World-Inquisition

Old Testament persecutions and Catholics of Today

2014-12-23T19:26:00.000-05:00

I was reminded by His Excellency Bp Dolan by his sermon concerning Gedeon and him being chosen by GOD to lead the Israelites(Hebrew) against the persecuting force of the Madianites. Think, those Israelites had fallen into sinful practices as a result the Hebrew were allowed to be persecuted. Look at the Philistines as well. They were another ancient group allowed by GOD to persecute the Israelites due to a falling away from GOD and resorting to pagan practices. Then a hero endowed with powers from GOD, Samson, came to aid and deliver of sorts the Israelites. The history of Moses and the Egyptians is so well known there is not exactly a need to retell the story.

Now we arrive to present day. The faithful, aka the Catholics, not only are but have been persecuted since the time of the adulterer murderer Henry VIII... That is, if we look at more recent times. More specifically look at the persecution allowed since Vatican II(The council formed by the masonic, communist anti-christs). This persecution is being allowed precisely due to the faithful( The Catholics) having slowly resorted to Modernism, New Age "theology", and gross practices more commonly associated with communism, protestantism. This falling away is exactly WHY this minor chastisement/persecution has been allowed to happen. If you don't think so please go back and reread all the persecutions that afflicted the Israelites in the Old Testament. Generally there was a people or group of individuals that afflicted the Hebrew in the Old Testament. Today it is the mohammedans/muslims. They are the cancer, the tumor affecting the whole world due to mankind's refusal to accept GOD's love and follow the Holy Catholic religion that GOD, Christ, himself gave to the world in the first place! Yes there are other forces at work ie. the talmudic "judaics" but also all the other modernist groups(masons, communists, "feminists", abortionists aka baby murderers). The other forces do work for lucifer yet the shock troops, the chastisement, the persecution is/are Islam/muslims. Until this world abandons it's pagan and vile ways this current chastisement will not end.

Seriously, What the Flip is the Point?

2014-12-15T17:39:00.001-05:00

Why do the msm, even more specifically the neo-cons cry cry cry about "radical jihadists". News flash, ALL mohammedism is the problem, anyways.... So many whine about "they hate our freedom", "they hate the West", "they want a new caliphate". So what? Neo-cons whine that they want to take us over and kill us. So what, what's your point?

Here is my point. While neocons, and the government, and the media lie about the effectiveness of mohammedans they COMPLETELY disregard not only the actual corrupt government we have but the complete ROT that is permitted is the USA. Every conceivable vice, sin, form of debauchery is not only permitted but endorsed by the media, and so called government leaders. Sodomy, check; Adultery, check; Immodest dress, check; Drug use, check; Fornication, check; Porn, check;Abortion(aka baby murder), check; Birth control, check; Paganism(aka satanism, any of the false religions), check...fyi "freedom of religion don't you know, Constitution mantra;
Let's see, what did I miss here, ah yes and glorification of war and violence.
All of this ROT is allowed, and permeates from Hollywood. Seriously, even Foxnews will have tv staff make jokes about porn. What difference does it make that you cry about oh no, Hajji is coming meanwhile spiritual ROT is about in the USA and tolerated and promoted.

VICE Magazine calls NYC Orthodox Jewish community a child rape assembly line

2014-07-29T21:19:00.000-04:00

VICE Magazine calls NYC Orthodox Jewish community a child rape assembly line

After blowing the whistle on sexual crimes and opening a hotline, Rabbi Nuchem Rosenberg was banished from area synagogues and attacked with bleach.

For decades Hollywood and television have pumped out programming that portrays Catholic(read novus ordo, not Catholic) clergy as child rapists. A disproportionately large number of the owners, directors, writers, and producers behind this programming have been Jewish. So it is no wonder that you never see depictions of Jewish clergy as child rapists in entertainment.

Now VICE Magazine is sounding the alarm with the headline “Child Rape Assembly Line” to describe aspects of New York City’s Orthodox Jewish community.

From VICE Magazine…

Rabbi Nuchem Rosenberg—who is 63 with a long, graying beard—recently sat down with me to explain what he described as a “child-rape assembly line” among sects of fundamentalist Jews. He cleared his throat. “I’m going to be graphic,” he said.

A member of Brooklyn’s Satmar Hasidim fundamentalist branch of Orthodox Judaism, Nuchem designs and repairs mikvahs in compliance with Torah Law. The mikvah is a ritual Jewish bathhouse used for purification. Devout Jews are required to cleanse themselves in the mikvah on a variety of occasions: Women must visit following menstruation, and men have to make an appearance before the High Holidays, such as Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. Many of the devout also purify themselves before and after the act of sex and before the Sabbath.

On a visit to Jerusalem in 2005, Rabbi Rosenberg entered into a mikvah in one of the holiest neighborhoods in the city, Mea She’arim. “I opened a door that entered into a schvitz,” he told me. “Vapors everywhere, I can barely see. My eyes adjust, and I see an old man, my age, long white beard, a holy-looking man, sitting in the vapors. On his lap, facing away from him, is a boy, maybe seven years old. And the old man is having anal sex with this boy.”

Rabbi Rosenberg paused, gathered himself, and went on: “This boy was speared on the man like an animal, like a pig, and the boy was saying nothing. But on his face—fear. The old man [looked at me] without any fear, as if this was common practice. He didn’t stop. I was so angry, I confronted him. He removed the boy from his penis, and I took the boy aside. I told this man, ‘It’s a sin before God, a mishkovzucher. What are you doing to this boy’s soul? You’re destroying this boy!’ He had a sponge on a stick to clean his back, and he hit me across the face with it. ‘How dare you interrupt me!’ he said. I had heard of these things for a long time, but now I had seen.”

The child sex abuse crisis in ultra-Orthodox Judaism, like that in the Catholic Church(read the novus ordo religion, not catholic), has produced its share of shocking headlines in recent years. In New York, and in the prominent Orthodox communities of Israel and London, allegations of child molestation and rape have been rampant. The alleged abusers are schoolteachers, rabbis, fathers, uncles—figures of male authority. The victims, like those of Catholic priests, are mostly boys. Rabbi Rosenberg believes around half of young males in Brooklyn’s Hasidic community—the largest in the United States and one of the largest in the world—have been victims of sexual assault perpetrated by their elders. Ben Hirsch, director of Survivors for Justice, a Brooklyn organization that advocates for Orthodox sex abuse victims, thinks the real number is higher. “From anecdotal evidence, we’re looking at over 50 percent. It has almost become a rite of passage.”

Ultra-Orthodox Jews who speak out about these abuses are ruined and condemned to exile by their own community. Dr. Amy Neustein, a nonfundamentalist Orthodox Jewish sociologist and editor of Tempest in the Temple: Jewish Communities and Child Sex Scandals, told me the story of a series of Hasidic mothers in Brooklyn she got to know who complained that their children were being preyed on by their husbands.

In these cases, the accused men “very quickly and effectively engage the rabbis, the Orthodox politicians, and powerful Orthodox rabbis who donate handsomely to political clubs.” The goal, she told me, is “to excise the mother from the child’s life.” Rabbinical courts cast the mothers aside, and the effects are permanent. The mother is “amputated.” One woman befriended by Dr. Neustein, a music student at a college outside New York, lost contact with all six of her children, including an infant she was breastfeeding at the time of their separation.

Seven years ago, Rabbi Rosenberg started blogging about sex abuse in his community and opened a New York City hotline to field sex abuse complaints. He has posted appeals on YouTube, appeared on CNN, and given speeches across the US, Canada, Israel, and Australia. Today, he is the lone whistleblower among the Satmar. For this he is reviled, slandered, hated, feared. He receives death threats on a regular basis. In Yiddish and Hebrew newspapers, advertisements taken out by the self-described “great rabbis and rabbinical judges of the city of New York” have denounced him as “a stumbling block for the House of Israel,” “a public rebuker and preacher of ethics” who “persists in his rebelliousness” and whose “voice has been heard among many Jewish families, especially young people in their innocence… drawn to listen to his poisonous and revolting speeches.” Leaflets distributed in Williamsburg and Borough Park, the centers of ultra-Orthodoxy in Brooklyn, display his bearded face over the body of a writhing snake. “Corrupt Informer,” reads one of the leaflets, followed by the declaration that Rabbi Rosenberg’s “name should rot in hell forever. They should cut him off from all four corners of the earth.”

When Rabbi Rosenberg wants to bathe at a mikvah in Brooklyn to purify himself, none will have him. When he wants to go to synagogue, none will have him. “He is finished in the community, butchered,” said a fellow rabbi who would only talk anonymously. “No one will look at him, and those who will talk to him, they can’t let it be known. The pressure in our community, it’s incredible.”

Hobby lobby the hippocrits and the satanic demoncrats

2014-07-11T09:03:00.000-04:00

"By their fruits you will know them", really these satanic demoncrats are really showing their true colors of what they are. All for the world to see.
But really Hobby Lobby themselves allow contraception in the first place to claiming they are pro-life is a load of cow poop.
http://www.lifenews.com/2014/07/09/democrats-file-bill-to-overturn-supreme-court-decision-protecting-hobby-lobby/

Divine Providence and why things happen

2014-07-09T15:30:00.002-04:00

I'm not super theologian but here's just my opinions here. People often ask why GOD let's things happen? Well a better point is that if someone has something that is outwardly "good" happen to them they say, "Oh thank god, it's divine providence", but if something outwardly "bad" happens to that same person they will say, "oh it's the work of the devil". This is a clear case of lack of faith or even cooperation with Grace. GOD is GOD, all powerful, all Holy, all Good. God merely allows "bad" things to happen. If you really do believe in The Holy Trinity do you not realize that GOD can simply turn a "bad" into a good. This is often the case when people see horrible things in the news, for instance the contraception/abortion/infant murder issue. You have the satanic organization such as NOW, Naral, out there promoting infant death. "But why does GOD let this happen?" People ask. Well for that let's look at a parable from the Bible.

Gospel According to Saint Matthew Chapter 13 Douay-Rheims
[24] Another parable he proposed to them, saying: The kingdom of heaven is likened to a man that sowed good seeds in his field. [25] But while men were asleep, his enemy came and oversowed cockle among the wheat and went his way.

[26] And when the blade was sprung up, and had brought forth fruit, then appeared also the cockle.[27] And the servants of the goodman of the house coming said to him: Sir, didst thou not sow good seed in thy field? whence then hath it cockle? [28] And he said to them: An enemy hath done this. And the servants said to him: Wilt thou that we go and gather it up? [29] And he said: No, lest perhaps gathering up the cockle, you root up the wheat also together with it. [30] Suffer both to grow until the harvest, and in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers: Gather up first the cockle, and bind it into bundles to burn, but the wheat gather ye into my barn.

