Saturday, February 27, 2010

Refuting Sandor's litany of lies

The chap who goes by the moniker SandorClegane1 on Youtube just launched into a litany of false assertions about what the Bible says about Catholicism. I have decided to refute each one.

You keep saying only the roman Catholic church teaches as the bible does. Lets take a Deeper Look Shall We!

- Why does it condemn clerical dress? (Matt. 23:5-6).

Nothing in those verses condemn clerical dress. What is being condemned is self promotion. The Scriptures specifically mandate clerical dress for a priest. (Exodus 28:4) In fact, even the miter is called for! (29:6)

- Why does it teach against the adoration of Mary? (Luke 11:27-28).

Again, these verses say nothing of the sort. The woman in the crowd is pointing out that Mary is blessed among all women. This only echoes other scriptures (Luke 1:42, 48). Jesus is not disagreeing that His mother is blessed, He only disagrees with the reason. She is not blessed because she bore Him and nursed Him but because she heard the word and obeyed. In fact, the word "rather" is a word that actually means "yes, but in addition to that...."

- Why does it show that all Christians are priests? (1 Pet. 2:5,9).

Once again, those verses do not say what you imply. This letter is written to a specific group of people (Verse 1). Nevertheless, The NT is clear that all true Christians participate in a larger Priesthood but that the specific ministerial Priesthood remains. To SPECIFIC people, Christ gave the authority to bind and loose (Matt 16:18-20), forgive sins (John 20:23), speak on Christ's behalf (Luke 10:16), resolve theological disputes with binding authority, (Matthew 18:17-18), Baptism (Matthew 28:19), Consecrate Communion (Luke 22:19) and pass on the succession of the Apostles (1 Timothy 4:14)

- Why does it condemn the observance of special days? (Gal. 4:9-11).

Those verses condemn astrology. "destitute elemental powers". The Jewish religion was full of feast days. An absurd argument on your part.
A complete non sequiter.

- Why does it teach that all Christians are saints? (1 Cor. 1:2).
The verses say that the letter is "to the church of God that is in Corinth". Once again, you state a meaning to the text that just, flat out isn't there.
- Why does it forbid us to address religious leaders as "father"? (Matt. 23:9).
It doesn't. You are taking the verse out of context and applying an absurdly literal interpretation to the English translation. (Luke 14:26). Sometimes you have to apply common sense to the text and ask yourself if your interpretation jibes with the rest of scripture. Yours doesn't.

The legitimate use of 'father', in addressing religious leaders appears all over the New Testament (Matthew 3:9, Mark 11:10, Luke 1:32, Luke 1:55, Luke 1:72, Luke 1:73, Luke 3:8, Luke 16:24, 27,30, John 4:12, John 8:39*, John 8:53, John 8:56**, Acts 4:25, Acts 7:32**, Acts 22:1, Romans 4:11, 12, 16, 17, 18, Romans 9:10, 1 Corinthians 4:15**, 1 Timothy 5:1, Philemon 1:10, Hebrews 8:9, James 2:21)

So, your interpretation is ludicrous....but this is what happens when you don't have an infallible, Holy Spirit guided, church to guide you and wind up blowing around in every direction the devil wants to take you.

Jesus clearly meant that no man is "father" or "teacher" (same verses) above your heavenly Father. Titles are not the point here.
- Why does it teach that Christ is the only foundation and not the apostle Peter? (1 Cor. 3:11).

False. Jesus calls Peter Kephas (translated to Petros - John 1:42) and makes Peter and the apostles the foundation of His Church. (Ephesians 2:20)
- Why does it teach that there is one mediator instead of many? (1 Tim. 2:5).
Subtracting from the Scriptures is a sin. It says that there is only one mediator between GOD AND MAN. Jesus was the only qualified applicant. No catholic believes that any other man is a mediator between God and man. We only believe we are ministers according to Christ's instruction. Even Mary's title co-mediatrix does not imply that she is a mediator between God and man, only that she cooperated in bringing that mediator to us.

- Why does it teach that a bishop must be a married man? (1 Tim. 3:2, 4-5).

It doesn't. It only teaches that he cannot be a polygamist. Paul, himself, who wrote that letter, was an unmarried Bishop.

- Why is it opposed to the primacy of Peter? (Luke 22:24-27).

It certainly is not. Those verses deal with someone who is greatest in his own eyes. The Primacy of Peter is clearly visible in the book of Acts and in Matthew 16 and in the fact that his name(s) appears in the NT more than all the other disciples combined (162 times). The Primacy of Peter is a fact.

- Why does it oppose the idea of purgatory? (Luke 16:26).

Your argument is a complete non sequiter. Purgatory doesn't exist because Abraham cannot go to hell? That's like saying that small cars are fast because big cars are blue.

