Apologetics | Blogger Priest

References to Pagan Rome Used Against the Church

Posted on January 21, 2011 by Father Joe

Revelation 18:2-8;24 is often misapplied to the Roman Catholic Church. The great harlot Babylon symbolizes the Rome of pagans not of Christians. Despite persecution and martyrdom, Christians of the first century are urged not to surrender their precious faith in Christ.

What is a Christian?

Since anti-Catholics often renounce the Christian nature of Catholicism, we would do well to look at the sober and rich definition of this question in the universal catechism:

[CCC #1694] Incorporated into Christ by Baptism, Christians are “dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus” and so participate in the life of the Risen Lord (Romans 6:11 and cf. 6:5; cf. Col. 2:12). Following Christ and united with him (cf. John 15:5), Christians can strive to be “imitators of God as beloved children, and walk in love” (Ephesians 5:1-2) by conforming their thoughts, words and actions to the “mind . . . which is yours in Christ Jesus” (Phil. 2:5), and by following his example (cf. John 13:12-16).

For more such reading, contact me about getting my book, DEFENDING THE CATHOLIC FAITH.

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Apologetics, Bible, Catholic, Church, Discipleship, Evangelization, Faith | 1 Comment »

Isolated Verses Misused Against the Church

Posted on January 17, 2011 by Father Joe

A frequent tactic used by critics of Catholicism is to use verses orphaned from their proper context to impugn or undermine the teaching authority of the Church. They both misunderstand and misapply these passages so as to give their personal interpretation credence against the Magisterium. It is symptomatic of the Protestant individualism that often privatizes faith over the corporate understanding of a Church established and sustained by our Lord.

I write you these things about those who would deceive you. As for you, the anointing that you received from him remains in you, so that you do not need anyone to teach you. But his anointing teaches you about everything and is true and not false; just as it taught you, remain in him. (1 John 2:26-27).

The initial difficulty in attacks of this sort is the very origin of the Bible, particularly the New Testament. The Catholic Church gathered and reproduced the canon of the Bible for the believers. As the Mother of the Bible, the Church and her bishops saw no challenge between biblical truth and her authority. The fundamentalist tends to be short-sighted in his historical assessments. This leads to another problem, in that the text he would use as a weapon against Catholicism becomes his own trap. The effort backfires.

His own role as a teacher of faith contradicts a literal reading of these verses. John speaks here with the authority of an apostle, a role which shall find its succession in the bishops. The warning here is not against the Magisterium of the Church, but against those who would lead God’s people astray. There is no Gospel that saves other than that of Jesus Christ. No community possesses any secret knowledge that surpasses that of the public proclamation of the true Church. Keeping faith in Christ Jesus, the believer is baptized and anointed (confirmation), receiving the Spirit of wisdom, the Holy Spirit. We have a responsibility to know the true faith and to spread it. This is the mission of the Church. The Christian has no need to seek another religious truth and we are to remain in solidarity with the chosen community of faith and in union with God. True wisdom and faith comes as a gift from God.

Further, the Holy Spirit leads the humble person to God. Against the Gnostic heretics, John is defending the Catholic truth that Jesus is the anointed Holy One, the Christ. Jesus Christ is indeed the revelation of the Father. In a certain sense, the “sola scriptura” critic of Catholicism is akin to these ancient Gnostics. While they believe that Jesus is both Christ and Savior; like the Gnostics, they minimize the importance of the material in regards to the spiritual. Thus, the Mystical Body and pre-eminence of the Church is denied, the sacramental signs are ridiculed, and the significance of the body in our personhood is often maligned for its wickedness.

Another interesting element about the verses given is their context. At the end of chapter two, something is said about our justification that is sure to make the anti-Catholic reviewer uncomfortable:

If you know that he is righteous, you may be sure that everyone who does right is born of him. (1 John 2:29).

A real sign of our being “born again” is our just behavior; dare I say our good works?
The anti-Catholic critic will sometimes resort to trying to scare Catholics. He argues that time is running out and that Catholics, no matter how well-meaning, are in the wrong camp and facing the prospect of damnation.

So then each of us shall give an account of himself to God. (Romans 14:12).

The detractor of Catholicism would do well to read a few verses earlier,

Why then do you judge your brother? Or you, why do you look down on your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God. (Romans 14:10).

Dissimilar from most other institutions, the inherent unity of Church members in Christ means that an attack against one is an assault on all. Similarly, if one targets the Catholic Church, then every Catholic believer is between the cross-hairs. The Church is a family. It is not really possible to hate the Church but to love individual Catholics. Hate the family, and you hate all of us. We are the Church.

While certain critical voices would employ such verses in their apologetics, the citation from Romans points to how one’s faith is actualized by the life of charity and following the commandments. We will each have to give an accounting for what we did in the body, either good or evil. While there is a particular judgment for each of us, there will also be a general judgment at the end of the world. Individual souls as members of God’s holy people or those for whom the Church has interceded will be accorded the reward of the just. The communion of saints is a celebration of the unity of the Church among those glorified by grace and thus worthy of heaven. Having repented, they place their faith in Jesus. They are washed clean in the blood of the Lamb and given the wedding garment of heaven as their vestiture. Those who reject the gift of salvation remain lost in their sins. They are separated from God and breached from their brothers and sisters by their own selfishness and iniquity.

But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all truth. He will not speak on his own, but he will speak what he hears, and will declare to you the things that are coming. (John 16:13).

These words are not written for various individuals apart from the believing community; these words regarding the Holy Spirit are directed to the Church as a whole. This promise of Christ is fulfilled when the Holy Spirit descended upon the infant Church at Pentecost. Imaged as tongues of flame over the heads of the apostles, the leadership of the Church would always be enlightened and protected in the truth. Individual members can and should invoke the Holy Spirit for wisdom. But, the gift of infallibility and steadfastness in the truth is conferred upon the Church, particularly the Magisterium, and not to every individual believer. The assurance of Christ’s teachings require that members of the faith take seriously the guidance of their lawful shepherds and that they seek to conform their hearts and minds to that of Christ realized in the teaching Church. Our Lord speaks to us through his Church.

As we have said before, and now I say again, if anyone preaches to you a gospel other than the one that you received, let that one be accursed! (Galatians 1:9).

Apart from Christ’s true Church, ministers and the people who follow them fall ever further from the truth. Fundamentalists might love this verse, but it also places them under divine judgment. Originally it applied to those missionaries who insisted that pagans had to become Jews before becoming Christians. Thus, circumcision and other Jewish rituals would be placed on par with the saving Cross of Christ. Paul denounces this activity and insists that his is the correct Gospel proclamation. Catholics place faith in Jesus and consider baptism as the manner in which we join the new People of God and are touched by Christ’s saving activity. The verse can in no way be applied against the Catholic Church. Ours is a faith in continuity with history: to the early Fathers, to the apostles and to Christ.

Now I am reminding you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you indeed received and in which you also stand. Through it you are also being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. For I handed on to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures; … (1 Corinthians 15:1-4).

Paul recalls the living TRADITION which he himself received and transmitted to the Corinthians. Paul stresses their faith in Christ and in his saving actions against the views of those who would deny the bodily resurrection of the Lord. Catholics believe in this very same Gospel and retain the ancient traditions repudiated by many non-Catholics.

Then he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” And they said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus….” (Acts 16:30-31).

Here the anti-Catholic critic is purposely deceptive. As the verse reads, it appears that salvation is an entirely personal matter. Nothing could be further from the case. The complete verse reads as follows,

“And they said, ‘Believe in the Lord Jesus and you and your household will be saved.” (verse 31)

We read further:

So they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to everyone in his house. He took them in at that hour of the night and bathed their wounds; then he and all his family were baptized at once. He brought them up into his house and provided a meal and with his household rejoiced at having come to faith in God. (Acts 16:32-34).

Can we presume that even the babies of the household were baptized? Most probably it is so. The household or family becomes the setting for the “little church.” The gift of faith brings people to Christ, not simply as isolated individuals, but corporately– as a family in faith.

Whoever possesses the Son has life; whoever does not possess the Son of God does not have life. I write these things to you so that you may know that you have eternal life, you who believe in the name of the Son of God. (1 John 5:12-13).

Pope John Paul II stressed this crucial element of the Good News in his encyclical on the Gospel of Life. Christ is the author of life and makes possible our share in eternal life.

For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him might not perish but might have eternal life. (John 3:16).

Again, this is a central teaching of the Catholic faith. Those who would use it to stress belief or faith profession over the merits of the Christian life would do well to read verses 20-21:

For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come toward the light, so that his works might not be exposed. But whoever lives the truth comes to the light, so that his works may be clearly seen as done in God.

We believe as Catholics that God will show his face to those who search for him with humility and with sincere hearts.

