If this were not so, then why would Pope Francis have cited as one reason for his partial suppression of the 1962 mass that Benedict’s Summorum Pontificum had failed to bring back the SSPX–therfore, liberalizing the use of the older mass had been a mistaken experiment which needed to be rolled back? You can’t bring back someone who isn’t gone–someone who never left. Let’s not play silly word games to cover up the fact of the SSPX having gone into schism.
– “One concrete result of all this is that priests are not recruiting replacements for themselves.” This is true. The chancery called me in 3 weeks prior to ordination. With no prior concerns expressed and after 6 years of formation, I was denied ordination in 45 minutes. The two actors, newly responsible for the program could not say this, but my pastor speculated it was due to my orthodoxy. My bishop was not interested in discussing it. How could he? These two hires had important jobs. Surely their discernment out-weighed the experience of pastors and professors who knew me. Sadly, among the faithful in the diocese this became widely known. Though never openly discussed, it scandalized many. Though it would not surprise Rev. Stravinskas, the expected next new class was postponed because there were too few applicants – not because of me, but because of the larger problem my circumstance revealed.
A comprehensive discussion by fervent writers, point and counterpoint! Views have been well stated and yet, we must bow the knee to God for the final word. Well held opinions are to be respected yet, He gives us the dividing line.
Colossians 3:17 And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.
1 Peter 4:11 whoever speaks, as one who speaks oracles of God; whoever serves, as one who serves by the strength that God supplies—in order that in everything God may be glorified through Jesus Christ. To him belong glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.
1 Samuel 2:30 Therefore the Lord, the God of Israel, declares: ‘I promised that your house and the house of your father should go in and out before me forever,’ but now the Lord declares: ‘Far be it from me, for those who honour me I will honour, and those who despise me shall be lightly esteemed.
1 Corinthians 10:31 So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.
Colossians 3:23 Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men,
Martin Luther corrected none of the errors and produced more errors even worse. His aim with the “95 Theses” was maligned, it was not from grace or goodwill. The “Theses” do not have sense for the true life of the Church; meaning, they offer no healing truth. The “Theses” reveal a cleric that had turned on his vocation. To say “God used him” as a way for the Church denies the essential reality of his “turning away his face” -which is the very thing the Church has exposed already.
Dear Elias:
When the “L” word surfaces, mudslinging and name calling becomes the order of the day amongst Catholics. Was it something he said? After some 500 years could bygones not be bygones?
Hazy and imprecise statements appear, yet they tend to be generalizations! Where is the meat on “the bone of contention”, one might ask?
It is odd that I have been cast as an apologist when I barely know anything of the man. Yet, he seems to have attracted a wide following. Perhaps a discerning Catholic would like to bring some specifics to the table for us to reconnoiter?
All the same, “Pope Benedict XVI’s recent weekly public addresses in St. Peter’s Square, he quoted Martin Luther in declaring “Sola fide,” that salvation is by faith alone.” This was from 2009, if I’m not mistaken.
Benedict is a highly intelligent man and faithful servant of Christ. His statement honours the early traditions of the Catholic Church. Perhaps it is time for discerning Catholics to read their Bibles and find concordance with Pope Benedict. I say this with respect and regard for the Catholic Church.
May the Lord bless you,
Brian
Brian Young who’s arguing? Luther’s sorry bones will have to contend in eternity with what he did and contend with the meat Judgment Day gives him back, at the last, poor sod. If you feel it will serve some purpose for you to go reconnoitering down rabbit holes to see which bones not to pick and to try to remake the outcome -can I stop you? All I did was submit to everyone here my own statement on the matter.
If God saves by faith alone Luther never expressed that saving faith; nor did he live it; nor did he ever repent of that, in the way for us to know that he did.