By the actions of those pushing obvious satanic agendas the rest of the world can manifestly see evil's existence. For far to long evil has slithered it's way into societies. As those that follow devils and lucifer make themselves known, I would hope bring those that consider themselves "good" to realize they should be more virtuous. GOD more certainly can make the horrific situations into a positive. Now of course Our Lord Jesus Christ wants us to know, love, and serve him. Well the only way is through His Catholic Church(note, the dioceses and novus ordo are not Catholic, neither is Jorge Bergoglio the Pope). I would hope that those throughout the world that appose those objectively evil things(sodomy, heresy, contraception, infant murder, adultery, fornication, masturbation, pagan worship, self-deification, etc.) that are pushed by dubious individuals, are galvanized and cooperate to with divine grace and do seek out the True Catholic Church. That is what GOD wants desires(if He ever desired anything) for His children to be members of His Church that His Son gave to the world so we might be sanctified and saved.

Nostrum Era of Guadalupe servo vos

Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus

The irony in the sermons

2014-01-01T20:53:00.002-05:00

I find it ironic. A priest in the sspx may in the sermon make a statement about praying for Holy Mother Church to make a return to tradition. Well the irony is such a priest is half right, while being in grave error at the same time.
1
Recognize and resisters(RR) are in grave error. Anyone thinking logically and looking at the history of Mother Church knows that the novus(bogus) ordo is not catholic. I'm a convert and sheesh I see it. I'm not exactly a smart person but I can see that 1+1 doesn't not equal 6. It's a grave error to think the protestant novus ordo founded upon freemasonry and protestant heresy is catholic and that a person obviously not catholic can be Pope. Of course we get to Scorpion Jorge Bergoglio. He is a blatant plant. An open heretic that makes heretical statements, blasphemes against the Blessed Virgin Mary. The RR's are in blatant denial in admitting Bergoglio is a heretic. That or they believe an obvious anti-catholic can be Pope. Sheesh ask a RR if if a baptist heretic can be Pope and they will say no. The point is that praying for a return of tradition of THE CHURCH is a mute point, and dead prayer. What a person should be praying for is the novus ordians to convert TO the Catholic Church.

2. The "half right" part is that... We are not the Catholics of yester century. Do we perform extreme fasts like Catholics did centuries ago. Do we prefer poverty and the hermit life to our parties and social life of today? Do we forgo luxury and walk barefoot for 20 miles to get to Mass? It's my opinion but after reading of the saints. I just do not think Catholics, you know the actual Christians, possess the same fortitude the saints of the past had. I'm probably wrong on this part. I'm wrong about a lot of things

Absolute must read! From Saint Athanasius

2013-10-16T09:51:00.001-04:00

Absolute must read!
'May God console you! . . . What saddens you . . . is the fact that others have occupied the churches by violence, while during this time you are on the outside. It is a fact that they have the premises - but you have the Apostolic Faith. They can occupy our churches, but they are outside the true Faith. You remain outside the places of worship, but the Faith dwells within you. Let us consider: what is more important, the place or the Faith? The true Faith, obviously. Who has lost and who has won in the struggle - the one who keeps the premises or the one who keeps the Faith?'

St. Athanasius

Somethings about Suffering and Purgatory

2013-10-07T11:56:00.001-04:00

I started reading again the Purgatory book by Fr. F.X. Schouppe. It reminded me of my time in the active duty Army...no not like that but here's the thing. Those in Purgatory suffer in essentially 2 ways. One is obviously punishment due for the sins each has committed. The other is pain of loss the denial of the Beatific Vision of God. The latter is what caused me to think of my military time, imagine that.
When we had our field exercises there was a place referred to as the contonement area, which could easily be thought of the confinement area. This place, as was possible, was kind of it's own torture. From this location would were close to going home. It was worse when you were in the field for 2 weeks or more then you had 4 more days to go in the contonement area because that is the last place before you leave. From there you could even see the interstate. How many times did the thought pass that "IT'S JUST RIGHT THERE LET US GO!" but nope you still have 1,2,3,4 more days. I suppose it was it's own torture. So close yet so far. I believe that is the real suffering that those souls in Purgatory must endure. Keep in mind the suffering for sins committed is deserved. The suffering is deserved because we place our love of self over the love of God, but still the suffering. I think that so close yet so far suffering is really what causes so much pain to the Suffering Souls in Purgatory.

Via-Traditio July 10, 2013 - Seven Holy Brothers, Martyrs; Sts. Rufina & Secunda, Virgins & Martyrs

2013-07-07T12:55:00.001-04:00

http://www.traditio.com/comment/com1307.htm

July 10, 2013 - Seven Holy Brothers, Martyrs; Sts. Rufina & Secunda, Virgins & Martyrs

Francis-Bergoglio "Approves" Novus Ordo Con-anizations for Two Modernist Newpopes
Further Violations of the Traditional Requirements Make John XXIII and JPII Phony Unsaints

From: The TRADITIO Fathers

An Apparition of JPII-Wojtyla Burning in Hell (Left)
Was Witnessed by Thousands in Poland in 2007
John XXIII-Roncalli (Right), Perhaps Unwittingly, Unleased the Modernist Vatican II Council
Which Has Virtually Destroyed the True Catholic Church
A Newchurch Desperate for Some Good Publicity in the Midst of Rampant Corruption
Has Broken All the "Rules," even of the New Order
To Rush Its "Poster-boys" to Novus Ordo Unsainthood

The Newchurch of the New Order, consumed in scandal after scandal -- paedophilia amongst its Newclergy, money-laundering for the Mafia in its bank, a "gay" pimp operating out of Francis-Bergoglio's office to service Newcardinals -- is desperate to do something to restore its blackened name. So, on July 5, 2013, Bergoglio rolled out two Modernist Newpopes, John XXIII-Roncalli and JPII-Wojtyla, for Novus Ordo "con-anization." The two weren't even "saintly" enough to meet the valid, traditional requirements for real canonization, so Bergoglio had to "wave" the requirements for sanctity in order to rush them out for the 50th anniversary of the Modernist Vatican II Council in 2013.
But already Bergoglio has come under attack in the international press for his complicity in these phony Novus Ordo con-anizations. Bergoglio's spokesman spun around in circles trying to claim that the corrupted process was "valid," though even the press knew that it is invalid. The spokesman's explanation was, in essence: it is "Bergoglio's will." Notice: he dared not say it is "the will of God." [Some information for this Commentary was contributed by Vatican Radio.]
This latest case of Novus Ordo nonsense has nothing to do with the Divine will, but everything to do with human politics. Neither John XXIII nor JPII-Wojtyla meet the traditional requirements to be declared Saints. But the sham even worse than that: they don't meet the requirements even for Novus Ordo con-anization, which specify two miracles after beatification. Roncalli doesn't have one, and it seems that Wojtyla's are doubtful, being concocted in haste.
Traditionally, the Church has waited centuries to canonize anyone, wanting to make sure through the concurrence of many generations of Catholics that the candidate is actually holy beyond doubt. Wojtyla's con-anization is ludicrous. His Newpapacy of 26 years was mired in sacrilege, paganism, heresy, and paedophilia. Wojtyla personally supported and blessed his Arch-paedophile presbyter, Marciel Maciel, head of the Legionaries of Christ, who raped boys, girls, men, women, seminarians, and even his own bastard children. For Wojtyla to be Novus Ordo con-anized in less than ten years shows just how desperate Bergoglio and his Newchurch is. Even the indisputably saintly Pope Pius X waited 40 years to be canonized, and even that was rushed.
Wojtyla changed the whole process of canonization for the New Order sect in 1983, making it an invalid sham, driven by political purposes. His Apostolic Constitution Divinus perfectionis magister was easily rendered invalid by the Catholic theology of the Church's Universal Theologian, St. Thomas Aquinas, who provided an out even for those who recognize Bergoglio as a pope -- an out that permits a complete rejection of all Newchurch con-anizations. For further information, click on FAQ10: How Do You Explain These Traditional Catholic Beliefs? in the section "Canonizations."

One Hundred Fifty Reasons I'm Catholic, And You Should Be Too!

