Criticizing Roman Catholicism

[Thomas Helwys]

I am strongly opposed to Roman Catholicsim, and I have stated many of my reasons why, and why I could never be Roman Catholic. However, I have probably gone too far with some of my criticism. I say this because lately when I read some other posts on the RCC, I get kind of a bad feeling. I can't remember if I said the RCC is a false church teaching a false Gospel, but if I did I will stop saying it and if I didn't say it, I won't. Why am I making this decision? Because the way I feel about the RCC, I also feel about Calvinism. I am strongly opposed to TULIP, and I could never be Presbyterian. In fact, I am more opposed to TULIP than some features of the RCC. So, I'll just say that I believe the RCC teaches grave errors, and I also believe this about Calvinism.

Both systems are within orthodoxy, so I won't say they teach a false gospel. I'll just say they teach a badly distorted gospel.

But I have brothers and sisters in both.

One more thing: The RCC is one of a very few large churches that is staunchly pro-life and pro-heterosexual-only-marriage. The mainline denominations are not. At this point and on these issues, we need all the allies we can get.

 

[Thousand Hills]

Your post has really got me thinking about reconsidering being a Calvinist. I mean everybody hates us. But you know, when I think about it, a gazillion Catholics couldn't possibly be wrong could they?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
just kidding :tongue3:

 

[Thomas Helwys]

Your post has really got me thinking about reconsidering being a Calvinist. I mean everybody hates us. But you know, when I think about it, a gazillion Catholics couldn't possibly be wrong could they?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
just kidding :tongue3:

I didn't know where you were going with this......until I scrolled down.

 

[Melanie]

Your post has really got me thinking about reconsidering being a Calvinist. I mean everybody hates us. But you know, when I think about it, a gazillion Catholics couldn't possibly be wrong could they?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
just kidding :tongue3:

I thought it was the other way around, put your hand up and say you are a practising RC.....and watch peoples blood pressures go up.:1_grouphug:

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

That's Ok...I could not be a SEMI PELEGIAN either:tongue3:

 

[Matt Black]

Neither could a Catholic - see the Council of Orange of 589

 

[Bro. James]

All ecumenical hogwash notwithstanding, the RCC is either the oldest, largest cult on the planet or she is not. She either has the divine authority or she does not.

If she has the authority, all others are schismatics and usurpers without authority. It cannot be: all of the above.

The world is filled with religion--most of it false. What is in your wallet? Will it get you to paradise or the pit? Are you sure?

Choose wisely.

Even so, come Lord Jesus.

Bro. James

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

All ecumenical hogwash notwithstanding, the RCC is either the oldest, largest cult on the planet or she is not. She either has the divine authority or she does not.

If she has the authority, all others are schismatics and usurpers without authority. It cannot be: all of the above.

The world is filled with religion--most of it false. What is in your wallet? Will it get you to paradise or the pit? Are you sure?

Choose wisely.

Even so, come Lord Jesus.

Bro. James

Are you absolutely certain your name is written in the Lambs book of Life? Really! Proove it then.

 

[Salty]

...One more thing: The RCC is one of a very few large churches that is staunchly pro-life and pro-heterosexual-only-marriage. The mainline denominations are not. At this point and on these issues, we need all the allies we can get.

There are groups called Feminists for Life and Atheists Against Abortion (facebook page) . I am by no means a feminists nor am I an Atheists. However, I do agree with them on the murder issue and will ally with them for the cause.

I am thankful that the RCC respects life - but that does not make them otherwise doctrinally sound.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

There are groups called Feminists for Life and Atheists Against Abortion (facebook page) . I am by no means a feminists nor am I an Atheists. However, I do agree with them on the murder issue and will ally with them for the cause.

I am thankful that the RCC respects life - but that does not make them otherwise doctrinally sound.

The same could be said about conservative Calvinists, from my perspective.

I just wonder why there is so much bashing of the RCC when most of us on here probably have just as many disagreements with other expressions of the faith.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

The same could be said about conservative Calvinists, from my perspective.

I just wonder why there is so much bashing of the RCC when most of us on here probably have just as many disagreements with other expressions of the faith.

