FOR THOSE WHO HATE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH (and especially for Catholics who need some inspiration)

http://www.kensmen.com/catholic/challenge.html ^

[NYer]

Ask yourself: why do I hate the Catholic Church? Who taught me what I think I know about the Catholic Church? Is what I was taught true? Have I looked at what the Catholic Church has to say about itself, using official resources such as the Catechism of the Catholic Church and papal encyclicals? Could my opinion of the Catholic Church possibly be based on bias, bigotry, bad history, propaganda from the secular media, or the bad priests who get publicity (i.e., the sick, and sickening, pedophile priests or those certain heretical modernist priests the secular media love to give press to)? Is it fair to judge doctrine by such things? Is any group with human beings in it free from sin and scandal? If I am wrong about the Catholic Church, what does that mean?

Here are some common myths about the Catholic Church:
 

	Because Catholics reject the tradition of "sola fide" ("faith alone"), they think they can work their way into Heaven and believe they are saved by works
	Catholics think the pope does not sin
	Catholics re-crucify Christ at their Masses (or at least think they do)
	Catholics think Mary is part of the Godhead and is to be worshipped
	Catholics worship statues
	Catholics think they can't pray to God directly but have to go through saints
	Catholics conjure the dead
	Catholics believe people can be saved after they die
	The Catholic Church teaches that one who isn't formally a Catholic is damned to Hell
	The Crusades are an example of Catholic aggression
	The Inquisition(s) killed hundreds of thousands of people and targeted Jews
	Pope Pius XII was "Hitler's Pope" and didn't do a thing to help Jews during WWII
	The Catholic Church wasn't around until the time of Constantine, a pagan who controlled the Church. The Catholic Church did more than baptize pagan calendar days for the good of Christ, it is pagan in its very roots.

If you believe any of the above myths, I implore you to research. For doctrinal questions, ask the Church what it teaches; it's the only fair thing to do. For historical questions, look at balanced and objective scholarly research from a variety of sources (including Catholic ones).

And as you research, keep in mind the common logical fallacies that are often used in attacks against Catholicism:

Generalization:
"I knew a Catholic/ex-Catholic (or I was a Catholic) who was (mean, a drunk, not holy, didn't like the Church, was superstitious, didn't know the Bible, didn't have a deep relationship with Jesus, etc.), so therefore, the teachings of the Catholic Church are wrong." (Ignores the fact that bad catechesis, miunderstandings, or other shortcomings of a few Catholics do not reflect on what the Catholic Church teaches)

Bifurcation:
"If the Catholic Church doesn't teach that it's faith alone that saves, then it must teach that men are saved by their own works." (Ignores that we teach that we are saved by Grace alone -- a Grace with which we must cooperate through "faith that works in love")

Cum hoc ergo propter hoc:
"Winter Solstice is on 21 December; Christmas is 25 December. Therefore, Christmas is a pagan holiday. (Ignores that fact that there are only 365 days to choose from in a year and that the early Church Fathers had good reasons to choose the date they did. It also ignores that Protestants' "Reformation Day" is celebrated on 31 October, the pagan festival of Samhain.)

Post hoc ergo propter hoc:
"Constantine must have been the real source of the Catholic Church's teachings because after his reign the Church grew tremendously, and before his reign it wasn't as well-known" (Ignores the simple fact that Constantine merely stopped the persecution of Christians with the Edict of Milan and allowed Christianity to spread. It also ignores the writings of the Church Fathers who lived before Constantine -- and who were Catholic.)

Straw man:
"You guys worship statues, and that's evil. Therefore, your religion is Satanic." (Ignores that fact that we don't worship statues)

Meanwhile: The Final Challenge

... and now I challenge my brothers and sisters in Christ to take two hours of your life to listen to theologian and former Presbyterian minister Scott Hahn and to Rosalind Moss, who was raised Jewish and later became Evangelical. Both are now 100% Catholic; don't you want to know why? Truly, I challenge you to listen and pray and think about what you hear, all with an open heart to God's will.

Real Audio: Listen to Scott Hahn tell his story
Real Audio: Listen to Rosalind Moss tell her story

Index

[kidd]

When Catholics I know endlessly Talk of Mary and How Holy and special she is (Which I happen to agree with) But They do it to the Exclusion of Christ that is evidence that They are holding Her up Higher than Christ... On Tv I watched a debate with a Catholic Representative and a Protestant and the Catholic priest was saying the Catholic Church believes that Mary is Co-redemptrix and Co-Mediatrix with Christ ( Both False and Un-Biblical).