2013-07-05T15:13:00.001-04:00

One Hundred Fifty Reasons I'm Catholic
And You Should Be Too!
by Dave Armstrong

Best One-Sentence Summary: I am convinced that the Catholic Church conforms much more closely to all of the biblical data, offers the only coherent view of the history of Christianity (i.e., Christian, apostolic Tradition), and possesses the most profound and sublime Christian morality, spirituality, social ethic, and philosophy.
Alternate: I am a Catholic because I sincerely believe, by virtue of much cumulative evidence, that Catholicism is true, and that the Catholic Church is the visible Church divinely-established by our Lord Jesus, against which the gates of hell cannot and will not prevail (Mt 16:18), thereby possessing an authority to which I feel bound in Christian duty to submit.
2nd Alternate: I left Protestantism because it was seriously deficient in its interpretation of the Bible (e.g., "faith alone" and many other "Catholic" doctrines - see evidences below), inconsistently selective in its espousal of various Catholic Traditions (e.g., the Canon of the Bible), inadequate in its ecclesiology, lacking a sensible view of Christian history (e.g., "Scripture alone"), compromised morally (e.g., contraception, divorce), and unbiblically schismatic, anarchical, and relativistic. I don't therefore believe that Protestantism is all bad (not by a long shot), but these are some of the major deficiencies I eventually saw as fatal to the "theory" of Protestantism, over against Catholicism. All Catholics must regard baptized, Nicene, Chalcedonian Protestants as Christians.
Catholicism isn't formally divided and sectarian (Jn 17:20-23; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 1:10-13).
Catholic unity makes Christianity and Jesus more believable to the world (Jn 17:23).
Catholicism, because of its unified, complete, fully supernatural Christian vision, mitigates against secularization and humanism.
Catholicism avoids an unbiblical individualism which undermines Christian community (e.g., 1 Cor 12:25-26).
Catholicism avoids theological relativism, by means of dogmatic certainty and the centrality of the papacy.
Catholicism avoids ecclesiological anarchism - one cannot merely jump to another denomination when some disciplinary measure or censure is called for.
Catholicism formally (although, sadly, not always in practice) prevents the theological relativism which leads to the uncertainties within the Protestant system among laypeople.
Catholicism rejects the "State Church," which has led to governments dominating Christianity rather than vice-versa.
Protestant State Churches greatly influenced the rise of nationalism, which mitigated against universal equality and Christian universalism (i.e., Catholicism).
Unified Catholic Christendom (before the 16th century) had not been plagued by the tragic religious wars which in turn led to the "Enlightenment," in which men rejected the hypocrisy of inter-Christian warfare and decided to become indifferent to religion rather than letting it guide their lives.
Catholicism retains the elements of mystery, supernatural, and the sacred in Christianity, thus opposing itself to secularization, where the sphere of the religious in life becomes greatly limited.
Protestant individualism led to the privatization of Christianity, whereby it is little respected in societal and political life, leaving the "public square" barren of Christian influence.
The secular false dichotomy of "church vs. world" has led committed orthodox Christians, by and large, to withdraw from politics, leaving a void filled by pagans, cynics, unscrupulous, and power-hungry. Catholicism offers a framework in which to approach the state and civic responsibility.
Protestantism leans too much on mere traditions of men (every denomination stems from one Founder's vision. As soon as two or more of these contradict each other, error is necessarily present).
Protestant churches (esp. evangelicals), are far too often guilty of putting their pastors on too high of a pedestal. In effect, every pastor becomes a "pope," to varying degrees (some are "super-popes"). Because of this, evangelical congregations often experience a severe crisis and/or split up when a pastor leaves, thus proving that their philosophy is overly man-centered, rather than God-centered.
Protestantism, due to lack of real authority and dogmatic structure, is tragically prone to accommodation to the spirit of the age, and moral faddism.
Catholicism retains apostolic succession, necessary to know what is true Christian apostolic Tradition. It was the criterion of Christian truth used by the early Christians.
Many Protestants take a dim view towards Christian history in general, esp. the years from 313 (Constantine's conversion) to 1517 (Luther's arrival). This ignorance and hostility to Catholic Tradition leads to theological relativism, anti-Catholicism, and a constant, unnecessary process of "reinventing the wheel."
Protestantism from its inception was anti-Catholic, and remains so to this day (esp. evangelicalism). This is obviously wrong and unbiblical if Catholicism is indeed Christian (if it isn't, then - logically neither is Protestantism, which inherited the bulk of its theology from Catholicism). The Catholic Church, on the other hand, is not anti-Protestant.
The Catholic Church accepts the authority of the great Ecumenical Councils (see, e.g., Acts 15) which defined and developed Christian doctrine (much of which Protestantism also accepts).
Most Protestants do not have bishops, a Christian office which is biblical (1 Tim 3:1-2) and which has existed from the earliest Christian history and Tradition.
Protestantism has no way of settling doctrinal issues definitively. At best, the individual Protestant can only take a head count of how many Protestant scholars, commentators, etc. take such-and-such a view on Doctrine X, Y, or Z. There is no unified Protestant Tradition.
Protestantism arose in 1517, and is a "Johnny-come-lately" in the history of Christianity. Therefore it cannot possibly be the "restoration" of "pure", "primitive" Christianity, since this is ruled out by the fact of its absurdly late appearance. Christianity must have historic continuity or it is not Christianity. Protestantism is necessarily a "parasite" of Catholicism, historically and doctrinally speaking.
The Protestant notion of the "invisible church" is also novel in the history of Christianity and foreign to the Bible (Mt 5:14; Mt 16:18), therefore untrue.
When Protestant theologians speak of the teaching of early Christianity (e.g., when refuting "cults"), they say "the Church taught . . ." (as it was then unified), but when they refer to the present they instinctively and inconsistently refrain from such terminology, since universal teaching authority now clearly resides only in the Catholic Church.
The Protestant principle of private judgment has created a milieu (esp. in Protestant America) in which (invariably) man-centered "cults" such as Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormonism, and Christian Science arise. The very notion that one can "start" a new, or "the true" Church is Protestant to the core.
The lack of a definitive teaching authority in Protestant (as with the Catholic magisterium) makes many individual Protestants think that they have a direct line to God, notwithstanding all of Christian Tradition and the history of biblical exegesis (a "Bible, Holy Spirit and me" mentality). Such people are generally under-educated theologically, unteachable, lack humility, and have no business making presumed "infallible" statements about the nature of Christianity.
Evangelicalism's "techniques" of evangelism are often contrived and manipulative, certainly not directly derived from the text of the Bible. Some even resemble brainwashing to a degree.
The gospel preached by many evangelical Protestant evangelists and pastors is a truncated and abridged, individualistic and ear-tickling gospel, in effect merely "fire insurance" rather than the biblical gospel as proclaimed by the Apostles.
Evangelicalism often separates profound, life-transforming repentance and radical discipleship from its gospel message. The Lutheran Bonhoeffer called this "cheap grace."
The absence of the idea of submission to spiritual authority in Protestantism has leaked over into the civic arena, where the ideas of personal "freedom," "rights," and "choice" now dominate to such an extent that civic duty, communitarianism, and discipline are tragically neglected, to the detriment of a healthy society.
Catholicism retains the sense of the sacred, the sublime, the holy, and the beautiful in spirituality. The ideas of altar, and "sacred space" are preserved. Many Protestant churches are no more than "meeting halls" or "gymnasiums" or "barn"-type structures. Most Protestants' homes are more esthetically striking than their churches. Likewise, Protestants are often "addicted to mediocrity" in their appreciation of art, music, architecture, drama, the imagination, etc.
Protestantism has largely neglected the place of liturgy in worship (with notable exceptions such as Anglicanism and Lutheranism). This is the way Christians had always worshiped down through the centuries, and thus can't be so lightly dismissed.
Protestantism tends to oppose matter and spirit, favoring the latter, and is somewhat Gnostic or Docetic in this regard.
Catholicism upholds the "incarnational principle," wherein Jesus became flesh and thus raised flesh and matter to new spiritual heights.
Protestantism greatly limits or disbelieves in sacramentalism, which is simply the extension of the incarnational principle and the belief that matter can convey grace. Some sects (e.g., Baptists, many Pentecostals) reject all sacraments.
Protestants' excessive mistrust of the flesh ("carnality") often leads to (in evangelicalism or fundamentalism) an absurd legalism (no dancing, drinking, card-playing, rock music, etc.).
Many Protestants tend to separate life into categories of "spiritual" and "carnal," as if God is not Lord of all of life. It forgets that all non-sinful endeavors are ultimately spiritual.
Protestantism has removed the Eucharist from the center and focus of Christian worship services. Some Protestants observe it only monthly, or even quarterly. This is against the Tradition of the early Church.
Most Protestants regard the Eucharist symbolically, which is contrary to universal Christian Tradition up to 1517, and the Bible (Mt 26:26-28; Jn 6:47-63; 1 Cor 10:14-22; 1 Cor 11:23-30), which hold to the Real Presence (another instance of the antipathy to matter).
Protestantism has virtually ceased to regard marriage as a sacrament, contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Mt 19:4-5; 1 Cor 7:14; 1 Cor 7:39; Eph 5:25-33).
Protestantism has abolished the priesthood (Mt 18:18) and the sacrament of ordination, contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Acts 6:6; Acts 14:22; 1 Tim 4:14; 2 Tim 1:6).
Catholicism retains the Pauline notion of the spiritual practicality of a celibate clergy (e.g., Mt 19:12, 1 Cor 7:8, 1 Cor 7:27, 1 Cor 7:32-33).
Protestantism has largely rejected the sacrament of confirmation (Acts 8:18, Heb 6:2-4), contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible.
Many Protestants have denied infant baptism, contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Acts 2:3839; Acts 16:15; Acts 16:33; Acts 18:8; 1 Cor 1:16; Col 2:11-12). Protestantism is divided into five major camps on the question of baptism.
The great majority of Protestants deny baptismal regeneration, contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Mk 16:16; Jn 3:5; Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16; Rom 6:3-4; 1 Cor 6:11; Titus 3:5).
Protestants have rejected the sacrament of anointing of the sick (Extreme Unction / "Last Rites"), contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Mk 6:13; 1 Cor 12:9, 1 Cor 12:30; Jas 5:14-15).
Protestantism denies the indissolubility of sacramental marriage and allows divorce, contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Gen 2:24; Mal 2:14-16; Mt 5:32; Mat 19:6, Mat 19:9; Mk 10:11-12; Lk 16:18; Rom 7:2-3; 1 Cor 7:10-14; 1 Cor 7:39).
Protestantism doesn't believe procreation to be the primary purpose and benefit of marriage (it isn't part of the vows, as in Catholic matrimony), contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Gen 1:28; Gen 28:3, Ps 107:38; Ps 127:3-5).
Protestantism sanctions contraception, in defiance of universal Christian Tradition (Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant) up until 1930 - when the Anglicans first allowed it - and the Bible (Gen 38:8-10; Gen 41:52; Ex 23:25-26; Lev 26:9; Deut 7:14; Ruth 4:13; Lk 1:24-25). Now, only Catholicism retains the ancient Tradition against the "anti-child" mentality.
Protestantism (mostly its liberal wing) has accepted abortion as a moral option, contrary to universal Christian Tradition until recently (sometime after 1930), and the Bible (e.g., Ex 20:13; Job 31:15; Ps 139:13-16; Isa 44:2; Isa 49:5; Jer 1:5; Jer 2:34; Lk 1:15; Lk 1:41; Rom 13:9-10).
Protestantism (largely liberal denominations) allow women pastors (and even bishops, as in Anglicanism), contrary to Christian Tradition (inc. traditional Protestant theology) and the Bible (Mt 10:14; 1 Tim 2:11-15; 1 Tim 3:1-12; Titus 1:6).
Protestantism is, more and more, formally and officially compromising with currently fashionable radical feminism, which denies the roles of men and women, as taught in the Bible (Gen 2:18-23; 1 Cor 11:3-10) and maintained by Christian Tradition (differentiation of roles, but not of equality).
Protestantism is also currently denying, with increasing frequency, the headship of the husband in marriage, which is based upon the headship of the Father over the Son (while equal in essence) in the Trinity, contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (1 Cor 11:3; Eph 5:22-33; Col 3:18-19; 1 Pet 3:1-2). This too, is based on a relationship of equality (1 Cor 11:11-12; Gal 3:28; Eph 5:21).
Liberal Protestantism (most notably Anglicanism) has even ordained practicing homosexuals as pastors and blessed their "marriages," or taught that homosexuality is merely an involuntary, "alternate" lifestyle, contrary to formerly universal Christian Tradition, as the Bible clearly teaches (Gen 19:4-25; Rom 1:18-27; 1 Cor 6:9). Catholicism stands firm on traditional morality.
Liberal Protestantism, and evangelicalism increasingly, have accepted "higher critical" methods of biblical interpretation which lead to the destruction of the traditional Christian reverence for the Bible, and demote it to the status of largely a human, fallible document, to the detriment of its divine, infallible essence.
Many liberal Protestants have thrown out many cardinal doctrines of Christianity, such as the Incarnation, Virgin Birth, the Bodily Resurrection of Christ, the Trinity, Original Sin, hell, the existence of the devil, miracles, etc.
The founders of Protestantism denied, and Calvinists today deny, the reality of human free will (Luther's favorite book was his Bondage of the Will). This is both contrary to the constant premise of the Bible, Christian Tradition, and common sense.