When you look for me, you will find me. Yes, when you seek me with all your heart… (Jeremiah 29:13).

God is the source of our being. He gives our lives meaning. As St. Augustine would say, “Our hearts are restless O Lord, until they rest in you.”

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Apologetics, Bible, Catholic, Evangelization, Faith, Holy Spirit | Leave a comment »

Sola Scriptura?

Posted on January 16, 2011 by Father Joe

Catholics poorly educated in their faith and non-Catholics filled with prejudices, often prejudge the Catholic faith or difficult issues of our discipleship. Such biases, reinforced by others with grievances, are often hard to overcome– no matter how clearly they are shown to be wrong. The matter of “sola scriptura” is a case in point. Can a believer in Christ interpret the Bible without any help from anyone else and without any Magisterium of the Church? While the fundamentalist might distort Scripture by citing isolated verses against Catholic positions; any Scriptures shown to challenge them are dismissed as irrelevant or misinterpreted, no matter how the full context of the teaching is intelligently explained. They are blind to the fact that they have made themselves or their favorite minister into their own private Magisterium– the final authority. They ridicule others holding the same view of “sola scriptura” who interpret the Scriptures differently than they do. Despite the thousands of fragments into which Protestantism has fallen, they insist that there is no NEED for a genuine teaching authority safeguarded by the Holy Spirit in the Church. They violate salvation history by denying that the Church came into being prior to the completion of the Scriptural canon and the composition of the New Testament. Facts do not matter to them unless they are “their” facts. The living tradition and the authority of the Church have always had a part to play in regard to the formation and the truths of Scripture. Just as they reject a teaching authority and are blind to their own claims to infallible interpretation, so too are they hesitant to admit their own church traditions, even if they are only a generation or so old. The “sola scriptura” Christians view the Bible as emerging from some vacuum in time to be picked up later by men who themselves would form churches. This contradicts the fact that Jesus himself said that he was going to found a Church and that he was going to appoint his apostles, with Peter at the head, as its shepherds. Their contradictions to this do not wash. No Catholic Church, no Christian Bible! It is as simple as that, and yet, they still refuse to believe.

False is their view that all personal interpretation of the Bible is forbidden to Catholics. Catholic Christians will often search the Bible for personal edification and for the voice of God in their lives. What the Church holds is that an individual’s interpretation must not contradict a text that has a universally accepted interpretation in the Church, such as regarding the identity or nature of Christ and the means of our salvation, etc. Accompanied by good footnotes and commentaries, the Catholic reader can make great personal use of the Scriptures.

When trounced by a Catholic who really knows the Bible, the anti-Catholic bigot will resort to name-calling. Upon this very topic, I have witnessed their categorization of God’s Church as “the Roman whore” and as a “prostitute.” Since St. Paul tells us that husbands should love their wives as Christ has loved the Church, I suppose the derogatory language ultimately targets Christ, no matter whether they know this or not. How would any husband feel to have his wife degraded in this manner? Do they not fear judgment? Failing at any coherent dialogue, the anti-Catholic will tell so-called honest men and women to run for their lives. In other words, even conversation with knowledgeable Catholics is unwarranted compromise. Instead, they seek out the gullible and the intellectually ill-equipped who can be easily maneuvered into their camp. One anti-Catholic author advises Protestants to avoid the Catholic Church and her emissaries as one would the “bubonic plague” and that otherwise, “AIDs and death” might await them.

After urging avoidance, they have the audacity to say that the Catholic Church refuses to allow people to use the brains God gave them. The next big lie is that the Church forbad Catholics to read the Bible. The truth is, that long before these anti-Catholic bible Christians or their founders came into existence, the Church had to contend with heresy and the Protestant reformation. Some of these flawed bible texts, even the fundamentalists today would reject. The Church did not ban the Bible; rather, she wanted to insure that Catholics read bibles that were accurate and complete. This is the truth upon the matter. Popes have urged believers to approach the Scriptures with real humility and to invoke the Spirit of truth. The Scriptures confirm the claims of the Catholic Church and that of our fathers in faith. This point is also quickly verifiable; however, anti-Catholic critics will have none of it. Indeed they argue the opposite is true. Again, the argument will move from the issues to an attack on the institution and those who speak for her. Thus, someone of my likes would be dubbed “poisoned by his pride” and the Church denounced as a “monstrous entity” which “enslaves the souls of men” in preparation for hell. As you can see, they do not exactly like us. They reduce the Gospel to a propaganda program of hatred and misinformation.

For more such reading, contact me about getting my book, DEFENDING THE CATHOLIC FAITH.

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Apologetics, Bible, Catholic, Church, Evangelization, Faith | Leave a comment »

Scripture & Tradition

Posted on January 12, 2011 by Father Joe

Why must we deal with anti-Catholic critics and their distortions? The fact is that Scripture, separated from the living tradition and Magisterium of the Church, loses its grounding and can be easily corrupted. The assertion that the authenticity of the Scriptures rests entirely upon itself is an argument that runs counter to the facts and the history of God’s people. The Church collected and, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, is the source for the New Testament. Before one word of the Gospel was written, there was the ministering and teaching Catholic Church. The notion that Old Testament prophesies legitimate the Bible fails to recognize that the promise was given to the Jewish people, the first people called by God to be in covenant with him. There are no Scriptures separated from a community established by God. The Catholic Church recognizes that Old Testament prophecies of the coming Messiah do indeed point to Jesus. This is not a matter of debate. Some anti-Catholic bigots still insist upon fighting the Catholic Church and her historical role in all this.

For more such reading, contact me about getting my book, DEFENDING THE CATHOLIC FAITH.

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Apologetics, Bible, Catholic, Faith, Pope | Leave a comment »

Did the Catholic Church Prohibit Bible Reading?

Posted on January 11, 2011 by Father Joe

An anti-Catholic critic claimed knowing elderly ex-Catholics who were generally not encouraged by the priests and nuns to read God’s Word. I asked an older priest about this and he said he never heard such a thing; indeed, a special indulgence was granted to anyone who faithfully read the Bible on a daily basis. Pope Benedict XV wrote in his encyclical Spiritus Paraclitus (1920): “A partial indulgence is granted to the faithful who, with the veneration due the divine Word, make a spiritual reading from the Sacred Scriptures. A plenary indulgence is granted if this reading is continued for at least one half an hour.” My late aunt admitted that she was hesitant to read the Bible for fear of misinterpreting the texts; however, such a personal sentiment cannot be said to reflect a Catholic prohibition.

Anti-Catholic apologists, themselves, use isolated bits-and-pieces to refute Catholic teachings and then accuse the Church of using the same flawed methods. Such just is not the case. An anti-Catholic author, David Cloud, furthered such distortions in an online article entitled, “The KJV and the Latin Vulgate.” He writes:

The Council of Trent (1545-1564) placed the Bible on its list of prohibited books, and forbade any person to read the Bible without a license from a Roman Catholic bishop or inquisitor. The Council added these words: “That if any one shall dare to read or keep in his possession that book, without such a license, he shall not receive absolution till he has given it up to his ordinary.”

Rome’s attempt to keep the Bible from men has continued to recent times. Pope Pius VII (1800-1823) denounced the Bible Society and expressed shock at the circulation of the Scriptures. Pius VII said, “It is evidence from experience, that the holy Scriptures, when circulated in the vulgar tongue, have, through the temerity of men, produced more harm than benefit.” Pope Leo XII called the Protestant Bible the “Gospel of the Devil” in an encyclical letter of 1824. Pope Gregory XVI (1831-1846) railed “against the publication, distribution, reading, and possession of books of the holy Scriptures translated into the vulgar tongue.”

Pope Leo XII, in January 1850, condemned the Bible Societies and admitted the fact that the distribution of Scripture has “long been condemned by the holy chair.”

Let us look at his assertions. First, did the Council of Trent really prohibit the reading and ownership of the Bible? The answer is, no. The council fathers decreed on April 8, 1546, “. . . the synod, following the examples of the orthodox Fathers, receives and venerates with an equal affection of piety and reverence all the books both of the Old and New Testament, –seeing that one God is the author of both, . . . .” Oddly, I could not find the quotation as given by the cited author; however, I did find decrees regarding UNAPPROVED and or FAULTY translations of the Scriptures. Just as with theological works, the Church asserted her role over their legitimate use. To suggest that the Council of Trent opposed the authentic Word of God is untrue. Second, the prohibition for Catholics in joining Bible Societies was due to the fact that these said groups did not use Scriptures approved by Church sources and were quite anti-Catholic in their approach. Such has been the continued problem with gullible Catholics stolen from Christ’s Church by anti-Catholic fundamentalist bible study programs, some which particularly target Catholics. Again, this was no disdain for the Holy Scriptures, only for the malicious intent by which some men used them. Third, the concern about bible distribution was that Protestant bibles were being circulated which in missing texts and in footnotes often questioned and ridiculed Catholic teaching. Obviously, the Church preferred that Catholics read bibles which reflected the orthodox Catholic interpretation of the Word of God. The misuse of the Gospel against the Church established by Christ himself is as Pope Leo XII noted nothing less than satanic. Cloud’s interpretation of Church history, or tradition, is as cloudy as the anti-Catholic’s understanding of the Scriptures.

