Church · cultural · protestant reformation · roman catholicism

Happy Hallow… Reformation Day?

Yes, that time of year is upon us once more. The dreaded pagan holiday where people put up scary decorations, and attempt to frighten off the demons that come around extorting them for treats, or else tricks. As Christians, most of us have had the debate internally as well as externally, over whether or not to celebrate Halloween due to its pagan roots. No matter where you land on that issue, I have an alternative to offer you, “Reformation Day!”

The Protestant Reformation was a pivotal instance in world history. In public education, little is made of it. In the same way little is made of the spread of Christianity being responsible for the Renaissance era. The world actually credits humanism for the Renaissance, and blames Christianity. Without a Christian world-view, we’d all still be stuck in the dark ages. This is my assertion, and opinion. You are free to go argue the point somewhere else if you don’t agree. I’m not going to argue over it. I do believe it is factual. I’m old enough to remember how history was taught when I was a kid in school, as opposed to now. When I was a kid the pilgrims were heroes, and the puritans were too. Now the indians are considered peaceful, spiritual, earth hippies, who were victimized by the pilgrims. It seems that the, “Ministry of Truth” Orwell wrote about is in full effect.

Anyway, back on task. On October 31st in 1517, when Martin Luther nailed his list of 95 thesis to the Church door, he started something big. A movement began. People started to question what Rome had been telling them. Soon they would have the Bible in their own language to read for themselves. Armed with God’s word, they were able to analyze Rome’s lies against the truths of the Bible. The movement only picked up more steam from there.

It wasn’t without problems. The peasant uprising occurred. Much to Luther’s dismay many of his countrymen died. They were fighting against tyranny and lies. Much like then, tyranny lives on today in the form of secular-humanism, globalism, and leftism. All of these can be sub-categorized under satanism. I believe we must continue to protest against spiritual tyranny in all of its manifestations. One way to do that is to teach our children about what happened, and what to do about it. We commemorate Reformation Day, as a memorial to the past saints, and martyrs, who travailed and suffered for the one true faith. We also must remember that our turn may well be upon us, and if we forget the lessons of the past, our futures will be that much more spiritually impoverished.

So, on October 31st, don’t just had out candy, do trick or trunk, or hide out with the lights off. Watch the 2003 movie, “Luther” with Joseph Fiennes. Read the 95 Thesis and try to figure out what that Luther fellow was all upset about. Have a Bible study on the doctrine of justification, or how to resist tyrants. Consider the effects, both good, and bad, of the Reformation. Wonder at the grace demonstrated by God in bringing the world out of the dark ages. Hand out some gospel tracts to the kids knocking on your door. Put up some decorations that might make your neighbors ask, “What the heck kind of Halloween decoration is that Ted?” Educate someone about freedoms they enjoy due to the Reformation. The gospel of Christ will not disappear from the Earth. The truth and light will not be extinguished. We can thank God, all of us, for justification by faith alone, and the other four Solas that came out of the Reformation. You could even do a little lesson on the Solas.

Don’t forget what happened, and teach the kids to remember as well. Have a great month, and enjoy the holiday by enjoying God, and the peace you have with Him, in Christ.

roman catholicism

Let’s look a little closer at what the RCC believes about Mary.

Let’s look a little closer at what the RCC believes about Mary.  Here is a quote from the RCC(Roman Catholic Church) Catechism that was included in a Cripplegate article;

Catechism of the Catholic Church. In Article 9, section 6, paragraphs 966-969, it says: 

966 “Finally the Immaculate Virgin, preserved free from all stain of original sin, when the course of her earthly life was finished, was taken up body and soul into heavenly glory, and exalted by the Lord as Queen over all things, so that she might be the more fully conformed to her Son, the Lord of lords and conqueror of sin and death.” The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin is a singular participation in her Son’s Resurrection and an anticipation of the resurrection of other Christians: In giving birth you kept your virginity; in your Dormition you did not leave the world, O Mother of God, but were joined to the source of Life. You conceived the living God and, by your prayers, will deliver our souls from death.

967 By her complete adherence to the Father’s will, to his Son’s redemptive work, and to every prompting of the Holy Spirit, the Virgin Mary is the Church’s model of faith and charity. Thus she is a “preeminent and . . . wholly unique member of the Church”; indeed, she is the “exemplary realization” (typus) of the Church.

968 Her role in relation to the Church and to all humanity goes still further. “In a wholly singular way she cooperated by her obedience, faith, hope, and burning charity in the Savior’s work of restoring supernatural life to souls. For this reason she is a mother to us in the order of grace.”

969 “This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation . . . . Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.”

In the first sentence we see that Rome claims Mary was not born with a sinful nature like all other humans were after the fall.  This is false.  Mary did have a sinful nature just like the rest of us.  The RCC also claims that Mary was taken up body and soul instead of awaiting the resurrection and the judgment, and that she is the “…Queen over all things…” reasoning that in so being she would be more conformed to the likeness of Christ.  This means that she is more like Christ than any other Christian could ever hope to be.  Many in the RCC insist that the, “Assumption of the Blessed Virgin” means that she did not die, but rather was taken up like Enoch.  This is also wrong as witnesses in the first century were at her funeral and recorded it in writing.  Many other Catholics believe that she died, and here body was taken up.  “we must remember that the Patristic Fathers defended the Assumption on two counts: Since Mary was sinless and a perpetual virgin, she could not suffer bodily deterioration, the result of original sin, after her death. Also, if Mary bore Christ and played an intimate role as His mother in the redemption of man, then she must likewise share body and soul in His resurrection and glorification.”1 Much more erroneous is the insistence that this assumption was part of Christs resurrection and that of Christians who would die after them.  Regardless of whether she initially died or not, they believe that she was bodily alive either by resurrection, or not dying to begin with, when she ascended to heaven.  We read this NO WHERE in scripture.  It is solely a doctrine of man created by the RCC.  We know from the record of scripture that Christ had younger siblings sired by Joseph with his wife Mary.  This is not debatable.  The RCC claim that she remained a virgin after the conception, and birth of Christ is completely fallacious, and without merit.  They misunderstand what it means to be the mother of Jesus, and place an import on it that corrupts proper Christocentric theology, and conflates the role of Mary with that of the Savior.  This is evident by the next claim that it is her prayers that, “will deliver our souls from death.”