Classical Protestantism had a deficient view of the Fall of Man, thinking that the result was "total depravity." According to Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, and Calvinists, man could only do evil of his own volition, and had no free will to do good. He now has a "sin nature." Catholicism believes that, in a mysterious way, man cooperates with the grace which always precedes all good actions. In Catholicism, man's nature still retains some good, although he has a propensity to sin ("concupiscence").
Classical Protestantism, and Calvinism today, make God the author of evil. He supposedly wills that men do evil and violate His precepts without having any free will to do so. This is blasphemous, and turns God into a demon.
Accordingly (man having no free will), God, in classical Protestant and Calvinist thought, predestines men to hell, although they had no choice or say in the matter all along!
Classical Protestantism and Calvinism, teach falsely that Jesus died only for the elect (i.e., those who will make it to heaven).
Classical Protestantism (esp. Luther), and Calvinism, due to their false view of the Fall, deny the efficacy and capacity of human reason to know God to some extent (both sides agree that revelation and grace are also necessary), and oppose it to God and faith, contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Mk 12:28; Lk 10:27; Jn 20:24-29; Acts 1:3; Acts 17:2, Acts 17:17, Acts 17:22-34; Acts 19:8). The best Protestant apologists today simply hearken back to the Catholic heritage of St. Aquinas, St. Augustine, and many other great thinkers.
Pentecostal or charismatic Protestantism places much too high an emphasis on spiritual experience, not balancing it properly with reason, the Bible, and Tradition (including the authority of the Church to pronounce on the validity of "private revelations").
Other Protestants (e.g., many Baptists) deny that spiritual gifts such as healing are present in the current age (supposedly they ceased with the apostles).
Protestantism has contradictory views of church government, or ecclesiology (episcopal, Presbyterian, congregational, or no collective authority at all), thus making discipline, unity and order impossible. Some sects even claim to have "apostles" or "prophets" among them, with all the accompanying abuses of authority resulting therefrom.
Protestantism (esp. evangelicalism) has an undue fascination for the "end of the world," which has led to unbiblical date-setting (Mt 24:30-44; Mt 25:13; Lk 12:39-40) and much human tragedy among those who are taken in by such false prophecies.
Evangelicalism's over-emphasis on the "imminent end" of the age has often led to a certain "pie-in-the sky" mentality, to the detriment of social, political, ethical, and economic sensibilities here on earth.
Protestant thought has the defining characteristic of being "dichotomous," i.e., it separates ideas into more or less exclusive and mutually-hostile camps, when in fact many of the dichotomies are simply complementary rather than contradictory. Protestantism is "either-or," whereas Catholicism takes a "bothand" approach. Examples follow:
Protestantism pits the Word (the Bible, preaching) against sacraments.
Protestantism sets up inner devotion and piety against the Liturgy.
Protestantism opposes spontaneous worship to form prayers.
Protestantism separates the Bible from the Church.
Protestantism creates the false dichotomy of Bible vs. Tradition.
Protestantism pits Tradition against the Holy Spirit.
Protestantism considers Church authority and individual liberty and conscience contradictory.
Protestantism (esp. Luther) sets up the Old Testament against the New Testament, even though Jesus did not do so (Mt 5:17-19; Mk 7:8-11; Lk 24:27; Lk 24:44; Jn 5:45-47).
On equally unbiblical grounds, Protestantism opposes law to grace.
Protestantism creates a false dichotomy between symbolism and sacramental reality (e.g., baptism, Eucharist).
Protestantism separates the Individual from Christian community (1 Cor 12:14-27).
Protestantism pits the veneration of saints against the worship of God. Catholic theology doesn't permit worship of saints in the same fashion as that directed towards God. Saints are revered and honored, not adored, as only God the Creator can be.
The anti-historical outlook of many Protestants leads to individuals thinking that the Holy Spirit is speaking to them, but has not, in effect, spoken to the multitudes of Christians for 1500 years before Protestantism began!
Flaws in original Protestant thought have led to even worse errors in reaction. E.g., extrinsic justification, devised to assure the predominance of grace, came to prohibit any outward sign of its presence ("faith vs. works," "sola fide"). Calvinism, with its cruel God, turned men off to such an extent that they became Unitarians (as in New England). Many founders of cults of recent origin started out Calvinist (Jehovah's Witnesses, Christian Science, The Way International, etc.).
Evangelicalism is unbiblically obsessed (in typically American fashion) with celebrities (TV Evangelists).
Evangelicalism is infatuated with the false idea that great numbers in a congregation (or rapid growth) are a sign of God's presence in a special way, and His unique blessing. They forget that Mormonism is also growing by leaps and bounds. God calls us to faithfulness rather than to "success," obedience, not flattering statistics.
Evangelicalism often emphasizes numerical growth rather than individual spiritual growth.
Evangelicalism is presently obsessed with self-fulfillment, self-help, and oftentimes, outright selfishness, rather than the traditional Christian stress on suffering, sacrifice, and service.
Evangelicalism has a truncated and insufficient view of the place of suffering in the Christian life. Instead, "health-and-wealth" and "name-it-and-claim-it" movements within Pentecostal Protestantism are flourishing, which have a view of possessions not in harmony with the Bible and Christian Tradition.
Evangelicalism has, by and large, adopted a worldview which is, in many ways, more capitalist than Christian. Wealth and personal gain is sought more than godliness, and is seen as a proof of God's favor, as in Puritan, and secularized American thought, over against the Bible and Christian teaching.
Evangelicalism is increasingly tolerating far-left political outlooks not in accord with Christian views, esp. at its seminaries and colleges.
Evangelicalism is increasingly tolerating theological heterodoxy and liberalism, to such an extent that many evangelical leaders are alarmed, and predict a further decay of orthodox standards.
"Positive confession" movements in Pentecostal evangelicalism have adopted views of God (in effect) as a "cosmic bellhop," subject to man's frivolous whims and desires of the moment, thus denying God's absolute sovereignty and prerogative to turn down any of man's improper prayer requests (Jas 4:3; 1 Jn 5:14).
The above sects usually teach that anyone can be healed who has enough "faith," contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (e.g., Job, St. Paul's "thorn in the flesh," usu. considered a disease by most Protestant commentators).
Evangelicalism, by its own self-critiques, is badly infected with pragmatism, the false philosophical view that "whatever works is true, or right." The gospel, esp. on TV, is sold in the same way that McDonalds hawks hamburgers. Technology, mass-market and public relations techniques have largely replaced personal pastoral care and social concern for the downtrodden, irreligious, and unchurched masses.
Sin, in evangelicalism, is increasingly seen as a psychological failure or a lack of self-esteem, rather than the willful revolt against God that it is.
Protestantism, in all essential elements, merely borrows wholesale from Catholic Tradition, or distorts the same. All doctrines upon which Catholics and Protestants agree, are clearly Catholic in origin (Trinity, Virgin Birth, Resurrection, 2nd Coming, Canon of the Bible, heaven, hell, etc.). Those where Protestantism differs are usually distortions of Catholic forerunners. E.g., Quakerism is a variant of Catholic Quietism. Calvinism is an over-obsession with the Catholic idea of the sovereignty of God, but taken to lengths beyond what Catholicism ever taught (denial of free will, total depravity, double predestination, etc.). Protestant dichotomies such as faith vs. works, come from nominalism, which was itself a corrupt form of Scholasticism, never dogmatically sanctioned by the Catholic Church. Whatever life or truth is present in each Protestant idea, always is derived from Catholicism, which is the fulfillment of the deepest and best aspirations within Protestantism.
One of Protestantism's foundational principles is sola Scriptura, which is neither a biblical (see below), historical (nonexistent until the 16th century), nor logical (it's self-defeating) idea:
The Bible doesn't contain the whole of Jesus' teaching, or Christianity, as many Protestants believe (Mk 4:33; Mk 6:34; Lk 24:15-16; Lk 24:25-27; Jn 16:12; Jn 20:30; Jn 21:25; Acts 1:2-3).
Sola Scriptura is an abuse of the Bible, since it is a use of the Bible contrary to its explicit and implicit testimony about itself and Tradition. An objective reading of the Bible leads one to Tradition and the Catholic Church, rather than the opposite. The Bible is, in fact, undeniably a Christian Tradition itself!
The NT was neither written nor received as the Bible at first, but only gradually so (i.e., early Christianity couldn't have believed in sola Scriptura like current Protestants, unless it referred to the OT alone).
Tradition is not a bad word in the Bible. Gk. paradosis refers to something handed on from one to another (good or bad). Good (Christian) Tradition is spoken of in 1 Cor 11:2; 2 Thess 2:15, 2 Thess 3:6, and Col 2:8. In the latter it is contrasted with traditions of men.
Christian Tradition, according to the Bible, can be oral as well as written (2 Thess 2:15; 2 Tim 1:1314; 2 Tim 2:2). St. Paul makes no qualitative distinction between the two forms.
The phrases "word of God" or "word of the Lord" in Acts and the epistles almost always refer to oral preaching, not to the Bible itself. Much of the Bible was originally oral (e.g., Jesus' entire teaching- He wrote nothing -St. Peter's sermon at Pentecost, etc.).
Contrary to many Protestant claims, Jesus didn't condemn all tradition any more than St. Paul did. E.g., Mt 15:3,6; Mk 7:8-9, Mk 7:13, where He condemns corrupt Pharisaical tradition only. He says "your tradition."
Gk. paradidomi, or "delivering" Christian, apostolic Tradition occurs in Lk 1:1-2; Rom 6:17; 1 Cor 11:23; 1 Cor 15:3; 2 Pet 2:21; Jude 3. Paralambano, or "receiving" Christian Tradition occurs in 1 Cor 15:1-2; Gal 1:9,12; 1 Thess 2:13.
The concepts of "Tradition," "gospel," "word of God," "doctrine," and "the Faith" are essentially synonymous, and all are predominantly oral. E.g., in the Thessalonian epistles alone St. Paul uses 3 of these interchangeably (2 Thess 2:15; 2 Thess 3:6; 1 Thess 2:9,13 (cf. Gal 1:9; Acts 8:14). If Tradition is a dirty word, then so is "gospel" and "word of God"!
St. Paul, in 1 Tim 3:15, puts the Church above Bible as the grounds for truth, as in Catholicism.
Protestantism's chief "proof text" for sola Scriptura, 2 Tim 3:16, fails, since it says that the Bible is profitable, but not sufficient for learning and righteousness. Catholicism agrees it is great for these purposes, but not exclusively so, as in Protestantism. Secondly, when St. Paul speaks of "Scripture" here, the NT didn't yet exist (not definitively for over 300 more years), thus he is referring to the OT only. This would mean that NT wasn't necessary for the rule of faith, if sola Scriptura were true, and if it were supposedly alluded to in this verse!
The above 11 factors being true, Catholicism maintains that all its Tradition is consistent with the Bible, even where the Bible is mute or merely implicit on a subject. For Catholicism, every doctrine need not be found primarily in the Bible, for this is Protestantism's principle of sola Scriptura. On the other hand, most Catholic theologians claim that all Catholic doctrines can be found in some fashion in the Bible, in kernel form, or by (usu. extensive) inference.
As thoughtful evangelical scholars have pointed out, an unthinking sola Scriptura position can turn into "bibliolatry," almost a worship of the Bible rather than God who is its Author. This mentality is similar to the Muslim view of Revelation, where no human elements whatsoever were involved. Sola Scriptura,, rightly understood from a more sophisticated Protestant perspective, means that the Bible is the final authority in Christianity, not the record of all God has said and done, as many evangelicals believe.
Christianity is unavoidably and intrinsically historical. All the events of Jesus' life (Incarnation, Crucifixion, Resurrection, Ascension, etc.) were historical, as was the preaching of the apostles. Tradition, therefore, of some sort, is unavoidable, contrary to numerous shortsighted Protestant claims that sola Scriptura annihilates Tradition. This is true both for matters great (ecclesiology, trinitarianism, justification) and small (church budgets, type of worship music, lengths of sermons, etc.). Every denial of a particular tradition involves a bias (hidden or open) towards one's own alternate tradition (E.g., if all Church authority is spurned, even individualistic autonomy is a "tradition," which ought to be defended as a Christian view in some fashion).
Sola Scriptura literally couldn't have been true, practically speaking, for most Christians throughout history, since the movable-type printing press only appeared in the mid-15th century. Preaching and oral Tradition, along with things like devotional practices, Christian holidays, church architecture and other sacred art, were the primary carriers of the gospel for 1400 years. For all these centuries, sola Scriptura would have been regarded as an absurd abstraction and impossibility.
Protestantism claims that the Catholic Church has "added to the Bible." The Catholic Church replies that it has merely drawn out the implications of the Bible (development of doctrine), and followed the understanding of the early Church, and that Protestants have "subtracted" from the Bible by ignoring large portions of it which suggest Catholic positions. Each side thinks the other is "unbiblical," but in different ways.
Sola Scriptura is Protestantism's "Achilles' Heel." Merely invoking sola Scriptura is no solution to the problem of authority and certainty as long as multiple interpretations exist. If the Bible were so clear that all Protestants agreed simply by reading it with a willingness to accept and follow its teaching, this would be one thing, but since this isn't the case by a long shot (the multiplicity of denominations), sola Scriptura is a pipe-dream at best. About all that all Protestants agree on is that Catholicism is wrong! Of all Protestant ideas, the "clarity" or perspicuity of the Bible is surely one of the most absurd and the most demonstrably false by the historical record.