Having attacked Christ’s Church, the anti-Catholic bigot will sometimes have the audacity to call the Catholics whom he addresses by the label, “friends.” This specious sign of affection was used several years ago by the pornography and prostitute addicted Jimmy Swaggert in a pamphlet to proselytize Catholics. Do not be fooled. Such critics will neither break bread nor pray in union of mind and heart with the Catholic. Indeed, the anti-Catholic critic, when he runs out of material, will often harp about the so-called multitude killed by Catholics as declared heretics. He tries to plant his own tags of intolerance and prejudice upon the Catholic Church.

It is true that civil societies in the past did engage in much insular nonsense, Catholic and Protestant, however, both camps equated spiritual murder with physical murder and subsequently confused the penalties. Neither Protestants nor Catholics would want to be classified by the actions of dishonest extremists. Returning to the subject of the Bible, it is my supposition that if properly studied, with care to the sources and the literary forms of the text, it will affirm the Catholic faith. Such openness to the truth of the Scriptures has led many of the more astute Protestants into the Catholic Church. However, the more emotional, embittered, and ignorant the researcher– the less affected they are by such truths or the claims of the Catholic Church. The message of our loving God to such critics would be to put aside their prejudice and hatred; taste and see the goodness of the Lord in the Catholic community of faith.

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Apologetics, Bible, Catholic, Church, Evangelization, Faith, God, Pope | 5 Comments »

Dealing with Anti-Catholicism

Posted on January 10, 2011 by Father Joe

I wish I could say that apologetics with fundamentalists is always nice and friendly. But I cannot. We have arguments with certain fundamentalists who hate the Church and all for which Catholicism stands. It is hard to be gentle with bigots. The ecumenical gestures of dialogue, prayer and social cooperation are spurned by them. They do not acknowledge Catholics as Christian brothers and sisters. Indeed, except for singular exceptions, they would say the members of the Church are damned. Many names are used against us: Idolaters, Pagans, Papists, Romanists, etc. Our worship is likewise demeaned as alternately “cookie worship” [Eucharist] and “goddess worship” [Mary]. They believe we are Pelagian heretics who seek to save ourselves with our own good works apart from faith in Jesus. The most fiendish of them will insist that “true Christians,” meaning of their sort, can have no affiliation or cordial association with “demon worshiping” Catholics. They latch upon mentally disturbed ex-nuns and angry former priests to fortify their arsenal of polemics against Catholic teachings and practices.

As I have gotten older, I have tired somewhat of battling such prejudice, hatred and ignorance. Given my own inherited pugnacious nature, I came out swinging as a young priest. It irritated me that smarter men and women in the Church often ignored such challenges and failed to make a response. Indeed, some critics argued that apologetics ran against the grain of Vatican II ecumenism and rapprochement. However, such passivity allowed simple souls with weak faith to be picked off and stolen from the Church. I was one poor shepherd who felt duty-bound to protect his sheep. While my responses have sometimes rescued or preserved a soul from the fundamentalist wolves; I am saddened to admit that very few if any of the so-called wolves or preachers of hate were ever personally moved to abandon such attacks upon the Church. It was my Pollyanna hope that such critics might even be turned around to accept the claims of Catholicism and seek membership. In any case, such matters are best left in God’s hands since he is the source for both repentance and faith.

Here are a few general efforts to share truth and to refute error on behalf of the Church instituted by Jesus. Despite the assertions of Catholic haters, there is no Scripture which invalidates the claims of the Roman Catholic Church. Further, I would beseech all our Christian friends, who see Catholics as brothers and sisters in faith, not to be offended by the harshness of my arguments. They are not addressed to such men and women of good faith who honestly disagree with Catholics about particular points of doctrine or affiliation. I want to make a response to the anti-Catholic bigot, and thus the tone may be more severe and apologetic than usual in interfaith discussions.

Turning to my own faith convictions, I have great confidence in the infallibility of the Catholic faith as made possible by the protective influence of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit of truth guides our teachers in faith (the Magisterium or bishops who are in union with the Pope). The Spirit of truth inspires with divine authorship those written records regarded as canonical (Sacred Scripture). The Spirit of truth guides and gives life to the Church (Sacred Tradition). While revelation ended with the death of the last apostle, our understanding of Christian doctrine grows and matures.

The subject of this safeguard from the Holy Spirit is faith and morals. It does not include all the various secular and scientific truths, upon which the Church’s leaders and membership might make human judgments. Fundamentalists often lose sight of this and posit the popes with wielding authority and a degree of infallibility that they do not even claim. While doing this, they seem to take for themselves the very infallibility they would strip from the Holy Father. Ironically, liberal Catholics will sometimes clamor for papal change in regard to teachings about ministry or sexual morality, even though the popes do not have the power to change what God has demanded in divine positive law or which flows from objective natural law. The first group must understand that the Pope does not claim to be God; and the latter must humbly acknowledge that they have no divine prerogative or veto to treat the Pope as their flunky open to intimidation.

Many charges are made against us. A holdover from the reformation controversy over paid indulgences is the distortion that Catholicism offers salvation for sale. Today, many will offer a donation, called a stipend for a Mass. However, it is a gift, with or without monetary help— the sacraments are free– even if we have to find resources elsewhere to pay for the upkeep of our clergy, facilities and materials. Protestant churches also “pass the basket” so this material side cannot be used to harass the Catholic Church. Yes, we pray for the dead, not to hear ourselves talk, but to manifest our continued unity with our beloved deceased who may still be on their way to paradise. It is true that the price for their entry into heaven has been paid by the blood of Christ. However, we must be made perfect as our heavenly Father is perfect. Those in heaven do not need our prayers and those in hell cannot benefit from them. At least upon this much, the anti-Catholic fundamentalist and the Catholic might agree.

The Roman Catholic Church is the largest Church in the world. Catholics have taken seriously their commitment to love God and neighbor. Catholic schools and hospitals abound throughout the nation. Catholic Charities is one of the largest charity and social assistance organizations on the globe and second only to the U.S. Government. We follow Jesus who is the Way and the Truth and the Life. He gave us the Church as his special family and the breaking of his kingdom into the world. It is unfortunate that despite the Church’s incredible contributions to society that there should still be a few who hate and malign her.

Filed under: Apologetics, Bible, Catholic, Church, Discipleship, Evangelization, Faith, Mass, Pope | 3 Comments »

Finishing Up the Archbishop Milingo/Married Priests Debate

Posted on June 29, 2009 by Father Joe

FATHER JOE

Exorcists are usually quiet and humble men. Archbishop Milingo was a sensationalist and evidently relished the attention he got as a spiritual healer. He left himself open for this kind of fall; indeed, in uniting with George Augustus Stallings, he has found a man with an enormous ego to match his own. Are they Catholics of any sort now, or just a branch of the Moonies? Stallings has women priests, condones all sorts of immoral practices (sexual in particular), combines Christianity with teachings and practices from Kwaanza, the Koran, and the various pagan teachings of the East. As soon as he started his own Church, he eradicated the sacrament of Penance. His religion is pelagian, pagan and utterly religious relativism. His doctrine of the Trinity is modalistic and the first person of the Trinity is called MOTHER-FATHER. The twisted version of the Creed he uses at services speaks of Christ’s birth (while the Latin of the Mother Church in Rome speaks of our Lord becoming “incarnate” which implies in the womb. He also says that Christ “becomes” a person; however, while he became MAN, he had been the Second PERSON of the Blessed Trinity from all eternity.

The issue here is more than a demand against the discipline of celibacy for priests. We see with the archbishop a profound shift away from the orthodox faith and a renunciation of magisterial authority.

CHIA

Will Archbishop Milingo surprise us next by becoming a Muslim?. As an Exorcist he could be under attack by Stan. Other Exorcists should exorcise him.

FATHER JOE

“…by STAN?” You no doubt mean Satan, although I always suspected that Stan Laurel had a dark side, not to mention Oliver Hardy. Peace!

NAZARENE

I am more than shocked to read his self-defense [from the archbishop]. How could anyone say that he loves and obeys Jesus without obeying His Church? Does Archbishop Milingo’s new discovery of marriage in his late 70’s hold water? Come on! He should be preparing for a good death (this age is biblically a bonus), not engaging the Church with his confusion.