Purgatory is a fact. (1 Cor 3:15, 1 Peter 3:19)

- Why is it completely silent about infant baptism, instrumental music in worship, indulgences, confession to priests, the rosary, the mass, and many other things in the Catholic Church?

It isn't.

Infant baptism- Acts 16:33 Baptism replaces circumsion, which was performed at 8 days old.

Instrumental music- Psalm 33:2

Indulgences- Matthew 16:19. 18:18

Confession to Priests- Leviticus 5:5, John 20:23

The Rosary is a devotion. Every prayer in the Rosary is Biblical. It is wholly unnecessary that the specific devotion be mentioned in Scripture. Protestants create new devotionals all the time.

The Mass was instituted by Christ with the words "do this in memory of me" Luke 22:19. Every element of the Mass is Scriptural right down to the Candle Sticks and Incense. Want to really see the Catholic Mass come alive? Read the first 4 chapters of the Book of Revelation.

The many other things are there too.

* This is just minor list. If the rcc actually did teach the purest of Truth I would have never left. Only following Gods commands alone is pure Truth as we have been warned!

And only by being a Catholic can you do that.

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

A Brilliant discourse

This was sent to me. I do not know the original source but it is credited to -- Paul (, June 06, 2003.

I quote it in it's entirety because it is totally sound and impenetrable.

The Protestant approach to Mary and to many other doctrinal beliefs of original Christianity reveals an underlying insecurity about the legitimacy of their faith.

No thinking person, observing the rampant fragmentation, widespread conflict, and blatant contradictions in Protestant beliefs, could reasonably accept that such a system of opposing manmade sects could ever constitute a reliable guide to truth.

Since Protestants recognize, subconsciously if not consciously, that the very nature of such an approach to Christian truth is indefensible and unsupportable on the face of it, the only semblance of legitimacy they can muster is therefore dependent upon the application of the principle of the lesser of two evils.

They recognize that their modern tradition of men came into existence through an open rebellion against the original Christian Church. The only way such a rebellion could ever be justified is by demonstrating that the object of the rebellion was something truly horrific. A rebellion can be just if that which one rebels against is evil; but if the object of the rebellion is good, then the rebellion itself is evil.

If the Church Christ founded - the one He promised He would be with until the end of time - the one He said the Holy Spirit would guide to all truth - the one with a divine guarantee of teaching bound in heaven - can be made to appear corrupt, heretical, apostate, satanic, etc., than some measure of justification might be claimed for the rebellion that brought the denominationalism system into existence. Protestants could then say, in effect, "even though our beliefs conflict at every turn, and therefore cannot really be true, just look at the even GREATER untruths that exist in Catholicism! Therefore we are in a better place."

This argument is about as close as any Protestant can come to justifying the plague of denominations which the original Protestant rebellion spawned, in direct opposition to the will of Christ, Who stated His divine intent that all Christians would be ONE, even as He and His Father are ONE. Protestants therefore do not wage their attacks on traditional Christian truth out of spite or hatred, or even jealousy, but rather out of a desperate quest for a legitimacy which is objectively lacking in their religious tradition.

The bizarre accusations they bring against God's Church - worshipping statues, making human beings equal to God, adopting pagan beliefs, etc. might possibly legitimize such a rebellion, if any of it were true. Of course, that would also make Jesus Christ a liar - but that's a separate issue.

Building a shared base of anti-Catholic myths allows them to maintain a thin veil of seeming legitimacy over the underlying doctrinal chaos which prevails in their collective churches, and provides a necessary distraction from the hard truths they simply cannot bring themselves to face - that Christ founded only one Church, that He intended all men to belong to that one Church, that History clearly identifies the Catholic Church as that one Church, and that the fruit of their manmade tradition is contrary to the will of God.

Of course, every year tens of thousands break through that veil, face those truths, and respond in spirit and in truth, converting to the Holy Catholic Church. But for those who have yet to receive the grace to make that transition, the only hope of clinging to the partial truth they are comfortable with is to find new and better reasons to convince themselves that the Church Jesus Christ founded for all men is evil.

Monday, February 8, 2010

Truth offends

There is something inherent in truth that calls us to self examination. That examination can be painful. We are not here to soft pedal things. Truth is our only aim. It is not that truth is unknowable or unfindable. Neither is it true that truth is malleable or fluid. The problem most of us encounter is that we look at the search for truth as only an exercise of the intellect. It is also an exercise of the will. To find truth we must, of course, exercise our brain power. Yet, what makes it elusive is that we shade it with our own experiences, prejudices, desires and hurts. Seeking bare truth, even unpleasant truth will-as the Savior said- "set us free". I am not trying to say that I don't have those same filters as anyone else. Together, let's take the blinders off. If we believe that truth Himself walked the earth and showed us the way (and I do), then we have only to find what He truly has to say to us.