Put another way, having a Bible does not render one's private judgment infallible. Interpretation is just as inevitable as tradition. The Catholic Church therefore, is absolutely necessary in order to speak authoritatively and to prevent confusion, error, and division.
Catholicism doesn't regard the Bible as obscure, mysterious, and inaccessible, but it is vigilant to protect it from all arbitrary and aberrant exegesis (2 Pet 1:20, 3:16). The best Protestant traditions seek to do the same, but are inadequate and ineffectual since they are divided.
Protestantism has a huge problem with the Canon of the NT. The process of determining the exact books which constitute the NT lasted until 397 A.D., when the Council of Carthage spoke with finality, certainly proof that the Bible is not "self-authenticating," as Protestantism believes. Some sincere, devout, and learned Christians doubted the canonicity of some books which are now in the Bible, and others considered books as Scripture which were not at length included in the Canon. St. Athanasius in 367 was the first to list all 27 books in the NT as Scripture.
The Council of Carthage, in deciding the Canon of the entire Bible in 397, included the so-called "Apocryphal" books, which Protestants kicked out of the Bible (i.e., a late tradition). Prior to the 16th century Christians considered these books Scripture, and they weren't even separated from the others, as they are today in the Protestant Bibles which include them. Protestantism accepts the authority of this Council for the NT, but not the OT, just as it arbitrarily and selectively accepts or denies other conciliar decrees, according to their accord with existing Protestant "dogmas" and biases.
Contrary to Protestant anti-Catholic myth, the Catholic Church has always revered the Bible, and hasn't suppressed it (it protested some Protestant translations, but Protestants have often done the same regarding Catholic versions). This is proven by the laborious care of monks in protecting and copying manuscripts, and the constant translations into vernacular tongues (as opposed to the falsehoods about only Latin Bibles), among other plentiful and indisputable historical evidences. The Bible is a Catholic book, and no matter how much Protestants study it and proclaim it as peculiarly their own, they must acknowledge their undeniable debt to the Catholic Church for having decided the Canon, and for preserving the Bible intact for 1400 years. How could the Catholic Church be "against the Bible," as antiCatholics say, yet at the same time preserve and revere the Bible profoundly for so many years? The very thought is so absurd as to be self-refuting. If Catholicism is indeed as heinous as anti-Catholics would have us believe, Protestantism ought to put together its own Bible, instead of using the one delivered to them by the Catholic Church, as it obviously could not be trusted!
Protestantism denies the Sacrifice of the Mass, contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Gen 14:18; Ps 110:4; Isa 66:18,21; Mal 1:11; Heb 7:24-25; Heb 13:10; Rev 5:1-10/cf. Rev 8:3; Rev 13:8). Catholicism, it must be emphasized, doesn't believe that Jesus is sacrificed over and over at each Mass; rather, each Mass is a representation of the one Sacrifice at Calvary on the Cross, which transcends space and time, as in Rev 13:8.
Protestantism disbelieves, by and large, in the development of doctrine, contrary to Christian Tradition and many implicit biblical indications. Whenever the Bible refers to the increasing knowledge and maturity of Christians individually and (particularly) collectively, an idea similar to development is present. Further, many doctrines develop in the Bible before our eyes ("progressive revelation"). Examples: the afterlife, the Trinity, acceptance of Gentiles. And doctrines which Protestantism accepts whole and entire from Catholicism, such as the Trinity and the Canon of the Bible, developed in history, in the first three centuries of Christianity. It is foolish to try and deny this. The Church is the "Body" of Christ, and is a living organism, which grows and develops like all living bodies. It is not a statue, simply to be cleaned and polished over time, as many Protestants seem to think.
Protestantism separates justification from sanctification, contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (e.g., Mt 5:20; Mat 7:20-24; Rom 2:7-13; 1 Cor 6:11; 1 Pet 1:2).
Protestantism pits faith against works (sola fide), which is a rejection of Christian Tradition and the explicit teaching of the Bible (Mt 25:31-46; Lk 18:18-25; Jn 6:27-29; Gal 5:6; Eph 2:8-10; Phil 2:12-13; Phil 3:10-14; 1 Thess 1:3; 2 Thess 1:11; Heb 5:9; Jas 1:21-27; Jas 2:14-16). These passages also indicate that salvation is a process, not an instantaneous event, as in Protestantism.
Protestantism rejects the Christian Tradition and biblical teaching of merit, or differential reward for our good deeds done in faith (Mt 16:27; Rom 2:6; 1 Cor 3:8-9; 1 Pet 1:17; Rev 22:12).
Protestantism's teaching of extrinsic, imputed, forensic, or external justification contradicts the Christian Tradition and biblical doctrine of infused, actual, internal, transformational justification (which inc. sanctification): Ps 51:2-10; Ps 103:12; Jn 1:29; Rom 5:19; 2 Cor 5:17; Heb 1:3; 1 Jn 1:7-9.
Many Protestants (esp. Presbyterians, Calvinists and Baptists) believe in eternal security, or, perseverance of the saints (the belief that one can't lose his "salvation," supposedly obtained at one point in time). This is contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible: 1 Cor 9:27; Gal 4:9; Gal 5:1,4; Col 1:22-3; 1 Tim 1:19-20; 1 Tim 4:1; 1 Tim 5:15; Heb 3:12-14; Heb 6:4-6; Heb 10:26,29,39; Heb 12:14-15; 2 Pet 2:15, 2 Pet 2:20-21; Rev 2:4-5.
Contrary to Protestant myth and anti-Catholicism, the Catholic Church doesn't teach that one is saved by works apart from preceding and enabling grace, but that faith and works are inseparable, as in James 1 and 2. This heresy of which Catholicism is often charged, was in fact condemned by the Catholic Church at the Second Council of Orange in 529 A.D. It is known as Pelagianism, the view that man could save himself by his own natural efforts, without the necessary supernatural grace from God. A more moderate view, Semi-Pelagianism, was likewise condemned. To continue to accuse the Catholic Church of this heresy is a sign of both prejudice and manifest ignorance of the history of theology, as well as the clear Catholic teaching of the Council of Trent (1545-63), available for all to see. Yet the myth is strangely prevalent.
Protestantism has virtually eliminated the practice of confession to a priest (or at least a pastor), contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Mt 16:19; Mt 18:18; Jn 20:23).
Protestantism disbelieves in penance, or temporal punishment for (forgiven) sin, over against Christian Tradition and the Bible (e.g., Num 14:19-23; 2 Sam 12:13-14; 1 Cor 11:27-32; Heb 12:6-8).
Protestantism has little concept of the Tradition and biblical doctrine of mortifying the flesh, or, suffering with Christ: Mt 10:38; 16:24: Rom 8:13,17; 1 Cor 12:24-6; Phil 3:10; 1 Pet 4:1,13.
Likewise, Protestantism has lost the Tradition and biblical doctrine of vicarious atonement, or redemptive suffering with Christ, of Christians for the sake of each other: Ex 32:30-32; Num 16:43-8; 25:613; 2 Cor 4:10; Col 1:24; 2 Tim 4:6.
Protestantism has rejected the Tradition and biblical doctrine of purgatory, as a consequence of its false view of justification and penance, despite sufficient evidence in Scripture: Is 4:4; 6:5-7; Micah 7:8-9; Mal 3:1-4; 2 Maccabees 12:39-45; Mt 5:25-6; 12:32; Lk 16:19-31 (cf. Eph 4:8-10; 1 Pet 3:19-20); 1 Cor 3:11-15; 2 Cor 5:10; Rev 21:27.
Protestantism has rejected (largely due to misconceptions and misunderstanding) the Catholic developed doctrine of indulgences, which is, simply, the remission of the temporal punishment for sin (i.e., penance), by the Church (on the grounds of Mt 16:19; 18:18, and Jn 20:23). This is no different than what St. Paul did, concerning an errant brother at the Church of Corinth. He first imposed a penance on him (1 Cor 5:3-5), then remitted part of it (an indulgence: 2 Cor 2:6-11). Just because abuses occurred prior to the Protestant Revolt (admitted and rectified by the Catholic Church), is no reason to toss out yet another biblical doctrine. It is typical of Protestantism to burn down a house rather than to cleanse it, to "throw the baby out with the bath water."
Protestantism has thrown out prayers for the dead, in opposition to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Tobit 12:12; 2 Maccabees 12:39-45; 1 Cor 15:29; 2 Tim 1:16-18; also verses having to do with purgatory, since these prayers are for the saints there).
Protestantism rejects, on inadequate grounds, the intercession of the saints for us after death, and the correspondent invocation of the saints for their effectual prayers (Jas 5:16). Christian Tradition and the Bible, on the other hand, have upheld this practice: Dead saints are aware of earthly affairs (Mt 22:30 w/ Lk 15:10 and 1 Cor 15:29; Heb 12:1), appear on earth to interact with men (1 Sam 28:12-15; Mt 17:1-3, 27:5053; Rev 11:3), and therefore can intercede for us, and likewise be petitioned for their prayers, just as are Christians on earth (2 Maccabees 15:14; Rev 5:8; 6:9-10).
Some Protestants disbelieve in Guardian Angels, despite Christian Tradition and the Bible (Ps 34:7; 91:11; Mt 18:10; Acts 12:15; Heb 1:14).
Most Protestants deny that angels can intercede for us, contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Rev 1:4; 5:8; 8:3-4).
Protestantism rejects Mary's Immaculate Conception, despite developed Christian Tradition and indications in the Bible: Gen 3:15; Lk 1:28 ("full of grace" Catholics interpret, on linguistic grounds, to mean "without sin"); Mary as a type of the Ark of the Covenant (Lk 1:35 w/ Ex 40:34-8; Lk 1:44 w/ 2 Sam 6:14-16; Lk 1:43 w/ 2 Sam 6:9: God's Presence requires extraordinary holiness).
Protestantism rejects Mary's Assumption, despite developed Christian Tradition and biblical indications: If Mary was indeed sinless, she would not have to undergo bodily decay at death (Ps 16:10; Gen 3:19). Similar occurrences in the Bible make the Assumption not implausible or "unbiblical" per se (Enoch: Gen 5:24 w/ Heb 11:5; Elijah: 2 Ki 2:11; Paul: 2 Cor 12:2-4; the Protestant doctrine of the "Rapture": 1 Thess 4:15-17; risen saints: Mt 27:52-3).
Many (most?) Protestants deny Mary's perpetual virginity, despite Christian Tradition (inc. the unanimous agreement of the Protestant founders (Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, etc.), some Protestant support, and several biblical evidences, too involved to briefly summarize.
Protestantism denies Mary's Spiritual Motherhood of Christians, contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible (Jn 19:26-7: "Behold thy mother"; Rev 12:1,5,17: Christians described as "her seed.") Catholics believe that Mary is incomparably more alive and holy than we are, hence, her prayers for us are of great effect (Jas 5:16; Rev 5:8; 6:9-10). But she is our sister with regard to our position of creatures vis-à-vis the Creator, God. Mary never operates apart from the necessary graces from her Son, and always glorifies Him, not herself, as Catholic theology stresses.
Protestantism rejects the papacy, despite profound Christian Tradition, and the strong evidence in the Bible of Peter's preeminence and commission by Jesus as the Rock of His Church. No one denies he was some type of leader among the apostles. The papacy as we now know it is derived from this primacy: Mt 16:18-19; Lk 22:31-2; Jn 21:15-17 are the most direct "papal" passages. Peter's name appears first in all lists of apostles; even an angel implies he is their leader (Mk 16:7), and he is accepted by the world as such (Acts 2:37-8,41). He works the first miracle of the Church age (Acts 3:6-8), utters the first anathema (Acts 5:2-11), raises the dead (Acts 9:40), first receives the Gentiles (Acts 10:9-48), and his name is mentioned more often than all the other disciples put together (191 times). Much more similar evidence can be found.
The Church of Rome and the popes were central to the governance and theological direction and orthodoxy of the Christian Church from the beginning. This is undeniable. All of the historical groups now regarded as heretical by Protestants and Catholics alike were originally judged as such by popes and/or Ecumenical Councils presided over and ratified by popes.
Protestantism, in its desperation to eke out some type of historical continuity apart from the Catholic Church, sometimes attempts to claim a lineage from medieval sects such as the Waldenses, Cathari, and Albigensians (and sometimes earlier groups such as the Montanists or Donatists). However, this endeavor is doomed to failure when one studies closely what these sects believed. They either retain much Catholic teaching anathema to Protestants or hold heretical notions antithetical to Christianity altogether (Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox), or both, making this Protestant theory quite dubious at best.
Catholic has the most sophisticated and thoughtful Christian socio-economic and political philosophy, a mixture of "progressive" and "conservative" elements distinct from the common-place political rhetoric and Machiavellianism which typically dominate the political arena. Catholicism has the best view of church in relation to the state and culture as well.
Catholicism has the best Christian philosophy and worldview, worked out through centuries of reflection and experience. As in its theological reflection and development, the Catholic Church is ineffably wise and profound, to an extent truly amazing, and indicative of a sure divine stamp. I used to marvel, just before I converted, at how the Catholic Church could be so right about so many things. I was accustomed to thinking, as a good evangelical, that the truth was always a potpourri of ideas from many Protestant denominations and Catholicism and Orthodoxy (selected by me), and that none "had it all together." But, alas, the Catholic Church does, after all!
Last but by no means least, Catholicism has the most sublime spirituality and devotional spirit, manifested in a thousand different ways, from the monastic ideal, to the heroic celibacy of the clergy and religious, the Catholic hospitals, the sheer holiness of a Thomas a Kempis or a St. Ignatius and their great devotional books, countless saints - both canonized and as yet unknown and unsung, Mother Teresa, Pope John Paul II, Pope John XXIII, the early martyrs, St. Francis of Assisi, the events at Lourdes and Fatima, the dazzling intellect of John Henry Cardinal Newman, the wisdom and insight of Archbishop Fulton Sheen, St. John of the Cross, the sanctified wit of a Chesterton or a Muggeridge, elderly women doing the Stations of the Cross or the Rosary, Holy Hour, Benediction, kneeling - the list goes on and on. This devotional spirit is unmatched in its scope and deepness, despite many fine counterparts in Protestant and Orthodox spirituality.