BRUNO

The Church seems to care less about the flock entrusted to her care.

FATHER JOE

What do you mean?

The Church still ministers the sacraments and helps the poor. The Church still proclaims the Gospel, both in and out of season. And as much as it pains us in the Church, those that breech the discipline and the teachings of the living Church need censure, so that others will not be led astray.

The current story about Stallings and Milingo is less about faith and charity as it is about selfish ego and greed.

MWENYA

You have no idea how we in Zambia feel about such a great man as Milingo. We will always love him not matter what you and your cohorts say.

FATHER JOE

It is inconsequential how people in Zambia feel about the renegade archbishop.

You can love whomever you want, the fact is that the archbishop is now excommunicated from the Church and is in a new union with formal heretics.

He attempted marriage outside the Church in a ceremony conducted by the Moonies, a Church that insists that a Korean fanatic is the Messiah (and according to some sources, God).

If he has sex with the woman, then that also makes him a fornicator since he is not free to marry. May God have mercy on his soul, and all those who follow him.

DAVID

My soul is in partnership with the beloved LUTHER of our times, the beloved Archbishop Milingo. Unlike you, he sees the will of God instead of the will of man.

“YOU are JOSHUA! Let the Lord’s own enter the Promised Land under your guidance. Thanks and thanks in Jesus name. Amen.”

FATHER JOE

There must be a translation issue, for while I might associate Milingo with Luther; I would tag neither as “beloved” given their rebellion against the See of Peter and their arrogance to the Church’s teachings and disciplines. I am convinced that the errant Archbishop is not complying with God’s will, but rather is following another spirit entirely. He has undermined the sacrament of marriage by his “attempted marriage” before the false messiah Moon and any physical congress is equivalent to fornication. He takes his followers, not to the promised land of Jesus, but to the false kingdom of insurrection and dissent. Given his peculiar behavior, I have to wonder if the once famous exorcist is not now possessed by the very entities he once combatted. No thanks, is my response to his appeal, I remain with Peter and Christ, not with Milingo, Stallings or Luther!

FIDELIS

Let the Catholic faithful pray for all those who spread errors in the Catholic faith. This is unthinkable in Nigeria, and can never be supported by any of the Catholic faithful in Nigeria. Rome is the center of our faith, and we must obey the Church. Satan is at work, and we must rise up to stop the enemy from destroying the Church. May we all pray for our separated brethren— pray that they come back to the fold.

DAMIAN

Miligo is in great error— may God pardon him.

FATHER FANO (NGCOBO)

With the Archbishop Milingo saga, the whole of the African Continent is slowly but surely waking up from its theological slumber. Milingo is the kind of a bishop-theologian for which the Continent of Africa has been looking. We all know that Rome and her Fathers care much less about the Continent in all matters African. In this day and age to argue that the Roman Catholic Church has absolute truth in everything borders on ignorance and blind theological pride. Our Continent will never be the same with bishop-theologians such as Milingo and others.

FATHER JOE

Archbishop Milingo had an arranged marriage witnessed by the cult-leader Moon, and you would recommend his judgment? You are being silly. The poor man betrayed his promises to God and the Church. Indeed, Father Fano, so have you. You counted race as more important than membership in the true Church established by Christ.

You make much of your not being affiliated with Rome. Well, so be it, run away from the ROCK all you want, there really is nowhere else to go. I grieve for your parishioners. You feign Catholic Christianity and yet you are only a pernicious kind of Protestant, and one who would steal from the Roman Catholic flock. The Holy Father is the ultimate bishop-theologian, and he has begged for Archbishop Milingo to come back to his senses. He has prayed for him, too. For all we know, this renowned exorcist may have been snagged by some spiritual evil that went under the radar of his discernment. The truth of the Gospel is for all men. There is no African Church or American Church. There is only THE CHURCH in Africa or in America. The difference is important. You are nothing new. You have made yourself a would-be pope. Nationalist churches have long been on the scene and they all suffer from a narrow perspective. The Catholic Church is still growing in the Third World, despite your castigation against the good priests and religious who have ministered and even sacrificed their lives to bring the truth of the Gospel to the sheep needing a shepherd. You are NOT that shepherd. You should go back to your religious community and renew your promises. We do not need priests who chase women or the disobedient who are more wolf than shepherd.

FATHER FANO

For too long, both the Western and European theologians have sought to define us and to force us into the mold of their disciplines.

FATHER JOE

The Catholic faith allows for enculturation. However, the deposit of faith must be preserved. Discipline must be upheld. The answer is not separation or dissent. Rather, The Church in Africa is called to weave their stories and lives into that of the universal Christian faith. You cannot properly do this as a Catholic by rupturing your link to the See of unity established by Christ. You should not lie. The problem is that you, not Africans, YOU do not like to be told what to do. Poor priest, you should learn personal humility and absolute dedication to the teachings of the faith. A priest is not his own man. He belongs to the Church. You forgot that. Father Cutie defected to another faith community. You tried to start your own church. I regularly do penance for my faults; but priests like you refuse to kneel— will not submit— will not serve. There is way too much of Milton’s Satan about such fallen priests and too little of Christ.

FATHER FANO

The question is not whether the good Archbishop is excommunicated by the self-righteous Roman Catholic Institution – but the kind relevance or irrelevance the Roman Catholic Church is continually depicting in this day and age of the freedom to belong.

FATHER JOE

The Roman Catholic Church is the BRIDE OF CHRIST. She is holy because Christ is holy. Have you forgotten your first year theology about the marks of the Church? There is plenty of freedom, Father, but it can also be misused. This is behind the nature of sin, abusing our liberty and making the wrong choices, selecting apparent goods which are really evil or just not good for us. You call the Roman Catholic Church “self-righteous” because you have spurned her authority over you. If your judgment is wrong, and I am convinced this is the case, then the self-righteousness is yours. By seeking to justify yourself, you make justification from Christ impossible. You stand outside the community of salvation.

FATHER FANO

Surely, God is not identical to the Roman Catholic Church. God is God, period! So no matter whether one has membership in the Roman Catholic Church, Methodist Church, Zionist Church, etc. – is not an issue. What is vital is that one has a good relationship with his/her God.

FATHER JOE

Certainly, there is an identity between the Roman Catholic Church and the Mystical Body of Christ. In this sense, Christ shares his divinity by grace with the Church. The Pope is the Vicar of Christ and the visible head of Christ’s Church. Jesus is the invisible head. He extended his authority to Peter and promised to be with him until the final consummation. Like a good fundamentalist Protestant, you stress a PERSONAL relationship with God. And yet, while this is important, the Catholic stress upon a CORPORATE RELATIONSHIP with Christ is very much what the word “Catholic” or “Universal” is all about. Your little breakaway church and the few sects loosely affiliated with you cannot make this claim. Neither in scope nor in history can they represent the house Jesus built. We do not come to God alone. He has given us each other and the Magisterium (teaching authority) to preserve us in the truth. Yours would be capricious religion based upon human whim and African eccentricities and maybe burning loins. This is all too bad for you. I would want no part of it and most of Africa would agree with me.

FATHER FANO

There are more serious issues to address in the churches, as with racism and poverty.

FATHER JOE

Avoidance solves nothing. I am reminded of the pro-life fight. We often hear that there are other important issues. Well, it is true. But if I am a dead baby, I have no more issues. Similarly, when it comes to faith, we are dealing again with life, albeit eternal life. Should I really place social justice matters ahead of whether I will go to heaven or hell— and who I might take with me?

FATHER FANO

God bless the Archbishop!

FATHER JOE

Yes, and I pray every day that he will repent before it is too late.

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Apologetics, Celibacy, Marriage, Priests | 1 Comment »

Debate on IFC’s 2007 Bridge Builders Confusion, Part 2

Posted on May 25, 2007 by Father Joe

LINK: False Worship at John Paul II Cultural Center?

LINK: Debate on IFC’s 2007 Bridge Builders Confusion, Part 1

SOROJ:

Obviously my opinion may be biased, given that I’m a Hindu myself. However, please bear with me. This is both a collection of my opinions as well as questions I’m curious about regarding the Catholic faith itself. Forgive my ignorance in advance.

First, I need something cleared up for my own knowledge. While idol worship is condemned within the Judeo-Christian faith, there is no church to my knowledge that does not have an image of Christ upon the Cross, at the very least. That, as far as I can tell, is an idol. The same goes for the icons of saints that are ubiquitous among Catholics.

FATHER JOE:

There are certain Protestant sects that prohibit even a corpus (body) upon a cross. A Baptist woman I know wears a plain cross but absolutely refuses to wear a crucifix. Catholics have no problem with crucifixes and statues; however they are only representations of religious personages or themes. They are not worshipped in themselves.

