Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 10/01/2010 6:50:23 AM PDT by Antioch
I bet people in that diocese are counting the minutes to Archbishop Gomez.
I think it could go either way, what is certain is that Shakespeare did not embrace the anti-Catholicism that was commonplace in Elizabethan England.
It is a good one. He speaks for his diocese -- while he exhibits some of the vulnerabilities of the way people are put into the episcopate in the Catholic Church.
And, while it CAN get murky, it is no less reasonable to say a hospital is in favor of disease because one of the chief physicians gets cancer that it is to say the official teaching of the Church is thus and such because a Cardinal makes a ferociously awful judgment on ecology and economics.
And there's a little trap concealed in the criticism of pro-abortion and pro Obama Catholics. If the Church started making credal standards of these issues -- if, for example, one could not serve on a parish committee without signing a kind of oath stating opposition to abortion or progressivism, the very same people who climb all over us for pinko Catholics would be nattering about Inquisitions.
There are no particular guts involved in saying that a lot of Catholics are dopes and confused, and that this includes clergy. A few miles from my parish the pastor said to a class at the Catholic school that he didn't see how anyone could be a Catholic and serve in the armed forces!
So the next week, one of our Dominicans, who was a Navy chaplain for 20 years and retired with the rank of commander, wore his uniform when he went up to the school on some business or other! Gotta love it.
Are you sure that we’re not still living in the Dark Ages? I wonder sometimes.
Yeah, I’m sure, though it does get difficult to sift through the garbage of the comic book crowd.
Can’t argue with the number who voted for 0bama. However, I would argue that most of those who voted for zero are CINOs. A full 45% of Catholics do not believe or understand the Church’s teaching on the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. This is the source and summit of our faith and they don’t get it. If they don’t get it on something this important to their faith, it is likely they are missing the Church’s teaching on many other issues also.
These are the people who have succumbed to secular humanism and moral relativism, who think like pelosi and other CINOs.
Bible: Revelation 17
Really? This is where you "learned" that the Catholic Church killed the first Christian martyrs? Please explain how the Catholic Church facilitated the martyrdom of Saint Stephen in Acts 7 (this should be real interesting considering that anti-Catholic lore is largely predicated upon the absurd notion that the Catholic Church didn't exist prior to the Council of Nicea in 325),
Any comment on anything else I wrote, or did you not understand it (I apologize for my unwillingness to write at a level that the comic book educated will comprehend).
I'll see if I can make it simpler, what language SHOULD Saint Jerome have translated the Bible into? You need to not only be specific, you need to be prepared to demonstrate that this language ACTUALLY EXISTED in the late 4th century and that it WAS DEVELOPED ENOUGH to allow for an accurate translation. You may not know this, but the reason that there were no real attempts to translate the Bible into other languages prior to the 14th century is because there weren't any languages that were developed enough. The Church rejected Wycliffe's translation for one reason and one reason only, it was horribly deficient at parts -- however, this was not Wycliffe's fault, it is because the English language didn't have enough words.
The Whore of Babylon
In another tract, Hunting the Whore of Babylon, we looked at nine arguments given by fundamentalist Dave Hunt for his claim that the Catholic Church is the Whore of Babylon from Revelation 17–18. His arguments are typical of those used by fundamentalist anti-Catholics and are easily proven wrong. (See that tract for details).
But we can go beyond a mere critique of the shallow anti-Catholic arguments like Hunt’s. There is irrefutable evidence in Revelation 17–18 (the chapters Fundamentalists love to quote against the Catholic Church) that proves that it is impossible for the Catholic Church to be the Whore.
A Vision in the Wilderness
When John introduces the Whore in Revelation 17, he tells us: “Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, ‘Come, I will show you the judgment of the great harlot who is seated upon many waters, with whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and with the wine of whose fornication the dwellers on earth have become drunk.’ And he carried me away in the Spirit into a wilderness, and I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast which was full of b.asphemous names, and it had seven heads and ten horns. The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet, and bedecked with gold and jewels and pearls, holding in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the impurities of her fornication; and on her forehead was written a name of mystery: ‘Babylon the great, mother of harlots and of earth’s abominations.’ And I saw the woman, drunk with the blood of the saints and the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. When I saw her I marveled greatly” (Rev. 17:1–6).