Human sensibilities lead to hell

2013-07-03T13:39:00.001-04:00

Human sensibilities lead to hell in creation of man made false religions ir protestantisms and the many pagans

Fund Creation for Traditional Latin Mass Chapels

2013-03-21T15:52:00.000-04:00

I was thinking this morning about something I could do in the exiled situation that The Church is in. With the apostate dioceses and the vile novus ordo, and the threat of simony from certain "traditional" groups what is a catholic to do? I mean a catholic as in real catholic, not someone that goes to the masonic novus ordo. Someone that solely attends the True Mass known as the Traditional Latin Mass. Many catholics live in areas that no Mass is available. I was thinking of creating a fund to raise money to build small chapels for catholics in need. In need of a more proper place to worship The Triune GOD in the way he meant for us to worship him in the means that The Son gave us in the Mass. A fund also to help pay for travel expenses for priests to travel and offer up these Masses that so few catholics today can actually attend. I hope someone out there finds this post and is willing to help.

Feast Day of Saint Benedict

2013-03-21T10:31:00.002-04:00

On this Feast Day of Saint Benedict I am recalled of an example of his, that even though unthinkable by some, is an example we all should follow
One time while in meditation Saint Benedict was tormented by the devil with a storm of temptations. The devil sought to make this wonderful Saint fall. The devil was relentless with temptations. Saint Benedict as dedicated to Our Lord as he was/is thought, "enough!" The Saint then ripped off his clothes and jumped into a nearby thornbush to ward off the temptations. the devil then knew he could no longer tempt this great Saint and did not bother again.

Saint Quote of the Day, St Thomas Aquinas

2012-10-08T11:14:00.002-04:00

'If in this world there be any knowledge of this sacrament stronger than that of faith, I wish now to use it in affirming that I firmly believe and know as certain that Jesus Christ, True God and True Man, Son of God and Son of the Virgin Mary, is in this Sacrament . . . I receive Thee, the price of my redemption, for Whose love I have watched, studied, and laboured. Thee have I preached; Thee have I taught. Never have I said anything against Thee: if anything was not well said, that is to be attributed to my ignorance. Neither do I wish to be obstinate in my opinions, but if I have written anything erroneous concerning this sacrament or other matters, I submit all to the judgment and correction of the Holy Roman Church, in whose obedience I now pass from this life.'

St. Thomas Aquinas, on his deathbed

This Religious Liberty crap needs to stop

2012-10-02T13:43:00.002-04:00

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/anti-obama-protesters-arrested-for-praying/

When will people get it through their thick skulls it is not about religious liberty nor was the Cristero War in Mexico. It is about anti-christ persecution pure and simple. It is about satanic human sacrifices, persecution of the Church, Christians, and mocking Sacraments of GOD. People need to quit the bs. "Liberty" is a French Revolt word meant to separate people from GOD. "Religious Liberty" really means to make the Church and Christianity on par with paganism and the abrogated judaism, which it is NOT. The only true Faith is Christian all others are false and in grave error. This 'religious liberty' crap has to stop.

Night at the Big D

2012-09-23T13:29:00.000-04:00

Work was very slow last night. It was so nice out that no one was ordering in. I thought on a delivery my job is to make Mothers and Dads happy. I do that by getting the pizza pie to families to make the children happy which makes the moms and dads happy. Coincidentally on that delivery I only got 2 for tip, and it was 12 miles round trip. Ugh. Another one I thought an assistant manager elsewhere was going to jump over the counter and hug me she was so happy to see pizza, got me a smile on the face there then unfortunately no tip, sigh. But it was nice to see such appreciation. At least I'm safe and have a job.
Thank you Jesus Christ, Blessed Mother, St Michael the Archangel, my own Guardian Angel, Saint Paul, Saint Augustine, Saint William, Saint Gabriel, and Saint Pius X.

Our Lady keep you.

Saint quote of day

2012-09-23T12:53:00.001-04:00

'May the Sacred Heart accomplish in you all His designs and be Himself your strength and your stay, so as to enable you to bear courageously the weight of your responsibility.'

St. Margaret Mary Alacoque

And she said, 'I refuse to live in a bubble.

2012-09-21T14:22:00.001-04:00

http://barnhardt.biz/

And she said, 'I refuse to live in a bubble.'