SOROJ:

The original intent, as far as I know, for forbidding that the Divine be contained in an image is that in our limited nature, we cannot capture His full essence, so to do so would be a vain act. So why are there so many crucifixes, paintings, icons, etc.?

FATHER JOE:

We believe that the incarnation of Christ, the God-Man, changes the economy of images and thus the Jewish prohibition in the Decalogue is modified. The divine is not contained in the image; rather images serve as a form of symbolic language.

SOROJ:

Second, if God decreed that “thou shalt have no other god before me,” then what about the saints? Of course they aren’t exactly “deified” but they are worshiped, no doubt. They are worshiped for what they stand for, whether it’s the protection of children, fertility, animals, or anything else. Of course it can be argued that they are being “venerated.” Yet, the definition given by Merriam Webster is “to honor (as an icon or a relic) with a ritual act of devotion,” which is not exactly different from worship. How do you differentiate between the two?

FATHER JOE:

A man might worship the woman he adores, but such is a sentiment of romance, not religious celebration. Saints are not worshipped. Divine worship is given to God alone. All prayer has God as its proper object. Saints are invoked within a special communion: the Church in pilgrimage on earth, the souls in purgation and the saints in glory. We ask the saints to intercede and pray with and for us to almighty God. We look to their lives as models of discipleship and for inspiration. The dictionary definition you cite is not precise enough. We venerate the saints as men and women who have been moved by divine grace to holy lives. We worship God as the source of all grace and holiness. We do not treat saints as deities. Mary is not a goddess. All that they have is given them. Saints are like the moon in the night sky. It shines but only because the light of the sun is reflected upon it. Similarly our Lord is the LIGHT OF THE WORLD. Saints are those who allow his light to shine through them.

SOROJ:

Third, and this is more pertinent to your post, what exactly is the big deal? The values espoused by all religions are the same; the rituals though may be different. Does that make one religion more right than another? I wouldn’t necessarily call what happened at the John Paul II Cultural Center an act of, or an endorsement of so-called “false worship.” It is an acceptance of different points of view, regarding praying for knowledge and success, both material and spiritual. Inter-religious dialogue is the only way we can achieve peace. This doesn’t mean necessarily accepting or adopting the views of the other faith, but it does mean respecting their way of life and respecting their right to live it that way. So long as they aren’t causing undue suffering or death, what’s the harm?

FATHER JOE:

No, the values are not the same in all religions. There is both true and false religion. Some religions have no afterlife, others an offensive reincarnation (which offends our soteriology) and still others vary in many degrees from the Catholic or Christian view. Catholics believe that Jesus is the Way and the Truth and the Life. He is the pontifex or bridge from this world to the next, our path to the Father. He is the redeemer of the world, regardless of what others might believe. Truth is objective and not subject to human whim. Similarly, the moral life is quite different between creeds. Certain religions espouse violence or holy wars to achieve their ends. We believe sexual conduct must remain exclusive to a man and woman in marriage. We reject divorce. We view the core of the Good News as a Gospel of Life. Abortion is regarded as murder.

As for lighting a candle before an Oriental idol, Tertullian and various fathers of the ancient Church would regard such an act as idolatry. Even more serious, they would view the deities of the East as possibly demonic in origin. We believe in invisible spiritual realities. We cannot accept another’s point of view that is diametrically opposed to our own. We can render “human” respect to another’s traditions, and even tolerate false worship. However, we ourselves are allowed no part in it. I do not think the nuncio was fully aware of what was going on and an honest mistake was made. Why should I commit an act that is sinful and renounces my exclusive devotion to Christ?

I have no problem with dialogue. It is collaboration in another’s ritual or prayer where I have problems. Pope Benedict VI, himself, has explained that ecumenism may mean allowing each group to pray as their tradition dictates, even for a common cause like peace, but without the blending of prayers or the coerced collaboration of anyone in a ritual which they would find offensive. The same respect I would give to them I would hope they would extend to me. Religious indifferentism is regarded by the Church as one of the most grievous sins in the post-Vatican II world.

SOROJ:

Let it be noted, by the way, that it is a gross misinterpretation that Hinduism is a polytheistic faith.

FATHER JOE:

So you say, but not all Hindu teachers agree. There seems to be a movement for sure, some arguing that the various deities are really manifestations of a single God. However, the models or manifestations are still incompatible with the Triune One God of Christianity.

SOROJ:

It is, in fact, a monotheistic religion but has evolved to allow its adherents greater spiritual freedom to view God in their own way, hence the seemingly large number of deities. Think of it kind of like having a hundred email addresses but mail sent to any of them is forwarded into one main address. Dorky example, admittedly, but it’s the best I can come up with right now.

FATHER JOE:

The image I have is that of spammers, none of the addresses may be the right one. I fail to see any significant unity in such an analogy.

SOROJ:

I just want to end off by stressing that I have much respect for the Catholic faith. It is a beautiful faith, and I have many friends who are strong believers. I have much respect for what you’re doing; it takes a strong person to write about one’s opinions without cutting corners. I’m just responding as such. Best of luck with everything.

FATHER JOE:

I would never do anything to infringe upon the rights of Hindus to celebrate their faith. I also believe in dialogue and cooperation about those things in society where we find some agreement. At the same time, I am acutely aware that the God of Christianity and Judaism is a jealous God and the prohibition against “other gods” is absolute. Indeed, although the Pope seems to view the Allah of the Moslems as the same as Yahweh and the Father of Jesus, there are many critics even here under the umbrella of Abraham who have their doubts. The deity or deities of Hinduism are even further removed.

SWAMI HARIDAS:

My dear Pagan Catholic friends, who worship countless numbers of saints, images and paintings, and are therefore ignorant polytheistic idol worshippers, those who eat and hack away at the animals of God, first of all I would like to point out your extremely derogatory tone towards Hindus and Hinduism. You call us idol worshippers, fools deluding others, idol bringers and polytheists. However, did you know that Hinduism has only one God, the Lord Vishnu and all of the other gods and goddesses are simply in the Catholic term saints, devotees and worshippers of our one true Lord? We worship these idols and statues, never believing that our Gods are directly before us, but because of the symbolism, it allows us to view the Lord in our hearts, for his to dwell in our minds. And so we are as pagan and polytheistic as you are!

It is symbolism, walking around the deity (pradakshina), acknowledging that God is the essence of our lives and beyond, bowing, acknowledging our subordinace to the eternal saviour, eating food that is supposedly blessed by the Lord (prasadam) allows us to be pure and refreshed by his blessing, his blessing to break our sinful bonds and engage in spiritual service to him.

You have been completely misled.

Those two statues are not Hindu deities; they are simply decorative statues of two princesses holding flowers in their hands. It is purely a decorative element and has no religious basis whatsoever. So please do not over-exaggerate with your ignorant terms, because in a sense you are the same.

May the Lord lift the darkness from your eyes, may you be humbled by his word ( Gita ) and may you surrender onto him, he who is our father, he who is our eternal lord, and he who is ever flowing with grace, because no matter how sinful you are, there is always space for you in the abode of the Lord, all you need is a change – Hare Krishna.

FATHER JOE:

Have I not written enough about this incident? The corrective was the very cautious manner in which the Pope acted when he visited the John Paul II Cultural Center. He talked about peoples of various faiths working together for a better world. He urged that together we search for the truth, albeit knowing that objective truth and an honest exploration leads to the God of the Bible, of the saints and Thomas Aquinas, and of the Church. There was no hybrid or welcoming liturgies that would incur confusion into the minds of Christian believers.

Catholics do not give divine worship to saints. Despite protestations to the contrary, the Hindus have made no universal statement disavowing polytheism. Even if their many deities were confined by some religious revisionism to one known through many manifestations, it is no guarantee that this would be the God of the Hebrews and of the Church. The Church has seen the old pagan religions fade away, and it has seen the emergence of a new paganism. The Catholic Church is not pagan but thoroughly Christian.

I am well aware of the ten avatars of Vishnu as well as the other 330,000 supernatural beings. They are all false, from the Catholic perspective. I do not deny that some Hindus have reinterpreted their religion as monotheistic. But this is not universally the case among its teachers and certainly not the situation among individual practitioners. Your treatment of images goes way beyond Catholic veneration. Trying to equate Catholicism with Hinduism will not work and a number of theologians and Catholic writers have faced censure from the Holy See for trying to do so. You are free to follow your beliefs; that was never in question. The concern of the post is that we as Catholics are not on the same page about faith and God. Christians are forbidden to take part in such foreign worship. Catholics cannot even receive communion in a non-Catholic church. We might sing hymns, but are generally forbidden to formally participate in the ritual of another denomination. Eating food that is supposedly blessed by a non-Christian deity was condemned by the early Christians fathers, even though the poor were attracted to the free meat and bread offered to a false god. The pagans were often good people. But, Christianity is not tolerant of false religions. Ecumenism means better mutual understanding, working for common objectives in society, but it does not mean anything more than “human” respect and it certainly does not mean any kind of religious relativism.