I've seen this first-hand, I'll try to explain where. There is a small Charismatic movement within the Catholic Church, which is quite similar to the Pentecostals. A small group of these Charismatics are pushing to have Mary recognized as a co-redemptrix and co-mediatrix. They do not hold Mary higher than Christ, but almost as an equal. This small group is composed almost exclusively of women, and most of these women have had abortions or abusive husbands. They have admitted to me that they find it easier to worship Jesus through a woman. Unfortunately, they are a very vocal small small group, and many have left the Charismatic movement (including me) because of their insistance that Mary is co-redemtrix.

The Catholic church is loaded with very small but vocal groups that push for their point of view (pro-aborts, pro-gay, pro-woman priests, etc). There are a billion of us; there is bound to be a few nuts.

So there is truth to the Myth. When Catholics talk of doing Pennance to pay for sins, They are reflecting what they have learned from their Priests or fellow Catholics.

I've seen this as well as a religious education teacher. Sins are forgiven when the Priest gives absolution. Penance brings you back into the church community. So your sins are forgiven before you do penance, thus pennance is not required to "pay" for sins. My students realize this only after its pointed out to them. They usually reply that they thought pennance was like a punishment, like after they've broken a lamp in the house that their parents make them stay in their room for an hour. This is not a serious misconception, and I don't think it would come from a priest - its more like how we've all been brought up in this society - if you do a crime then there is a punishment.

So again, Truth to your list of Myths. You may be able to prove that the Catholic Church doesnt hold these positions on Paper, but the proof is in the words and deeds of the followers. Christ should live in your heart and not in the Dust of bad Doctrine.

I think you've fallen for the "Generalization" trap:
"I knew a Catholic/ex-Catholic (or I was a Catholic) who was (mean, a drunk, not holy, didn't like the Church, was superstitious, didn't know the Bible, didn't have a deep relationship with Jesus, etc.), so therefore, the teachings of the Catholic Church are wrong." (Ignores the fact that bad catechesis, miunderstandings, or other shortcomings of a few Catholics do not reflect on what the Catholic Church teaches)

[Conservative til I die]

You can really tell when they've done no research. They use lots of "obviously" and "of course" and "it's clear that" in their arguments.

Most of them read from the same two books, A Woman Rides the Beast by Dave Hunt and Roman Catholicismby somebody-or-other. They also have to inject a lot of sarcasm and vitriol into their arguments to flesh them out.

I don't think more than 5% of them have ever had advanced education where one has to learn what makes a good argument and how to compose one.

[OHelix]

Okay, I just finished listening to Scott Hahn, and I'm not sure why you put the link up... I was expecting him to address the issues which you addressed in your post, and the only issues he addressed in any specifics were the doctrines of solo fide and solo scriptus, which neither, I believe, is a deliniating doctrine of Catholics vs Protestants (although, I believe they are very much deliniating between what I would call Calvanism vs. Catholicism, so I understand his point with reference to his background... But even that is arguably a false dichotomy).

He refered to his own experience of being presented with unanswerable answers which support the Catholic Church, but never said what these unanswerable answers were. He basically told a story about how what people told him, or what he read or studied, was so convincing that he could not deny the truth, but without sharing with the audience what these convincing arguments or revelations were. Therefore I have to say this lacks any apologetic substance at all, which it why I thought you posted it.

Unless you can give me some assurance the second link would be different, I feel like it would be a waste of my time to listen to it. (I don't mean to sound insulting, but I was sincerely hoping for "doctrinal apologetic substance"). However, if you have listened to both, and understand the premis of my disappointment, and are convinced that the second would be worth my attention, I will listen to it on your recomendation.

[kidd]

A Searchable Catholic Catechism can be found at:
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

Scroll to the bottom to find the search engine

[hello2U]

I used to consider Boston's Law a hero for his pro-life stand. (Didn't know him personally, only went by media reports.) Now it seems he is a world-class enabler of these abusive homosexual priests. (Don't know him personally, only going by media reports--including lots of articles by Catholics.) Why don't they get rid of him? It's an abomination. And by the way, Council of Trent Section 6 says, "Whosoever shall affirm that men are justified solely by the imputation of the righteousness of Christ... let him be accursed." Amazing! They'll have to start with the Apostle Paul!!

[pbear8]

Can you give Biblical support for praying to dead saints as intercessors for us, and not praying directly to the Savior why died for us?

