Religion of ruin?

I think we focus on the wrong things in life. True the RCC leaders are somewhat if not totally blind to true Christian living and the numbers of its church who think they are Christians and are not is astronomical. I live near Lourdes and I have worked in Hotels where these RC pilgrims stay and I have seen for myself how they are ungenerate duped people.

But there are people within the Protestant churches just the same. Its life, and the best thing we can do is live OUR lifes the best we can for the Lord Christ.

Its sad, the condition of the RCC, so much pomp and ceremony.

Another thing, a lot of people make a living from the pilgrims, there are countless rows of shops selling religious nic nak stuff and its fierce competition. Like the silversmiths in Ephesus with Paul, if anyone went in to Lourdes and started to change things and people began to be changed there would be uproar with the 'artisans' and no doubt the officials too.

The devil has a strong grip in Lourdes as anywhere else but when you see it close up it makes you realise the reality of Christianity and what a spiritual warefare it is.

David

 

This article answers most of your objections and ones you are likely to bring up in the future

http://www.catholic.com/library/Do_Catholics_Worship_Statues.asp

For your argument to be consistent you should run around and remove any teddy bears,dolls and pictues of family memebers from your house. In fact there are christian groups which require this of their members.

After you are done with that you should ask that the Lincoln Memorial and Mt Rushmore be dismantled.

I like having pictures/representations of my family around and I see Mary and the saints as part of my family, I no more worship them than I worship pictures of my grandfather.

[ April 22, 2005, 04:01 AM: Message edited by: Born Again Catholic ]

 

But didn't people bow down to each other in biblical times as a sign of honor and respect? (I'm sure if your tried, you could indeed find such instances in the Bible.) Why then shouldn't we so honor those brothers and sisters in Christ who have completed the race and have been glorified by the Father and are fully united with Christ, being fully conformed to His likeness?

 

Deborah B nice try but no cigar

Can't you see your own blindness you read one verse in context which allows you to surround yourself with graven images at home then the next verse out of context to castigate Catholics.

I will sincerely pray for you.

 

That is true. And both RC historians AS WELL AS RC pastoral publications recognize this clear and obvious link between Catholicism and paganism.

Here we see a RC Pastoral source admitting to the common ground on some of the very things you mentioned.

Catholics of the 20th century publish the connection to paganism for the world to see and understand.

Pagan prayer methods.

 

Here we see a Catholic Historian (A Catholic who IS a Catholic Historian - AND pro-Catholic) -- showing source of paganism in Roman Catholicism.

The Catholic historian Thomas Bokenkotter's best selling pro-Catholic work "a concise history of the Catholic church" makes it abundantly clear..

Ibid -Pg 49 speaks of the change that occurred in the 4th century

So there we have it on two short pages (49-50) of that telling work done by a Catholic historian - revealing the ongoing evolutionary process in the church that brings us to where we are today.

How much influence did this have on the RCC “really”?

 

Imagine if the JW's or Mormons or some new startup suddenly pulled in a truck load of paganism or declared their leadership to speak "infallibly" or started to pray to the dead, or slaughtered heretics or ...

Nobody would go for it.

But since these practices are "old" history -- we are like the frog in hot water accustomed to the danger.

Having said that - the question you ask in the OP post is a good one.

How much error is TOO much error?

I think the answer will not show that nobody is saved in the RCC. At the same time it will not show that "error does no damage to the Gospel".

All error is bad.

All error does some damage to the Gospel. It distorts our view of God and of salvation.

In Matt 16 Christ commended Peter for accepting the truth about the Messiah and then denounced him as "Satan" when he balked at the 'next truth' (a truth that was undoing some bad tradition and bias he had from his childhood).

The fact that he was at the HEAD of the class during the blessing part of that chapter did not stop him from being sent to the BACK of the class when he turned is nose up at "truth".

In Christ,

Bob

 

Also from Scripture:
"Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it Holy" (Ex 20:8)

Just curious, what day of the week do you worship on? How do you spend your Saturdays?

He didn't say keep the Sabbath only til the Messiah came either. Are you a "Sabbath-keeping" baptist?

But Catholics believe she is a member of their family in heaven.