Posted by Ann Barnhardt - September 20, AD 2012 10:45 PM MST

Last week a cattle industry colleague of mine called to relate his afternoon's activity. He was driving with his four children, aged 9 to 1, when the following conversation took place in the car: 4 year old girl: Can two girls get married?
6 year old boy: NO, SILLY! Two girls can't get married. It has to be one boy and one girl.
9 year old girl: Nuh-uh. I saw on TV where two girls got married.
This is what it finally took for this man, this husband, this father, this guardian and protector, to FINALLY understand the full horror of what is being done to his children. This is what it took - having the sword of his 9 year old's parroting of Marxist-Sodomite propaganda pierce his soul. He could pretend that he had it under control so long as it was only the people on TV saying it. He could lie to himself and tell himself that "it is all going over their heads" and "we're a good Christian family, and we are raising our children in a Godly home in rural America," ... until he heard the Sodomite filth come spewing out of the mouth of his firstborn child, contaminating two of his other children in the process.
This horror was what was required for the Holy Spirit to finally get through. And this is a big lesson: if you need to get your heart torn out of your chest and stomped all over in order for you to comprehend some essential truth, God will permit that to happen. Don't you doubt that for one second.
As soon as they arrived home, my friend dug out the last satellite bill, called the customer service number, and in no uncertain terms told them to TURN. THE. SHIT. OFF. NOW.
It's over. No more. No more satanic Sodomite agitprop and pornography will be coming into his house. It's over. No more Marxist pagan filth. It's over. No more mind-numbing soul-killing innocence-destroying lies in his home. No more open attacks on his children while he sits by and watches. It's over.
TURN. THE. SHIT. OFF. NOW.
"But sir, what if we offered you two months free? Are you switching to cable? We can beat any cable package. What if we upgraded you to our premium high-definition package at no additional charge?"
TURN. THE. SHIT. OFF. NOW.
Praise God. Praise God. Praise God.
Significant damage has already been done, but that damage can be fixed, and this family is now on the road to healing. The lives of four children and two parents have just changed, and changed for the better in ways that they cannot yet imagine. Games of kickball and baseball will now be played that never would have occurred, forts will be built, books will be read, skills will be learned, adventures will be had and CONVERSATIONS WILL NOW TAKE PLACE that would have all been snuffed from existence by the godforsaken Marxist-Sodomite agitprop and pornography vector that is called "TV". Satan's main entrypoint into this home and family has now been firmly shut, and it was shut by the ACTION of the father in MASCULINE IRE IN DEFENSE OF HIS FAMILY.
Now to the flip side of this anecdote, which happened just this morning.
I attended a conference about Catholic ethics, and toward the end discussion opened up a bit. An upper-middleclass suburban woman raised her hand and complained that her 13 year old daughter persistently wanted to dress like Kim Kardashian, I believe the word "whore" was used, as the daughter has been regularly watching the Kardashian filth on TV and wants to be just like Kim Kardashian, who is, for those of you who do not know, a sociopathic moral degenerate de facto prostitute who is also teetering on the precipice of being mentally retarded.
I tend to keep fairly quiet in venues such as this. If I am not "the speaker" then it is my job to listen, but with the anecdote above fresh in my mind, and since discussion had opened up, I did lean forward and asked this woman why she allowed cable TV into her home in the first place, and why she allowed her daughter to watch evil filth. Some response was made to the effect, "Well, I can't control . . . " at which point I cut her off and told her that she could call and cancel the cable feed this afternoon, at which she bristled and snarled back at me, "I'm not going to have this discussion. I'M NOT GOING TO LIVE IN A BUBBLE."
Understand, this woman had no clue who I was, so the bristling and snarling was not because she was intimidated by me - it was an organic response to the thought of taking away her precious Marxist-Sodomite agitporn (new word!) delivery vector. She then got up and left.
Had I gone blowtorch on this woman, here is what I would have said:

Madam, you just raised your hand and volunteered that your 13 year old daughter is emulating as a role model and dressing like a whore in an effort to elicit sympathy from this group. When I asked you why you simply don't do the absolute minimum of what any parent should do, namely removing the evil of TV from your home and thus protecting your daughter, you snapped back that you refuse to "live in a bubble." Madam, from what little you have told us, it sounds like your daughter, being 13 years old, upper-middle class, living in the United States in 2012, and already EMULATING WHOREDOM, is well on her way to being lost to hell for all eternity. Her soul and psyche are being formed in profound ways, especially now as she is in the throes of puberty, setting up who she will be and the choices she will make for the rest of her life. And you, her mother, refuse to do what is clearly the BARE MINIMUM to stop your own daughter's descent into the grips of hell, namely eliminating cable TV from your home, because you don't want to "live in a bubble?" You would watch your own child be lost to hell before you would go without TELEVISION? Do you realize that in this you are also putting YOUR OWN SOUL at profound risk for eternal damnation?
I don't know your daughter, and probably never will. I don't know you, and to be frank, I don't like you and we will almost certainly never be friends on this earth. BUT, for some reason which I cannot explain, I CARE whether or not you and your daughter go to heaven or go to hell. I am not indifferent to your fate, and am intensely desirous of both of you making it to heaven. In fact, it appears that I care more about the eternal fate of your daughter's soul than you do. This is charity: not being indifferent to our fellow human beings. I do not like you, nor am I obliged to, but I am not indifferent to you, which IS my obligation.
Madam, you are the walking personification of the Marxist goal. You are a totally sensuous, self-absorbed person who can only see the world through the prism of your own faux-victimhood, so much so that your self-centered sensuousness even takes precedence over the eternal fates of the souls of your own young children. The last wedge, the wedge between mother and child, has been driven home, and you are the proof of that.
Madam, that "bubble" that you refuse to live in, that "bubble" that simply asks of us that we reject evil, is what the rest of us call "The Sacred Heart of Jesus", pierced and burning with love for you, your daughter and everyone else. But, if you don't want to live in that "Bubble", then I can promise you Sister, YOU WON'T. EVER. If you find the "Bubble" too boring, too isolating, too embarrassing and too socially awkward; if you hold that "Bubble", all who dwell in It, all those who seek to dwell in It, and those who are truly desirous of you and your daughter dwelling in It in scathing contempt, then Madam, I can promise you that you will never, ever have to experience It.

Cast out to worldly wolves

2012-09-17T09:02:00.000-04:00

Over the weekend I felt like I was home, now I feel like I was cast out to the wolves. This past weekend I visited my parents. Well I actually spent more time with friends and acquaintances in KY. I went to the Assumption Festival at Our Lady of the Assumption parish in Walton, KY. I always feel so much at home there. That and I am able to go to solemn High Mass when I go there. Unfortunately in Evansville our priest that graciously drives out here can only have a Low Mass for us. Now that I'm back here in Evansville it just seems like I'm back in the grind hoping to accomplish my research to graduate. At least I can go to our chapel for the Rosary anytime I want to.

Symbols of Rachel Corrie's Murder

2012-09-05T23:40:00.000-04:00

SYLLABUS CONDEMNING THE ERRORS OF THE MODERNISTS

2012-09-03T12:31:00.001-04:00

SYLLABUS CONDEMNING THE ERRORS OF THE MODERNISTS

LAMENTABILI SANE
Pius X July 3, 1907
With truly lamentable results, our age, casting aside all restraint in its search for the ultimate causes of things, frequently pursues novelties so ardently that it rejects the legacy of the human race. Thus it falls into very serious errors, which are even more serious when they concern sacred authority, the interpretation of Sacred Scripture, and the principal mysteries of Faith. The fact that many Catholic writers also go beyond the limits determined by the Fathers and the Church herself is extremely regrettable. In the name of higher knowledge and historical research (they say), they are looking for that progress of dogmas which is, in reality, nothing but the corruption of dogmas.
These errors are being daily spread among the faithful. Lest they captivate the faithful's minds and corrupt the purity of their faith, His Holiness, Pius X, by Divine Providence, Pope, has decided that the chief errors should be noted and condemned by the Office of this Holy Roman and Universal Inquisition.
Therefore, after a very diligent investigation and consultation with the Reverend Consultors, the Most Eminent and Reverend Lord Cardinals, the General Inquisitors in matters of faith and morals have judged the following propositions to be condemned and proscribed. In fact, by this general decree, they are condemned and proscribed.
1. The ecclesiastical law which prescribes that books concerning the Divine Scriptures are subject to previous examination does not apply to critical scholars and students of scientific exegesis of the Old and New Testament.
2. The Church's interpretation of the Sacred Books is by no means to be rejected; nevertheless, it is subject to the more accurate judgment and correction of the exegetes.
3. From the ecclesiastical judgments and censures passed against free and more scientific exegesis, one can conclude that the Faith the Church proposes contradicts history and that Catholic teaching cannot really be reconciled with the true origins of the Christian religion.
4. Even by dogmatic definitions the Church's magisterium cannot determine the genuine sense of the Sacred Scriptures.
5. Since the deposit of Faith contains only revealed truths, the Church has no right to pass judgment on the assertions of the human sciences.
6. The "Church learning" and the "Church teaching" collaborate in such a way in defining truths that it only remains for the "Church teaching" to sanction the opinions of the "Church learning."
7. In proscribing errors, the Church cannot demand any internal assent from the faithful by which the judgments she issues are to be embraced.
8. They are free from all blame who treat lightly the condemnations passed by the Sacred Congregation of the Index or by the Roman Congregations.
9. They display excessive simplicity or ignorance who believe that God is really the author of the Sacred Scriptures. 10. The inspiration of the books of the Old Testament consists in this: The Israelite writers handed down religious doctrines under a peculiar aspect which was either little or not at all known to the Gentiles.
11. Divine inspiration does not extend to all of Sacred Scriptures so that it renders its parts, each and every one, free from every error.
12. If he wishes to apply himself usefully to Biblical studies, the exegete must first put aside all preconceived opinions about the supernatural origin of Sacred Scripture and interpret it the same as any other merely human document.
13. The Evangelists themselves, as well as the Christians of the second and third generation, artificially arranged the evangelical parables. In such a way they explained the scanty fruit of the preaching of Christ among the Jews.
14. In many narrations the Evangelists recorded, not so much things that are true, as things which, even though false, they judged to be more profitable for their readers.
15. Until the time the canon was defined and constituted, the Gospels were increased by additions and corrections. Therefore there remained in them only a faint and uncertain trace of the doctrine of Christ.
16. The narrations of John are not properly history, but a mystical contemplation of the Gospel. The discourses contained in his Gospel are theological meditations, lacking historical truth concerning the mystery of salvation.
17. The fourth Gospel exaggerated miracles not only in order that the extraordinary might stand out but also in order that it might become more suitable for showing forth the work and glory of the Word lncarnate.
18. John claims for himself the quality of witness concerning Christ. In reality, however, he is only a distinguished witness of the Christian life, or of the life of Christ in the Church at the close of the first century.
19. Heterodox exegetes have expressed the true sense of the Scriptures more faithfully than Catholic exegetes.
20. Revelation could be nothing else than the consciousness man acquired of his revelation to God.
21. Revelation, constituting the object of the Catholic faith, was not completed with the Apostles.
22. The dogmas the Church holds out as revealed are not truths which have fallen from heaven. They are an interpretation of religious facts which the human mind has acquired by laborious effort.
23. Opposition may, and actually does, exist between the facts narrated in Sacred Scripture and the Church's dogmas which rest on them. Thus the critic may reject as false facts the Church holds as most certain.
24. The exegete who constructs premises from which it follows that dogmas are historically false or doubtful is not to be reproved as long as he does not directly deny the dogmas themselves .
25. The assent of faith ultimately rests on a mass of probabilities .
26. The dogmas of the Faith are to be held only according to their practical sense; that is to say, as preceptive norms of conduct and not as norms of believing.
27. The divinity of Jesus Christ is not proved from the Gospels. It is a dogma which the Christian conscience has derived from the notion of the Messias.
28. While He was exercising His ministry, Jesus did not speak with the object of teaching He was the Messias, nor did His miracles tend to prove it.
29. It is permissible to grant that the Christ of history is far inferior to the Christ Who is the object of faith.
30 In all the evangelical texts the name "Son of God'' is equivalent only to that of "Messias." It does not in the least way signify that Christ is the true and natural Son of God.
31. The doctrine concerning Christ taught by Paul, John, and the Councils of Nicea, Ephesus and Chalcedon is not that which Jesus taught but that which the Christian conscience conceived concerning Jesus.
32. It is impossible to reconcile the natural sense of the Gospel texts with the sense taught by our theologians concerning the conscience and the infallible knowledge of Jesus Christ.
33 Everyone who is not led by preconceived opinions can readily see that either Jesus professed an error concerning the immediate Messianic coming or the greater part of His doctrine as contained in the Gospels is destitute of authenticity.
34. The critics can ascribe to Christ a knowledge without limits only on a hypothesis which cannot be historically conceived and which is repugnant to the moral sense. That hypothesis is that Christ as man possessed the knowledge of God and yet was unwilling to communicate the knowledge of a great many things to His disciples and posterity.
35. Christ did not always possess the consciousness of His Messianic dignity.
36. The Resurrection of the Savior is not properly a fact of the historical order. It is a fact of merely the supernatural order (neither demonstrated nor demonstrable) which the Christian conscience gradually derived from other facts.
37. In the beginning, faith in the Resurrection of Christ was not so much in the fact itself of the Resurrection as in the immortal life of Christ with God.
38. The doctrine of the expiatory death of Christ is Pauline and not evangelical.
39. The opinions concerning the origin of the Sacraments which the Fathers of Trent held and which certainly influenced their dogmatic canons are very different from those which now rightly exist among historians who examine Christianity .
40. The Sacraments have their origin in the fact that the Apostles and their successors, swayed and moved by circumstances and events, interpreted some idea and intention of Christ.
41. The Sacraments are intended merely to recall to man's mind the ever-beneficent presence of the Creator.
42. The Christian community imposed the necessity of Baptism, adopted it as a necessary rite, and added to it the obligation of the Christian profession.
43. The practice of administering Baptism to infants was a disciplinary evolution, which became one of the causes why the Sacrament was divided into two, namely, Baptism and Penance.
44. There is nothing to prove that the rite of the Sacrament of Confirmation was employed by the Apostles. The formal distinction of the two Sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation does not pertain to the history of primitive Christianity.
45. Not everything which Paul narrates concerning the institution of the Eucharist (I Cor. 11:23-25) is to be taken historically.
46. In the primitive Church the concept of the Christian sinner reconciled by the authority of the Church did not exist. Only very slowly did the Church accustom herself to this concept. As a matter of fact, even after Penance was recognized as an institution of the Church, it was not called a Sacrament since it would be held as a disgraceful Sacrament.
47. The words of the Lord, "Receive the Holy Spirit; whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained'' (John 20:22-23), in no way refer to the Sacrament of Penance, in spite of what it pleased the Fathers of Trent to say.
48. In his Epistle (Ch. 5:14-15) James did not intend to promulgate a Sacrament of Christ but only commend a pious custom. If in this custom he happens to distinguish a means of grace, it is not in that rigorous manner in which it was taken by the theologians who laid down the notion and number of the Sacraments.
49. When the Christian supper gradually assumed the nature of a liturgical action those who customarily presided over the supper acquired the sacerdotal character.
50. The elders who fulfilled the office of watching over the gatherings of the faithful were instituted by the Apostles as priests or bishops to provide for the necessary ordering of the increasing communities and not properly for the perpetuation of the Apostolic mission and power.
51. It is impossible that Matrimony could have become a Sacrament of the new law until later in the Church since it was necessary that a full theological explication of the doctrine of grace and the Sacraments should first take place before Matrimony should be held as a Sacrament.
52. It was far from the mind of Christ to found a Church as a society which would continue on earth for a long course
of centuries. On the contrary, in the mind of Christ the kingdom of heaven together with the end of the world was about to come immediately.
53. The organic constitution of the Church is not immutable. Like human society, Christian society is subject to a perpetual evolution.
54. Dogmas, Sacraments and hierarchy, both their notion and reality, are only interpretations and evolutions of the Christian intelligence which have increased and perfected by an external series of additions the little germ latent in the Gospel.
55. Simon Peter never even suspected that Christ entrusted the primacy in the Church to him.
56. The Roman Church became the head of all the churches, not through the ordinance of Divine Providence, but merely through political conditions.
57. The Church has shown that she is hostile to the progress of the natural and theological sciences.
58. Truth is no more immutable than man himself, since it evolved with him, in him, and through him.
59. Christ did not teach a determined body of doctrine applicable to all times and all men, but rather inaugurated a religious movement adapted or to be adapted to different times and places.
60. Christian Doctrine was originally Judaic. Through successive evolutions it became first Pauline, then Joannine, finally Hellenic and universal.
61. It may be said without paradox that there is no chapter of Scripture, from the first of Genesis to the last of the Apocalypse, which contains a doctrine absolutely identical with that which the Church teaches on the same matter. For the same reason, therefore, no chapter of Scripture has the same sense for the critic and the theologian.
62. The chief articles of the Apostles' Creed did not have the same sense for the Christians of the first ages as they have for the Christians of our time.
63. The Church shows that she is incapable of effectively maintaining evangelical ethics since she obstinately clings to immutable doctrines which cannot be reconciled with modern progress.
64. Scientific progress demands that the concepts of Christian doctrine concerning God, creation, revelation, the Person of the Incarnate Word, and Redemption be re-adjusted.
65. Modern Catholicism can be reconciled with true science only if it is transformed into a non-dogmatic Christianity; that is to say, into a broad and liberal Protestantism.
The following Thursday, the fourth day of the same month and year, all these matters were accurately reported to our Most Holy Lord, Pope Pius X. His Holiness approved and confirmed the decree of the Most Eminent Fathers and ordered that each and every one of the above-listed propositions be held by all as condemned and proscribed.
PETER PALOMBELLI, Notary of the Holy Roman and Universal Inquisition