I have to run so I'll do this really fast. "Dead saints" are alive in Jesus. As part of the 'communion of saints', they are the 'Church Triumphant'. In heaven they want to aid those of us on earth by adding their prayers to ours.

Please consider that the use of the word 'pray' in this context has changed over the centuries. In Shakespeare's time the word "prithee", was a contraction for 'I pray thee'. Were all those people in Shakespear's time praying to each other?

At that time, 'I pray thee', was obviously used as a request, (I request thee, I ask thee).

In our own time you have heard someone say, "And what, pray tell, do you mean by that"? Is the questioner praying to the listener?

In common Catholic usage to 'pray to' St. So and So is simply asking that person who is alive in Jesus to add his/her prayers to yours (I ask you, I request you, I pray you...). This is not unlike asking a friend to pray for you or someone else. The Bible tells us to pray for each other in many places, does it not?

I know this is barebones, but we must do our taxes this weekend so I must run. Before I do I will ask St. Matthew (taxman) to pray that we get them done quickly and accurately so I may come back to the boards.

[pbear8]

Can you give Biblical support for praying to dead saints as intercessors for us, and not praying directly to the Savior why died for us?

I have to run so I'll do this really fast. "Dead saints" are alive in Jesus. As part of the 'communion of saints', they are the 'Church Triumphant'. In heaven they want to aid those of us on earth by adding their prayers to ours.

Please consider that the use of the word 'pray' in this context has changed over the centuries. In Shakespeare's time the word "prithee", was a contraction for 'I pray thee'. Were all those people in Shakespear's time praying to each other?

At that time, 'I pray thee', was obviously used as a request, (I request thee, I ask thee).

In our own time you have heard someone say, "And what, pray tell, do you mean by that"? Is the questioner praying to the listener?

In common Catholic usage to 'pray to' St. So and So is simply asking that person who is alive in Jesus to add his/her prayers to yours (I ask you, I request you, I pray you...). This is not unlike asking a friend to pray for you or someone else. The Bible tells us to pray for each other in many places, does it not?

I know this is barebones, but we must do our taxes this weekend so I must run. Before I do I will ask St. Matthew (taxman) to pray that we get them done quickly and accurately so I may come back to the boards.

[LadyDoc]

Nice artical however it still will not change the church's fate. A done deal's a done deal. The Catholic church is doomed.

Is this meant to be sarcasm?

Since you have trouble spelling, the only way I can interpret your reply is thus: Nice article....The catholic church (presumably St Peter's in Rome) is domed (i.e. has a dome)...

[Procyon]

The Church hierarchy is its own worst enemy.

I wonder if the high rate of "fallen" Catholics is more due to the earnest, but incompetent, teachers of the catechism. I remember all the crazy things nuns and priests would say, focusing more on our sinfulness than on the loving nature of our relationship with God.

Only in my 40's did I, on my own, rebuild my belief structure and reconcile with the Church.

[Conservative til I die]

"I firmly hold that there is a purgatory, and that the souls detained there are helped by the prayers of the faithful. I likewise hold that the saints reigning together with Christ should be honored and invoked, that they offer prayers to God on our behalf, and that their relics should be venerated. I firmly assert that images of Christ, of the Mother of God ever Virgin, and of the other saints should be owned and kept, and that due honor and veneration should be given to them. I affirm that the power of indulgences was left in the keeping of the Church by Christ, and that the use of indulgences is very beneficial to Christians." -- Tridentine Profession of Faith

This statement alone shows multiple instances of Catholic Theology / tradition that go beyond Scripture and distort the gospel.

Your post alone shows perfectly the uninformed, embryonic reasoning of most Protestants about the Catholic faith. So you think just saying the Church "distort[s] the gospel" makes it so, sparky?

Let's do a little point-by-point reasoning:

>"I firmly hold that there is a purgatory, and that the souls detained there are helped by the prayers of the faithful.

Go read 2 Maccabees 12:43-46. The soldiers made an offering for their dead compatriates to speed them into Heaven. It reads:

"He also took up a collection, man by man, to the amount of two thousand drachmas of silver, and sent it to Jerusalem to provide for a sin offering. In doing this he acted very well and honorably, taking account of the resurrection. For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead. But if he was looking to the splendid reward that is laid up for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Therefore he made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin."