Context is everything, Deborah. The commandment was meant to forbid the worship of idols, false gods. God had yet to become Incarnate in Christ so He could not yet be depicted artistically. When God became man in Christ, a lot of things changed. Christ, the express image of God, became visible and could thus be depicted artistically. The reverence paid to His Icon thus passes to Him. Likewise, the saints in heaven, including the Theotokos, who have been perfected in Christ are honored with the respect (to a lesser degree) paid to their icons. This is not an excuse, but is the glorious implication of the Incarnation, Crucifixion, and Resurrection of Christ who is our salvation, Who rescues us from the "letter of the law" since the letter kills but the Spirit gives life. We are to serve in the newness of the Spirit, not in the oldness of the letter (Romans 7:6). That's why I wouldn't be too quick to lump venerating the icons of Christ and His saints with the bowing down before the graven images of false gods simply in your zeal to keep "the letter".

 

What he was doing in that case was taking the Jewish interpretation of the commandment, which is not to MAKE any image FOR ANY PURPOSE, to prevent any possible bowing down to it.
Most of us believe that that was not the real intent of the command; but the Jews, living by the letter of course; would be extra restrictive to be safe.
So no, having pictures in the house does not violate the command as religiously bowing to a statue or picture (including bas relief, DT!) does!

 

But people did a lot of bowing down in the Temple which contained many "graven images" made at the command of God. There are even graven images of cherubim on the Ark of the Covenant which the Israelites treated with high honor because of what it represented.

 

Just as kissing a picture of an absent (or deceased) family member here on earth doesn't mean I'm worshipping that family member as God (let alone worshipping a photograph itself), neither does kissing an icon of a saint, a family member in heaven, necessarily mean one is worshipping that one as God (or worshipping painted materials).

 

Deborah - the interesting thing is - that quote is from a well known Catholic source -- Catholic Digest's Fr. Ken Ryan.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Well; I don't do that; I guess, because I have no reason to. Because of the very fact that it is not the real person; why give affection to a representation of them. They ar enot receiving it. Some people may do that; because of their own feelings, and it becomes a sort of parallel of our substituting visible objects for the invisible God. (I also don't believe in spending thousands upon thousands of dollars to parade and then dispose of dead bodies! That is a racket if I ever saw one; playing upon/profiting from people's emotions! And Americans complain about taxes!)

What Icon? Nobody has any image of him preserved. Most of the images people are venerating are of some Italian guy in the middle ages; and they have modified it into the brunette we are most familiar with today. People back then did not draw images of Christ; because of their interpretation of the Second Commandment. Even if God was incarnate now; his body/flesh was not what was his divinity was; so it was not to be worshipped (as that church does with supposed shrouds, holy grails, and other physical stuff he supposedly touched). So no; the Incarnation does not change that God is ultimately "invisble, in a Temple made not with hands", and "the Heavens cannot contain Him". The Oneness could argue otherwise; and I think even most of them still try to say that God was still Spirit in Heaven while Christ walked the earth; though they call them the same "person".

The spirit of the second commandment is that ANYTHING we put before God becomes an idol (whether visible/tangible or not). This does not free us to literally bow down to objects; but instead further implicates that practice. People bow to these things; cross their chests in front of churches, put ash on their foreheads; etc. and think nothing of really obeying God; even the commandments that the Church does emphasize like monogamy and other moral issues, hatred, etc. These are idols that have in effect taken the place of the true God. Te people keeping "the letter" in the sense you are talking about, would be the Jews who felt that they were alright because they did not literally bow down to anything. But they had their agenda (of what God shoul do; of what Messiah should be, all centered around their righteousness); which caused them to reject Christ; and that was definitely an "idol". And yes; many of us who condemn the Catholics for literal idolatry need to watch out as well. Many do have a similar moral/cultural agenda that becomes an idol. But still; in no case does literal bowing to things become OK now. God is still invisible; and Christ has now gone back to Heaven, and the "incarnation" in this age is now the [invisible] Spirit in us, the new "temples" of God!

And once again; the Spirit of the Law means it becomes all the more restrictive. While they were not actualy bowing TO things, there was still a lot of focus on visible items for worship. You could also add the brazen serpent they were required to look on to be healed (Kind of suprising to me that God would order this; when you would expect that more from pagans). But here is where I would agree with Calvin, Chrysostom and others about the "puerile instruction of the Law". God allowed things like that because they were the carnal, unspiritual nation, and what He was doing was in preparation for the New Covenant of the Spirit anyway. Just like there were visible appearances of God back then too; but after Christ, there are none. We live through the Spirit, by faith today. Visible things were apart of that very "letter" you are talking about. They were only shadows of spiritual realities. What the liturgical churches have done is take us right back to the OT; only changing the weekly and annual days of worship; confident that THOSE are what distinguishes them from the Old covenant. But everything else is quite OT; even down to the use of "priests", and claims of supernatural rituals. The Eastern Church even copies the garb and beards of the Israelites.