The statues are elements of Hindu iconography if nothing else, and lighting candles before them is highly questionable. One person suggested that the two princesses holding flowers were the two daughters of Vishnu, the head deity. I do not propose to be an expert in Hindu theology, but you cannot speak for a worldwide Hinduism which varies greatly from place to place and from teacher to teacher. Further, as a priest, I am somewhat well informed about Catholic Christianity and find your views in this regard both juvenile and inaccurate.

Worship your one or thousands of gods; that is your business. But do not expect me to say that such is okay for Catholics. It is not!

Jesus is the Way and the Truth and the Life!

MICHAEL:

Swami, your remarks typify all of the ignorant hard headed non-Catholics that don’t have a clue. Wait until you’re on your death bed. You’ll be calling on all kinds of people both dead and alive and YES, even some Catholic saints, I’ll bet.

You’re gonna find out how wrong you are. In the meantime, I would suggest that you keep quiet and stop basing your opinions and thoughts on conjecture. Do yourself a favor and read the entire Catechism of the Catholic Church from cover to cover TWICE, if you’re sincere about learning. Then you’ll have reason to understand why true Catholics do what we do and believe what we believe in

Jesus is the Way and the Truth and the Life!

ABAR!

MELBOURNE:

I don’t understand what the fuss is about. Both religions have pagan influences in how they Worship God. Even the words Worship, Sacrifice, Goddess have pagan origins. Christians give money in sacrifice; pagans kill animals to appease their God. Catholics have placed Mary as a Goddess of Virginity just as the Romans placed Venus as a Goddess of Love. Roman mythology has been mixed up with Gods words. They are all pagan religions. Fear of honoring the wrong god is just superstitious. God, your Father, judges you on your character, not on your beliefs.

FATHER JOE:

There are certain commonalities between religions as a whole, but that does not mean Christianity is in any way paganized. Worship and Sacrifice have unique definitions for Christians, albeit derived from the earlier Jewish usage. We worship the one true God and all worship must be focused upon God. The Jews sacrificed grain and animals, Catholics offer the unbloody offering of Jesus Christ behind the elements of bread and wine that are transformed into his body and blood. Neither the Bible nor the living tradition substantiates your claims. The quality of a man’s character will not save you. False belief or the worship of demons will not save you. As a Christian, I believe that Jesus alone is Savior and Lord: he is the Way and the Truth and the Life. Catholics do not regard Mary as a goddess; she is a human creature like the rest of us, but specially chosen and blessed by God.

VISHNU:

Dear Father, it has been a long time since you have written a post like this. I am a Hindu, so what? I’ve been to church, be it RC (Roman Catholic), LC (Latin), Pentecostal or whatever. And each of these guys says that they are the real Christian. Again, I don’t care about that too. For me, they are all Christians and believe in Yeshua.

I believe that Jesus is one of the saviors and a lord, but don’t believe that he is the sole path to eternity. I am sure there are many other ways, too.

I wasn’t here for that. Actually, the picture there was just a sculpture and had nothing to do with so-called pagan culture and god. And lighting a lamp is almost like cutting a ribbon, stating that something has started. And yes, it is the Indian way.

Don’t take it to the heart dear, but Christians in India do light lamps (yes, similar oil lamps with a cross on the top) and candles in front of Jesus.

Father I have some serious doubts. Please do contact me in the email address… just some doubts regarding Christianity.

FATHER JOE:

The archbishop may have been similarly deceived, but it is not “just a statue” but has symbolic value for Hinduism and the lighting of a candle is a ritual gesture. Jesus is the Savior. Apart from Christ, there is only condemnation. Jesus tells us in John 14 that “no one comes to the Father, but through me.” Jesus is NOT one deity or “savior” among many. He is the Lord. His is the saving name.

PJ JOHNSON:

It seems as if this is a very old thread at this point so I’m a bit reluctant to comment on it, but I’m a Catholic Ph.D. student in South Asian religions and the subject is of personal and professional interest to me particularly when I am doing fieldwork in India.

If you have interlibrary loan access you might want to look at the Indian bishops’ “Guidelines for Interreligious Dialogue” (Guidelines for Interreligious Dialogue. New Delhi: CBCI Centre, 1989). It deals with many of the issues treated in this discussion, such as the nature of Indian religions (polytheism vs. monotheism, the role of images, and so forth), and sets norms for interfaith worship services involving Catholics and Hindus.

My interpretation of the document is that the bishops established individual prudential judgment as the ultimate arbiter of what is licit involvement with non-Christian religions, with just a handful of exceptions – potential scandal given to the non-Christian party (avoiding scandal to the Christian party is contemplated but rejected as a guiding principle), and any guidelines and norms that are subsequently established by one’s diocese to limit the application of individual conscience. The norms specifically permit invoking the Christian god under Hindu names, adapting Indian religious symbols to private Christian religious use as part of inculturation, limited participation in Hindu puja, and a demeanor of worship at non-Christian religious sites. You may or may not be familiar with Cardinal Dias lighting a lamp for Ganesha in the 1990s, but it was a similar situation to the nuncio’s action at the JPII Center operating within the Indian guidelines. More recently, St. Philomena’s in Mysore illuminated itself (that is, turned on its lights) for the Hindu festival Dusshera.

http://www.ucanews.com/2009/09/11/priests-divided-over-government-move-for-inclusive-hindu-festival/

This is of course an Indian document, but from my own limited perspective, I think it’s likely that the Holy See, apostolic nuncios such as Pietro Sambi, and others in the Church involved in comparative theology and interfaith dialogue are aware of the Indian norms and find them licit, and something like the same norms are the de facto ones applied throughout the church. In other words, I don’t think the nuncio was acting in ignorance, but within norms for inter-religious dialogue that are generally accepted by the magisterium. If you could establish out of recent magisterial documents that this is not the case, I would appreciate knowing about it.

FATHER JOE:

When the Pope encountered the interfaith groups in the United States, he was very careful not to say or do anything that might compromise on this issue. We can work together in a common pursuit of the truth but the Pope is fearless in knowing that the claims of Catholicism reflect objective truth and reality. Compromises similar to a few you have mentioned have been rightfully criticized and I suspect Pope Benedict will slowly bring correctives to the situation. I know that the American bishops have been admonished on elements of their document on homosexuality (forcing a rewrite) and ICEL translations formerly approved by the USCCB were deemed as heretical by the Vatican. I suspect the Indian bishops and others are also fallible. This is more than a matter of policy or Church rules, but of the Decalogue and Divine Revelation.

ROY:

READ DUET. 4:23-25 – Be careful, therefore, lest you forget the covenant which the LORD, your God, has made with you, and fashion for yourselves against his command an idol in any form whatsoever. For the LORD, your God, is a consuming fire, a jealous God.

READ DUET. 5:7-8 – You shall not have other gods beside me. You shall not make for yourself an idol or a likeness of anything in the heavens above or on the earth below or in the waters beneath the earth.

READ DUET. 6:14-15 – You shall not go after other gods, any of the gods of the surrounding peoples— for the LORD, your God who is in your midst, is a passionate God—lest the anger of the LORD, your God, flare up against you and he destroy you from upon the land.

FATHER JOE:

This does not speak to the change in the economy of images because of the incarnation. You are simply citing the Old Testament and I applied the full quotations. Such is in the Catholic Bible and represents no challenge to the Catholic faith.

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Apologetics, Catholic, Church, Ecumenism, Faith, Jesus, Religion, Salvation | Comments Off on Debate on IFC’s 2007 Bridge Builders Confusion, Part 2

Arguing with a Crazy Man

Posted on May 21, 2007 by Father Joe

LINK: False Worship at John Paul II Cultural Center?

LINK: Debate on IFC’s 2007 Bridge Builders Confusion, Part 1

JOHN:

You’re all morons!

FATHER JOE:

Well, starting a discussion that way certainly adds no points to your argument. You are saying that any religion that makes absolute truth claims can have its adherents ridiculed and mocked. Sorry, all you do is immediately show your irrational bigotry. Catholics and other Christians would take exception to other religions, maybe even see spiritual hazards, but hopefully we would not ridicule their believers as “morons.”

JOHN:

All religions are the same— period!

FATHER JOE:

This statement is so ignorant; I am not sure where to begin. Are you saying that all truth is relative? No, obviously not, because you are starting off by criticizing Catholic doctrine which condemns the heresy of “religious indifferentism.” Further, if all religions are the same (with conflicting truth claims), then what you seem to be saying is that all religions are equally false. This is also off the mark because Catholic Christianity puts much store into such things as natural law. In other words, even if you disagree with our faith claims, there are certain assumptions from the natural order that must be held unless you somehow reject objective reality. Certain religions reject such reality as illusion and thus, even from an atheist’s perspective, would probably be further removed from the truth.