Also see Revelations 21:27 which states that nothing unclean may enter into Heaven. Which means there is some sort of cleansing process. Catholics are supposed to use critical thinking and reasoning skills to put 2 and 2 together. While the word "Purgatory" is not used, there are enough verses around the Bible to put together that neatly defines Purgatory. We are not like Protestants, who treat the Bible like a color-by-numbers coloring book and have to have everything laid out for them in big bold flashing letters like they're 4 year olds.

I firmly assert that images of Christ, of the Mother of God ever Virgin, and of the other saints should be owned and kept, and that due honor and veneration should be given to them.

A woman who suffered from bleeding touched the nem of Jesus's garment and was healed instantly. The apostles could heal. They were saints. We also believe there is nothing wrong with showing admiration by keeping a picture of a saint in our houses.

I affirm that the power of indulgences was left in the keeping of the Church by Christ, and that the use of indulgences is very beneficial to Christians."

All an indulgence is is an offering for the dead. What's wrong with charity as a way of helping the dead? Would you say the same if it was a good act? Or a donation of clothing? Is it just that you have a problem with monetary donations? Is money evil to you? It sure isn't evil to a lot of Evangelistic ministers, and it sure is a part of a lot of Evangelical doctrine that material gain is something that God bestows on the faithful, and is even something to pray for and aspire to (the Prayer of Jabez is just the latest example). I think that is much more anti-Christian than indulgences.

[Conservative til I die]

Anti-Catholicism is the rock that many of them stand on. Sad. Of course, the rock the Anglican Church stands on is divorce. When anti-Catholicism is the basis for your religion, you've got big problems.

[tiki]

People look at me funny when I point out to them that really faithful people start getting more Catholic the more they learn.

[Conservative til I die]

And if you really wanted to talk about early Christianity you would be talking about the Orthodox church, or the Waldensians.

Interesting. Well, to talk about the Orthodox, you'd have to talk about the Catholics since one left the other. Which one depends on your beliefs but they both existed as early Christianity. One could call it Western and Eastern Christianity. But to say the Catholic Church didn't exist until 1054 is idiotic.

The Waldensians; were these one of those mythical "original evangelistic" groups that the RCC of course persecuted? If so, how could the RCC do it if it didn't exist until 1054?

[Conservative til I die]

You're back here peddling your crap? WHo told you we were doomed again? Or are you just Jesus's personal PR man? I'm sure He'll be thrilled to know you've taken that role on for yourself.

[Conservative til I die]

Still beating your wife?

[Conservative til I die]

If the Pope won't remove Cardinal Law right now then a mob of concerned Catholics should string the Cardinal up from a lampost.

BTW, you've been reported to the moderators for your call to violent action against priests. That, and your generally slanderous comments that Catholic laypeople condone child molestation out of our loyalty to the Church.

[drstevej]

Macccabees is in the Apocrypha and is not a source of biblical doctrine even if the passage presented a full blown understanding of purgatory, which it does not. (A separate point for debate.) Nothing pure shall enter Heaven. Believers' sins are forgiven (Ro. 8:1) and they are clothed in His righteousness.

2 + 2 = 4 not 5, 6 or even 7!

Keep and venerate whatever you wish. I'll stick to meditatiion on the Word of God. I understand the distinction made between veneration and worship. So I do not say Catholics worship statues. I just find no biblical warrant for their veneration. I respect men and women of faith but do not see a class of saints distinct from the term saint given to all believers in the NT.

Indulgences are based upon the RC theory that there is a treasury of merit achieved by the saints that can be drawn upon for grace. The system is built upon a false premise. Thus charitable gifts may be well motivated but they are non-efficacious.

I reject prosperity theology too as do many evangelicals. Prosperity theology is not a essential doctrine of evangelicalism at all. The items included in the passage from the Tridentine Creed are de fide essentials of the Catholic faith.

As far as my embryonic understanding of Catholicism, I have a PhD in Reformation History and Theology from Westminster Seminary. I have spent time (years) reading the original source materials as well as the writings of leading Catholic and Protestant theologians.

I did not intend by the post to give a response to each of the elements of the Tridentine pronouncement, I wanted the readers of the thread to hear it from RC documents themselves. I do believe these issues distort the gospel. You do not. Fine.

I did appreciate the kind way you expressed your views -- charitably avoiding any hint of personal criticism.

[refreshed]

You know, your provocative arguments such as "are you still beating your wife" are very thoughtful. In fact, the more you post, the more sure I am that Catholics don't have a leg to stand on. Thank you for this affirmation.