This passage tells us several things about the Whore: (1) She is an international power, since she “sits on many waters,” representing different peoples (17:15), and she has committed fornication with “the kings of the earth,” and she has inflamed “the dwellers on earth” with her fornication. (2) She is connected with the seven-headed Beast from Revelation 13:1–10. That Beast was a major pagan empire, since its symbolism combined animal elements from four other major pagan empires (compare Rev. 13:1–2 with Dan. 7:1–8). (3) The Woman is connected with royalty, since she is dressed in the royal color purple. (4) The Woman is rich, for she is “bedecked with gold and jewels and pearls, holding in her hand a golden cup.” (5) She has committed some kind of fornication, which in Scripture is often a symbol of false religion—lack of fidelity to the God who created heaven and earth. (6) She is symbolically known as Babylon. (7) She is a central cause of “abominations” in the land, abominations being a reference to practices, especially religious practices, that are offensive to God. And (8) she persecutes Christians “the saints and . . . martyrs of Jesus.”
While the rest of her description could refer to a number of things, the symbolic designation “Babylon” narrows it down to two: pagan Rome and apostate Jerusalem. It is well known that the early Church Fathers referred to pagan Rome as “Babylon”; however, there are also indications in Revelation that the Whore might be apostate Jerusalem. Historically, a number of commentators, both Protestant and Catholic, have adopted this interpretation.
The Seven Heads
Continuing in Revelation, the angel begins to explain to John the woman’s symbolism: “This calls for a mind with wisdom: the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman is seated; they are also seven kings, five of whom have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come, and when he comes he must remain only a little while” (Rev. 17:9–10).
Fundamentalists argue that these seven mountains must be the seven hills of ancient Rome. However the Greek word here, horos, is almost always translated “mountain” in Scripture. Mountains are often symbols of kingdoms in Scripture (cf. Ps. 68:15; Dan. 2:35; Obad. 8–21; Amos 4:1, 6:1), which might be why the seven heads also symbolize seven kings. The mountains could stand for a series of seven kings, five of whom have already fallen.
This passage gives us a key rule of Bible interpretation which is often denied by Fundamentalists: A symbol does not have to refer to one and only one thing. Here Scripture itself tells us that the heads refer both to seven mountains and seven kings, meaning the symbol has multiple fulfillments. Thus there is not a one-to-one correspondence in the Bible between symbols and their referents.
Also, the mountains could be a reference to pagan Rome, yet the Whore could still be a reference to apostate Jerusalem. In this case, her sitting on the Beast would not indicate a geographical location but an alliance between the two powers. The Whore (Jerusalem) would be allied with the Beast (Rome) in persecuting “the saints and . . . martyrs of Jesus.” (Note that the Whore also sits on many waters, which we are told are many peoples, [cf. 17:15]. The context makes it clear that here her “sitting” on something does not refer to a geographical location.)
This passage gives us one reason why the Catholic Church cannot be the Whore. We are told that the heads “are also seven kings, five of whom have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come.” If five of these kings had fallen in John’s day and one of them was still in existence, then the Whore must have existed in John’s day. Yet Christian Rome and Vatican City did not. However, pagan Rome did have a line of emperors, and the majority of commentators see this as the line of kings to which 17:10 refers. Five of these emperors are referred to as having already fallen, one as still reigning in John’s time, and another yet to come. Since Jerusalem had no such line of kings in the first century, this gives us evidence that the Beast (though not the Whore) is Rome.
The Ten Horns
The angel also interprets for John the meaning of the Beast’s ten horns: “And the ten horns that you saw are ten kings who have not yet received royal power, but they are to receive authority as kings for one hour, together with the beast. These are of one mind and give over their power and authority to the beast; they will make war on the Lamb, and the Lamb will conquer them, for he is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those with him are called and chosen and faithful” (17:12–14).
This shows us that the Beast is allied with ten lower rulers and with their own territories. Some Fundamentalists bent on making this apply to modern times and the Catholic Church have argued that the horns refer to the European Community (EC) and a revived Roman empire with the Catholic Church at its head. The problem is that there are ten kings, but there are now many more than ten nations in the EC.