Understanding that they believe Mary to be perpetually sinless it follows that they would also believe that she accomplished, “complete adherence to the Father’s will, to his Son’s redemptive work, and to every prompting of the Holy Spirit,”  This ignores that Biblical fact that she was sinner, and needed a Savior just as much as the rest of us.  It is yet another contrived tradition of the RCC.  Because of this doctrine they elevate her to the model of faith and charity, thus supplanting Christ, and robbing Him of His due glory.  To further elevate her the catechism states, “preeminent and . . . wholly unique member of the Church”; indeed, she is the “exemplary realization” (typus) of the Church.  In other words when the Church is referred to in the Bible as the bride of Christ, Mary is to be understood as the fulfillment of that type instead of the Church itself, thus ostensibly setting up some incestuous relationship between Mary and Christ, equating in blasphemy. 

If these blasphemous heresies were not enough, they go even further into their doctrines of the devil by stating this, “968 Her role in relation to the Church and to all humanity goes still further. “In a wholly singular way she cooperated by her obedience, faith, hope, and burning charity in the Savior’s work of restoring supernatural life to souls. For this reason she is a mother to us in the order of grace.”  This is blatantly and abjectly satanic!  The glaringly obvious and grievous error of attributing Mary with regenerative work quickening the human soul, replaces the Holy Spirit with a mere mortal woman!  In this heresy she becomes our mother due to her regenerative work.  What happened to being sons and daughters of God, through adoption?  I guess now, Mary is the wife of her son and God.  Notice the switch from, “For this reason” referring back to her, “work of restoring supernatural life to souls” to being, “mother to us in the order of grace.”  The switch is explicit in line 969.  It completely disregards the earlier clause, “for this reason” which made clear that it was addressing her regenerative work in regards to the soul.

The annunciation is the RCC tradition that surrounds the Biblical account of the angel Gabriel informing Mary of her coming conception, and motherhood to Jesus.  According to the catechism, because of her consent to this (as if she had a choice)  Evidently, due to her being the mother of Jesus, she suffered as He did during the crucifixion which earned her merit with God, and apparently still suffers until all the number of God’s elect come in.  The next sentence leaves me bewildered how anyone can read it, affirm it, and claim to be Christian.  “Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation”  Wow!  Who knew Mary had a saving office, and made manifold intercession?  Here I always thought there was one intercessor between God, and man, and that being the Lord Jesus Christ Himself!  Of course then there is a, “therefore” and we must ask what it is there for?  “Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.”  According to the RCC catechism because she is our intercessor, and savior, she must be blessed and recognized as our advocate, helper, benefactress, and mediator.  Correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t at least a couple of those attributes of the Holy Spirit?  Just sayin’…  Come on Patrick!

Having unpacked all of that, I’m wondering how the jam pack such a small statement with so much heresy?  I am also pretty sure that is why people don’t refute it more often.  It would take them forever to get through it all.  If you obfuscate epochally enough the pile of manure you’d have to dig through to get to the bottom of it would be so large it would become its very own repellant to discovering the true extent of their lies.

marriage · roman catholicism

Why can’t they marry? The Bible says they should be able to.

Ever wonder why the Roman Catholic Church disregards the Bible and refuses to allow their priests to marry?  In light of (1 Corinthians 9:3-5 NASB) “(3) My defense to those who examine me is this: (4) Do we not have a right to eat and drink? (5) Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?”  and (1 Timothy 3:1-4 NASB) “It is a trustworthy statement: if any man aspires to the office of overseer, it is a fine work he desires to do. (2) An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, (3) not addicted to wine or pugnacious, but gentle, peaceable, free from the love of money. (4) He must be one who manages his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity” as well as, (1 Timothy 3:12-13 NASB) “Deacons must be husbands of only one wife, and good managers of their children and their own households. (13) For those who have served well as deacons obtain for themselves a high standing and great confidence in the faith that is in Christ Jesus.”  It seems pretty clear that marriage is the normative for the leadership of the Church.  Not only does it make sense that way, but it also displays the gospel for everyone to see in the Husband and Wife relationship.  Even God incarnate, Jesus Christ quoted His own word by referring to Genesis 2:24 in (Matthew 19:1-5 NASB) When Jesus had finished these words, He departed from Galilee and came into the region of Judea beyond the Jordan; (2) and large crowds followed Him, and He healed them there. (3) Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?” (4) And He answered and said, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE, (5) and said, ‘FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH’?”  It seems to me that marriage is a good thing and prescribed in the Bible for men and women.  Perhaps the Roman Catholic Church just likes to make up their own doctrines and disregard the Bible?  Just saying…