JOHN:

Christians have been misled purposely.

FATHER JOE:

We have? By whom? Sorry, the history of salvation history shows a clear progression from Judaism to Christianity. You are wrong about this. We believe that the Holy Spirit has safeguarded the Magisterium of the Church and the inspiration and canonical selection of her Scriptures.

JOHN:

The word God in the old Geneva Bible was Elohim.

FATHER JOE:

Why are we talking about a Protestant bible that was not fully published until 1560? The Catholic Church resolved the issue of the biblical canon in 393 AD!

JOHN:

Elohim… meant male/female and also meant more than one! That means that God was Gods! And any true Jewish man will confirm this.

FATHER JOE:

No true Jew will confirm any form of polytheism. Hebrew did not capitalize the word (how would it) and this has led to your misinterpretation that it can refer to many gods. The word was sometimes substituted for the more formal YAHWEH. However, in either case, it is a reference to the one God of Abraham. There is nothing about combined gender as God is neither male nor female. He is an infinitely perfect spirit. Nevertheless, the Scriptures do suggest that there is something significant about the role of groom and father in terms of his revelation to men.

Wikepedia states: “Note that contrary to what is sometimes assumed, the word Eloah (אלוה) is quite definitely not feminine in form in the Hebrew language (and does not have feminine grammatical gender in its occurrences in the Bible).” Further, any royal plural does not signify multiple gods but is used as in the same manner as the royal and papal “we.”

JOHN:

So logic dictates that anytime you see God in the Bible it actually is Elohim or Gods!

FATHER JOE:

There is nothing at all logical about it.

JOHN:

Makes sense when you rationally look at Genesis: “….and let us make man in our own image.” If it were one “Old Man in the Sky,” then why the plural?

FATHER JOE:

Again, this is merely a linguistic use of the ROYAL PLURAL. The entity is still singular. Your literal fundamentalism that runs against the grain of both ancient Jewish and Christian teaching is indeed quite ridiculous. Note also that Catholics believe in a Trinity = one divine nature but three divine persons. Jews would simply stress the single godhead.

JOHN:

Angels had nothing to do with the fashioning of man, only God. So reason dictates (not religious dogma or lies) that there were more than one.

FATHER JOE:

Yes, angels perform no demiurge function. But you display no logical reason. I am tempted to call you the liar, but suspect that you are merely ignorant and incompetent.

JOHN:

In the Old Testament (Torah… the Old Testament is nothing more than the Torah with a different name), terms this to mean that Gods are everywhere in the Bible and you don’t know what God or Gods were really good and which ones were jerks!!!

FATHER JOE:

Now you have become incomprehensible and resort again to bigoted name-calling. Of course, even here you make factual mistakes. The Torah is part of the Old Testament or Hebrew Scriptures, but is not the entire Old Testament. The Torah is five books: 1. Genesis; 2. Exodus; 3. Leviticus; 4. Numbers; and 5. Deuteronomy. There are 46 books in the Catholic Old Testament.

JOHN:

Also, it makes sense were somewhere later (can’t remember the Scripture) when Jesus says in the New Testament that “my God is not your God…” to the Jews.

FATHER JOE:

Huh? Like where does he say this? Do you make up everything you ramble about? The scene is just the opposite from how you describe it. The text is John 20:17 where the Risen Lord speaks to Mary Magdalene: “Stop holding on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. But go to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am going to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’” We hear echoes of Ruth 1:16-17 in the Old Testament:

But Ruth said, “Do not press me to go back and abandon you! Wherever you go I will go, wherever you lodge I will lodge. Your people shall be my people and your God, my God. Where you die I will die, and there be buried. May the LORD do thus to me, and more, if even death separates me from you!”

JOHN:

In two terms this means one… they are not actually worshipping God but Satan since they are money driven whore mongers and they could actually worship a whole totally different God!!

FATHER JOE:

Now you will offer exegesis on made-up verses? Pleeeease! Jesus is the one who is accused of healing with the power of demons, a false charge and a blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. The God of the Jews and that of the Christians is the same.

JOHN:

Some Jewish text clearly states (once again, ask an honest Jewish guy, probably not a brainwashed orthodox one but a more secular one) that Leviathan was an old Babylonian god worshipped by Jews in that time period and still to this day.

FATHER JOE:

You are willing to mock Jews, too? If you ask either an informed orthodox or a reformed Jew, he or she would tell you that your ideas are confused and erroneous. We do not worship the pagan deities or the false religion of ancient Babylon.

JOHN:

Look, it all boils down to either you use love, compassion, caring and understanding, and sometimes a little tough love or you wanna burn everyone, kill in the name of an unknowable God, yada, yada, yada… there are two philosophies plain and simple.

FATHER JOE:

What really matters is that the true God of the Jews has revealed his face in Jesus Christ. Divine mercy and divine justice are hallmarks of this revelation.

JOHN:

Take your pick. I will take the Jesus-Buddha-Krishna-Tamuz pick and say live and let live. Give some tough love when someone needs it. Don’t pee on my door step and I won’t pee on yours!

FATHER JOE:

Jesus has nothing to do with false prophets or pagan gods. Idol worship as practiced by pagans was condemned by the Jews. Pagan worship is condemned in the New Testament. The early Church fathers saw the pagan gods as demons in disguise. Christianity and Judaism are not tolerant of polytheism and the false worship to which you subscribe. You applaud contradictions and, despite professions to logic, have embraced irrationality.

JOHN:

Be nice people and that’s it— stop all the debate and squabble.

FATHER JOE:

Look who is talking! You called us “morons” and “jerks”!

JOHN:

You’re caught up in the ritual and literal translation of things instead of the real meat of the point!!! Be nice!!!

FATHER JOE:

You are the one who has missed the whole point. Being nice and being saved are different things.

JOHN:

Grow up and be honest with yourselves. Work on you and don’t worry about your neighbor!

FATHER JOE:

Charity and the mandate of the Gospel demand that we proclaim the Good News. We must care for our neighbor. You would have us renege on the saving message of Jesus Christ. Who are you to tell us our faith? What nerve!

JOHN:

Stop the nonsense; everyone has the same value and worth.

FATHER JOE:

Yes, human dignity and personhood is incommensurate, but this is a wholly different matter than religious faith. Not all religions are the same. Some are closer to the truth and others are dead wrong. Yours is utterly incomprehensible.

JOHN:

No one person should make more money than anyone else. Everyone in the world is important, everyone! In every second of everyday!!!

FATHER JOE:

What are you now, a communist? I say this as a poor priest.

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Apologetics, Bible, Catholic, Church, Ecumenism, Evangelization, Faith, God, Jesus, Religion | Comments Off on Arguing with a Crazy Man

Arguing with a Gnostic Fake Bishop

Posted on May 20, 2007 by Father Joe

LINK: False Worship at John Paul II Cultural Center?

+MOST REV. RICHARD SAINT JOHN: (Fort Worth Texas USA)

You are insulting the legacy of St. John Paul the Great…

He did far more loving actions than the Bishop in the photo!!!!

Traditionalists of EXTREMEISM are being used by demonic forces as LIBERALIST…

The darkness will use ANY vehicle, even PIOUSness to wound the DIVINE HEART of JESUS…

WATCH OUT PEOPLE!!!!

FATHER JOE:

Bishop Kevin Vann is the genuine Bishop of Fort Worth, Texas. You sir, are an imposter!

The post here was never meant to tarnish the late Pope’s reputation. The problem is that mistakes have sometimes been made that cannot be easily excused. Christians can have no part in pagan prayer and worship. That is the long and short of it.

This so-called “bishop” feels differently, Bishop Richard St. John is a faker. Posting here under the guise of a Catholic bishop shows the depth of his deceit. He is nothing of the kind!

Who is he?

He writes this at an interfaith site:

His defective apostolic pedigree…

“We have a lot in common. I was communicating with the U.G.C. (Universal Gnostic) but I haven’t the cash to take all the lessons. We both are bishops from +Lewis K. who I’ve known for many years. I also know some other Gnostic Prelates: +Hoeller and +Rosamonde Miller. I also have been a Bishop in +Michael Bertiauxs Church.”

His heretical Gnosticism and occult involvement…

“I’m more on the “catholic side” of Gnosticism. I love comparative religion, metaphysics, shamanism, Wicca, and psychic development.”

He is unemployed but should go out and get a job…

“At this time I don’t have an active pastoral ministry or sacramental apostolate.”