However, what we are told about the horns does fit one of the other candidates we have for the Whore—apostate Jerusalem. The angel tells John: “And the ten horns that you saw, they and the beast will hate the harlot; they will make her desolate and naked, and devour her flesh and burn her up with fire, for God has put it into their hearts to carry out his purpose by being of one mind and giving over their royal power to the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled” (17:16–17).
If the Whore is Jerusalem and the Beast is Rome (with the ten horns as vassal states), then the prophecy makes perfect sense. The alliance between the two in persecuting Christians broke down in A.D. 66–70, when Rome and its allied forces conquered Israel and then destroyed, sacked, and burned Jerusalem, just as Jesus prophesied (Luke 21:5–24).
The Whore’s Authority
Finally the angel tells John: “And the woman that you saw is the great city which has dominion over the kings of the earth” (17:18). This again points to pagan Rome or apostate Jerusalem. In the case of the former, the dominion would be political; in the case of the latter, it could be a number of things. It could be spiritual dominion in that Jerusalem held the religion of the true God. It could be a reference to the manipulation by certain Jews and Jewish leaders of gentiles into persecuting Christians.
It could even be political, since Jerusalem was the center of political power in Canaan and, under the authority of the Romans, it ruled a considerable amount of territory and less powerful peoples. On this thesis “the kings of the earth” would be “the kings of the land” (the Greek phrase can be translated either way). Such local rulers of the land of Canaan would naturally resent Jerusalem and wish to cooperate with the Romans in its destruction—just as history records they did. Local non-Jewish peoples were used by the Romans in the capture of Jerusalem.
The hub of world commerce
Continuing in chapter 18, John sees the destruction of the Whore, and a number of facts are revealed which also show that she cannot be the Catholic Church. For one, she is depicted as a major center of international trade and commerce. When it is destroyed in chapter 18, we read that “the merchants of the earth [or land] weep and mourn for her, since no one buys their cargo any more” (18:11) and “all shipmasters and seafaring men, sailors and all whose trade is on the sea . . . wept and mourned, crying out, ‘Alas, alas, for the great city, where all who had ships at sea grew rich by her wealth!’” (18:17–19).
Pagan Rome was indeed the hub of world commerce in its day, supported by its maritime trading empire around the Mediterranean, but Christian Rome is not the hub of world commerce. After the Reformation, the economic center of power was located in Germany, Holland, England, and more recently, in the United States and Japan.
Persecuting apostles and prophets
When the Whore falls we read, “‘Rejoice over her, O heaven! Rejoice, saints and apostles and prophets! God has judged her for the way she treated you’. . . . In her was found the blood of prophets and of the saints, and of all who have been killed on the earth” (18:20, 24). This shows that the Whore persecuted not just Christians, but apostles and prophets. Apostles existed only in the first century, since one of the requirements for being an apostle was seeing the risen Christ (1 Cor. 9:1). Prophets existed as a group only in the Old Testament and in the first century (Acts 11:27–28, 13:1, 15:32, 21:10).
Since the Whore persecuted apostles and prophets, the Whore must have existed in the first century. This totally demolishes the claim that Christian Rome or Vatican City is the Whore. Rome was not a Christian city at that time, and Vatican City did not even exist, so neither of them could be the Whore. Furthermore, Fundamentalists continually (though wrongly) claim that Catholicism itself did not exist in the first century, meaning that based on their very own argument Catholicism could not be the Whore!
Fundamentalists are fond of conjecturing that in the last days there will be a “revived Roman empire,” such as the one that persecuted Christians in the first century. Yet they never draw the inference that this empire would be headed by a revived pagan Rome, with the bishop of Rome leading the Christian underground, just as he did in the first century.
Still, Revelation 18:20 and 18:24 prove that the Whore had to be a creature of the first century, which, in the Fundamentalist view, the Catholic Church was not. Thus, on their own view, their identification of the Catholic Church with the Whore is completely impossible! Only ancient, pagan Rome or apostate Jerusalem could possibly be the Whore.