Civil war and the truth about communists

2012-09-02T11:13:00.002-04:00

We sure do need somebody....but I doubt if your Romney or Ryan will save any of us.

But for the sake of the nation I hope in a miracle that with eyes wide open you'll have some reason be just as satisfied with Mittens in about a year from now.

Oh, and the commie "crap" you mention got it's start in America long before Obama was handed the reigns by the old entrenched gang of handlers who imposed upon us Bush, Clinton, Bush, and McCain.

Now you should fear that Romney is just their latest alternate in their "two party" game of "good cop/bad cop" played so effectively against the mostly naïveté population.

The ugly truth is that Americans lost their nation when Abe Lincoln's Jewish handlers created the communist Federal Government after killing 600,000 soldiers while killing and raping untold numbers of civilians in the South.

Today, America is run by two aligned communist parties, both pretending to represent the people via "election" when it's only been one iron fist-velvet glove political system that has existed in America since 1865.

Here's a bit of history that the commies didn't get around to teaching us in their John Dewey public schools.:

http://www.newswithviews.com/Stang/alan30.htm

From the beginning, the Republican Party has worked without deviation for bigger, more imperial government, for higher taxes, for more wars, for more totalitarianism. From the beginning, the Republican Party has been Red.

Why? In 1848, Communists rose in revolution across Europe, united by a document prepared for the purpose, entitled Manifesto of the Communist Party. Its author was a degenerate parasite named Karl Marx, whom a small gang of wealthy Communists – the League of Just Men – hired for the purpose. The Manifesto told its adherents and its victims what the Communists would do.

But the Revolution of 1848 failed. The perpetrators escaped, just ahead of the police. And they went, of course, to the united States. In 1856, the Republican Party ran its first candidate for President. By that time, these Communists from Europe had thoroughly infiltrated this country, especially the North. Many became high ranking officers in the Union Army and top government officials.

Down through the decades, Americans have wondered about Yankee brutality in that war. Lee invaded the North, but that sublime Christian hero forbade any forays against civilians. Military genius Stonewall Jackson stood like a stone wall and routed the Yankees at Manassas, but when Barbara Frietchie insisted on flying the Yankee flag in Frederick, Maryland, rather than the Stars and Bars , that sublime Christian hero commanded, according to John Greenleaf Whittier, “‘Who touches a hair of yon gray head/Dies like a dog! March on!’ he said.”

But the Yankees, invading the South, were monsters, killing, raping and destroying civilian property. In one Georgia town, some 400 women were penned in the town square in the July heat for almost a week without access to female facilities. It got worse when the Yankee slime got into the liquor. Some two thousand Southern women and children were shipped north to labor as slaves. Didn’t you learn that in school?

Sherman’s scorched earth March to the Sea was a horror the later Nazis could not equal. Why? Because the Yankees hated Negro slavery so much? There can be no doubt that the already strong Communist influence in the North, combined with that of the maniacal abolitionists, was at least one of the main reasons. Slavery was a tardy excuse, an afterthought they introduced to gain propaganda traction.

In retrospect, it appears that because nothing like this had ever happened here, Lee and Jackson did not fully comprehend what they were fighting. Had this really been a “Civil” War, rather than a secession, they would and could easily have seized Washington after Manassas and hanged our first Communist President and the other war criminals. Instead they went home, in the mistaken belief that the defeated Yankees would leave them alone. Lee did come to understand – too late. He said after the war that had he known at the beginning what he had since found out, he would have fought to the last man.

Tulsa Police Officer Sues After Being Punished For Refusing To Attent Mosque Event

2012-08-26T15:14:00.000-04:00

This is just another example of the forced anti-christ attitude upon the whole stinking world. A police officer that is a protestant refused to go to a "cultural diversity" poop-fest and was docked pay. When will he have another Crusade against mohomedans? Christ help us, Christ have mercy on us.

Tulsa Police Officer Sues After Being Punished For Refusing To Attent Mosque Event

RomneyGoHome

2012-08-24T14:08:00.001-04:00

AnnBarnhardt_Vendee_

2012-08-22T22:07:00.002-04:00

World-Inquisition

Old Testament persecutions and Catholics of Today

Seriously, What the Flip is the Point?

VICE Magazine calls NYC Orthodox Jewish community a child rape assembly line

VICE Magazine calls NYC Orthodox Jewish community a child rape assembly line

Hobby lobby the hippocrits and the satanic demoncrats

Divine Providence and why things happen

The irony in the sermons

Absolute must read! From Saint Athanasius

Somethings about Suffering and Purgatory

Via-Traditio July 10, 2013 - Seven Holy Brothers, Martyrs; Sts. Rufina & Secunda, Virgins & Martyrs

http://www.traditio.com/comment/com1307.htm

July 10, 2013 - Seven Holy Brothers, Martyrs; Sts. Rufina & Secunda, Virgins & Martyrs

Francis-Bergoglio "Approves" Novus Ordo Con-anizations for Two Modernist Newpopes Further Violations of the Traditional Requirements Make John XXIII and JPII Phony Unsaints

One Hundred Fifty Reasons I'm Catholic, And You Should Be Too!

Human sensibilities lead to hell

Fund Creation for Traditional Latin Mass Chapels

Feast Day of Saint Benedict

Saint Quote of the Day, St Thomas Aquinas

This Religious Liberty crap needs to stop

Night at the Big D

Saint quote of day

And she said, 'I refuse to live in a bubble.

Cast out to worldly wolves

Symbols of Rachel Corrie's Murder

SYLLABUS CONDEMNING THE ERRORS OF THE MODERNISTS

SYLLABUS CONDEMNING THE ERRORS OF THE MODERNISTS

Civil war and the truth about communists

Tulsa Police Officer Sues After Being Punished For Refusing To Attent Mosque Event

RomneyGoHome

AnnBarnhardt_Vendee_

Francis-Bergoglio "Approves" Novus Ordo Con-anizations for Two Modernist Newpopes
Further Violations of the Traditional Requirements Make John XXIII and JPII Phony Unsaints