He sits around all day and plays on the computer…

“I enjoy e-mail or snail mail with other kindred souls who Spirit brings upon my path.”

He is very gay…

“I’m going through a lot of changes right now regarding work etc. I’m a single gay guy, who is a Super-Uncle of my sis: 5 kids and one great-niece!!!”

He uses the Wiccan closure…

“Blessed Be.”

What does the utterly heretical Universal Gnostic Church says about itself and him? He is aligned with an occult group that calls itself the Universal Gnostic Fellowship. It claims to trace its apostolic lineage not simply to Jesus but to Adam. They claim their holy orders were initiated by a host of Gnostic masters, including Mary Magdalene. While they claim a doctrine of the one, it is really a form of pantheism where everything is seen as divine. They argue that Old Testament prophets and Christ were occult shamans or witch-doctors. They reject all other doctrines. This group is not really even Christian, but is pagan in nature. Instead of a unique creation, they claim that all people are merely fractured bits and pieces of the divine. They repudiate, absolutely, the following teachings: “original sin, damnation, hellfire, virgin birth, tithing, and “others whose purpose is to subjugate the masses for the benefit the priesthood.” They subscribe to a long list of sacraments, some quite peculiar and others redefined, like “Child birthing, Naming, Coming of Age, Initiation, Manhood, Womanhood, Handfasting, Exorcism, Elderhood, and Burial of the Dead.”

They impose their counterfeit ministries upon the Ordinate and the Episcopate. Ordination to the Ordinate is conferred upon qualified candidates regardless of age, class, race, color, religious preference, creed, gender or sexual orientation. Just as we apparently saw at the JPII Center, they suffer from a chronic syncretism with deacons, ministers, priests, rabbis, swamis, canons, deacons, deans, deaconesses, and priestesses.

WE SHOULD INDEED BE ALERT, THIS MAN IS NO BISHOP AND APPARENTLY NOT A CHRISTIAN! HE IS PLAYING AT BISHOP AND WOULD LEAD SIMPLE PEOPLE ASTRAY! IF HE WAS EVER A CHRISTIAN, HE IS NOW A GENUINE HERETIC! THERE IS NO GENTLE WAY TO RESPOND TO HIS COMMENT.

+MOST REV. RICHARD SAINT JOHN:

Father Joe, I AM NOT nor EVER said I was the ROMAN Bishop of Fort Worth or anywhere…. I am not an imposter/fake or phony anything. I am one of the most honest/kind/loving/sweet-natured/unselfish people you could EVER meet. I AM in Fort Worth, born here. I AM a valid consecrated prelate in the apostolic succession (from Roman-Greek-Russian-Coptic-Armenian-Melkite-Atiochian-Anglican-Utrech). The Holy See/Holy Father whom I revere, upon studying/knowing of me would 100% respect me as a real/valid/legitimate apostolic bishop…..PERIOD! Our Divine Lord said not to bear false witness so you either read into my email what you humanly wanted (no sin) or you sinned against the Holy Ghost against my holy orders…. mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa!

NOT ROMAN— with all humility and reverence to His Holiness Benedict 16, Supreme Pontiff.

FATHER JOE:

You sir, in my reckoning are not even a true Christian. That makes any claim to being a bishop a sham. Note that you speak of yourself as “the most honest/kind/loving/sweet-natured/unselfish people you could EVER meet.” Ah, evidently humility is NOT one of your virtues, either. The Church you describe does not really exist; it is a bogus as you are. Pope John Paul II would have nothing to do with you. Indeed, from the way you express yourself, I am becoming concerned that you might not be quite well. If you had “all” humility and reverence to the Pope, you would put away your charade and seek membership in the Catholic faith. As things stand, you are not Roman, not Catholic, not Christian, and not a true bishop. You belong to an occult sect that only masquerades as Christian. Even genuine Orthodox churches do not recognize you or your so-called apostolic orders. I will try not to laugh. I will offer prayer for your healing instead.

+MOST REV. RICHARD SAINT JOHN:

Reverend Father, I posted via your reply without having scrolled down to read all you said.

John Paul received the marking on the forehead of Shiva in India (PHOTO on INTERNET).

John Paul KISSED the KORAN!!!

John Paul received the blessing of VOUDON PRIESTS or Hougans in AFRICA.

JOHN PAUL let Dali Lama priests put statue of BUDDAH on the TABERNACLE in ASSISI.

I AM NOT ROMAN CATHOLIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I would NEVER disrespect your priesthood!!!

YOU pulled a FBI search on me like a Gestapo Nazi.

I AM not unemployed… thank you!

I have a real job and work my ass off!

I don’t use my holy orders to put a roof over my head.

I live in the REAL WORLD, not a damn rectory with a pious Irish lady cleaning my undies.

I AM a CATHOLIC CHRISTIAN. I profess in “humiltas” the Blessed Trinity and The DIVINITY OF JESUS CHRIST ONLY. I respect other faiths… you don’t! JOHN PAUL did. I AM GAY….so are thousands of Roman laity, priests, religious, bishops, cardinals and many popes (some were adulterous murderous [deleted] AND STRAIGHT!!!!) You can insult me, slander me, and hate me; but you have INSULTED THE HOLY GHOST— Third Person of The Divine and Blessed TRINITY. You have insulted the dignity of my holy order’s witch have nothing to do with so-called heresy/personal sin/lack of JOB. YOU DONT KNOW ANYTHING about ME. You jumped in the cesspool of SATAN and drank it up. YOU ARE A REAL PRIEST but as a human you have shown your feet of clay! Oh how Glorious the Precious Blood of Our Divine Lord Incarnate on Calvary that froggives ME and YOU. May the Divine Mercy heal your HATRED!!!!!!!!!!!!!! St. Therese the Little Flower, “ora pro nobis.” St. Padre Pio, “ora pro nobis.” Sancta Maria Mater Dei, “ora pro nobis.” Saint John Paul, “ora pro nobis.” + Richard Saint John baptized Roman with reverence to His Holiness Benedict.

FATHER JOE:

Actually, Pope John Paul II was very compassionate to those who should have been disciplined for making liturgical blunders. The bird poop was an error not orchestrated. The Koran kiss was honor to the givers, not to the gift. The pagan priests gave a blessing on their own initiative. The Buddha statue was a disgrace that Cardinal Ratzinger (now the Pope) was quite upset about in Assisi. No one wanted to give offence, but the idol should have been thrown to the grown and crushed underfoot.

What FBI search? You are being paranoid. Everything I posted, you have already shared “yourself” on the Internet! You say you do not disrespect my priesthood but you call me a Nazi and make up a fictional cleaning woman in my rectory. I wash my own clothes at Holy Spirit! And by the way, being a REAL priest is being in the REAL world. You are a weekend bishop who treats religion like a hobby. You are into the occult and cannot claim to be a true Christian or Catholic. Ours is a jealous God. You cannot worship the idols of demons and honor Jesus.

You more than respect other faiths— you fully embrace them, no matter how incompatible with Christianity.

Like so many active gays you cannot speak about your disorientation without a vulgar slur.

I see a contradiction here. You speak of your “holy order’s witch” but contend that I am the one who has blasphemed against the Holy Spirit. Pleeease, I do not know what “spirit” moves you, but it is not the Advocate sent by Christ!

All I know about you is what you broadcast to the world, and in that respect, the “cesspool of Satan” is yours.

May your “frog” give you forgiveness, but I prefer my reconciliation with God. I suspect the saints pity you.

+MOST REV. RICHARD SAINT JOHN:

I LIVE in FORT WORTH….THANK YOU— BORN HERE, WORK HERE AND my ADDRESS is SUNSET ROAD, FORT WORTH. GET YOUR FACTS OF HATRED STRAIGHT! LYING/FALSE WITNESS is A MORTAL SIN! (St. Joseph Baltimore Catechism) MEA CULPA, MEA CULPA, MEA MAXIMA CULPA— ohhhh if you’re a post Vat. 2 Kumbaya-Priest, that means “through my fault, through my fault, through my grievous fault!!!!!!” That bishop of the Roman diocese has a priest at my baptismal parish that is more liberal than me. I’ve gone to his Mass (MESS) and wanted to cry cause of what’s going on there ain’t no HOLY SACRIFICE of the MASS. SO GO THROW STONES in your own Roman backyard, padre!

FATHER JOE: Without real holy orders any celebration you give is no Eucharist. Even a liberal priest with the right intention can say Mass and forgive sins. You cannot do this much. You are just playing dress-up. As for the facts, I simply posted what you told everyone.

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Apologetics, Apostles, Bishops, Catholic, Church, Ecumenism, Faith, God, Jesus, Morality, Pope, Priests, Sacraments, Salvation, Sin | Comments Off on Arguing with a Gnostic Fake Bishop