If Not the Whore, the Bride
The fact that the Catholic Church is singled out by Fundamentalists as the Whore reveals that they intuit the fact it has an important role in God’s plan. No other church gets accused of being the Whore—only the Catholic Church. And it is understandable why: The Catholic Church is the largest Christian body, larger than all other Christian bodies put together, suggesting a prominent place in God’s plan. Fundamentalists assume, without objectively looking at the evidence, that the Catholic Church cannot be the Bride of Christ, so it must be the Whore of Babylon.
Yet the evidence for its true role is plain. The First Vatican Council taught that “the Church itself . . . because of its marvelous propagation, its exceptional holiness, and inexhaustible fruitfulness in all good works; because of its Catholic unity and invincible stability, is a very great and perpetual motive of credibility and an incontestable witness of its own divine mission” (On the Catholic Faith 3).
So why is the Bride maligned as the Whore? Jesus himself answered the question: “If they have called the master of the house Beelzebul, how much more will they malign those of his household” (Matt. 10:25). “If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world . . . the world hates you. Remember the word that I said to you, ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will persecute you” (John 15:18–20).
I understand your point - and you have the hispanic contingent as well.
But this is what I see -
Heirarchy far left.
Majority of “Catholics” voting well left - MORE than average of society.
Then a small sliver of “real Catholics” who bother to understand what is going on.
It has gotten to a point where the political interferece of the majority and the leftist leaders - is really sort of outweighing the good of the others. There must be SOME point on the scale at which one says “OK - enough is enough!” In my opinion - the Catholic church is approaching that point - if it has not passed it.
This Cardinal didn’t have to say ANYTHING about global warming. There are plenty of the world’s poor, and social problems, to attend to. This is just politics.
"For the pope to deny that Christ has come in the flesh would be to undercut the basis of his position. Since no pope historically has made such claims, it is easily verifiable that no pope in history has been an Antichrist. Neither will any future pope be inclined to deny the basis of his position. The anti-papal argument simply is not credible.
Further, in Scripture the beast is clearly a political leader, not a Church leader. In fact, the beast is literally identified with one of the Roman emperors, who had no part of the Church."
------------------------ttp://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2003/0304bt.asp
Excellent post, unfortunately the author’s liberal use of polysyllabic words renders it nearly impossible for a comic-book anti-Catholic to comprehend.
I am praying. AMEN!
Yes - I understand the difference between speaking for Rome and speaking for his diocese.
Do you really want a discussion of Catholic heirarchy support for leftist causes? This isn’t about ONE single solitary outlier of a Cardinal. This is about a solid easily supported trend.
By the way - people don’t choose to get cancer - so your analogy is a bit weak. This guy wasn’t forced to say anything about the topic - forget that he is on the wrong side of it. This was an active choice to be political.
If he is NOT out of line - point me to the smackdown he gets from Church hierarchy. You can’t say “Oh - boo hoo - no one can control these Cardinals ....” - this is a formal Church program: from the article -
:The coalition, in turn, is a partnership of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, the National Religious Partnership for the Environment, and ten other organizations.
Catholic social teaching on safeguarding the environment is summarized in Chapter 10 of the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, which was issued in 2004. Pope Benedict further reflected on the topic in his 2010 World Day of Peace message”
Chapter 10 includes such titles as “The environment - a COLLECTIVE good”. have you read these documents? (I just did) it is like socialism in a cloaok.
My point is - and I thought it was fairly clear - people are using their own filter to decide who “is and is not” speaking for the Church. This is not some lone weirdo - this guy is mainstream. Or else - point me to his smackdown from the heirarchy. We both know it isn’t coming.
Nearly all legitimate Biblical scholars (Catholic and Protestant) dismiss outright the idea that Saint John's Revelation suggested that there was more than one Antichrist or that the Antichrist could be an office or institution.
You can’t make a blanket statement like “Hierarchy far left”. Granted there are many Bishops who lean to the left. However, there are many (Bishop Chaput, Archbishop Dolan, Bishop Bruskewicz just to name a few) teaching and preaching the Truth. Their voice is loud. It just happens that the msm only prints / broadcasts the left leaners. The msm wants to paint the Church leaders as liberals when that is not entirely true.
I hope your ride went excellently! Frank has been poorly today, so it’s been crummy for us in spite of beautiful weather.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.