Well when hate is deep within the soul its is apt to come out somehow & what better way to express that hate than on a religious baptist forum...particularly when you can keep your identity hidden .... the perfect storm if you will. It would be far better to have a true ID's disclosed.

 

[Salty]

.

I just wonder why there is so much bashing of the RCC when most of us on here probably have just as many disagreements with other expressions of the faith.

I do not consider that bashing - rather it is proclaiming the truth. Of course, I believe some RC are truly born again - but that would be a small minority.

Now, differences in open/closed communion; KJO, legalism, pre/trib, 6 day creation, dunk/sprinkle, ect - have nothing to do with being born again - that is the difference!

 

[Yeshua1]

I am strongly opposed to Roman Catholicsim, and I have stated many of my reasons why, and why I could never be Roman Catholic. However, I have probably gone too far with some of my criticism. I say this because lately when I read some other posts on the RCC, I get kind of a bad feeling. I can't remember if I said the RCC is a false church teaching a false Gospel, but if I did I will stop saying it and if I didn't say it, I won't. Why am I making this decision? Because the way I feel about the RCC, I also feel about Calvinism. I am strongly opposed to TULIP, and I could never be Presbyterian. In fact, I am more opposed to TULIP than some features of the RCC. So, I'll just say that I believe the RCC teaches grave errors, and I also believe this about Calvinism.

Both systems are within orthodoxy, so I won't say they teach a false gospel. I'll just say they teach a badly distorted gospel.

But I have brothers and sisters in both.

One more thing: The RCC is one of a very few large churches that is staunchly pro-life and pro-heterosexual-only-marriage. The mainline denominations are not. At this point and on these issues, we need all the allies we can get.

BIG difference between calvinism/Arminianism say and official RCC theology!

I can disagree with a fellow Christian holding to Arm view, but they would still ahve same Gospel and Christ as me, just in my opinion not understanding clearly thegrace of God, but the RCC ahs a DIFFERENT Gospel, not the one of the Bible!

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

BIG difference between calvinism/Arminianism say and official RCC theology!

I can disagree with a fellow Christian holding to Arm view, but they would still ahve same Gospel and Christ as me, just in my opinion not understanding clearly thegrace of God, but the RCC ahs a DIFFERENT Gospel, not the one of the Bible!

Don't say brother that they don't have the same gospel brother, its the interpretation that's the subtle difference along with their traditions & lastly their system of government of churches that is strange to us. Still I know people who are saved in it...despite what we think of as peculiar. :godisgood:

 

[saturneptune]

"Calvinism" and Arminianism are not denominations. They transcend denominations. For example, Presbyterians are almost 100% in agreement with Doctrines of Grace, and Methodists are the opposite. This is one doctrine of many that make up the Christian faith. Baptists are split on the issue.

This has nothing whatsoever to do with the Roman Catholic Church as a denomination. Whereas the above debate defines one doctrine, the Roman Catholic Church defines the entire Christian faith, and does so contrary to every aspect of Scripture.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

Well when hate is deep within the soul its is apt to come out somehow & what better way to express that hate than on a religious baptist forum...particularly when you can keep your identity hidden .... the perfect storm if you will. It would be far better to have a true ID's disclosed.

You certainly have a point.

 

[Walter]

Well when hate is deep within the soul its is apt to come out somehow & what better way to express that hate than on a religious baptist forum...particularly when you can keep your identity hidden .... the perfect storm if you will. It would be far better to have a true ID's disclosed.

Yup, nailed it!

 

[SolaSaint]

Don't be hatin...really that is a serious charge when one is only reading a post. I know I feel like I'm being yelled at or chastized in a post but I'm sure I'm just reading into the post an emmotion that is probably not present. We all need to stop throwing barbs if we disagree and do the research to see if we are correct or just trying to stir up emmotions.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

"Calvinism" and Arminianism are not denominations. They transcend denominations. For example, Presbyterians are almost 100% in agreement with Doctrines of Grace, and Methodists are the opposite. This is one doctrine of many that make up the Christian faith. Baptists are split on the issue.

This has nothing whatsoever to do with the Roman Catholic Church as a denomination. Whereas the above debate defines one doctrine, the Roman Catholic Church defines the entire Christian faith, and does so contrary to every aspect of Scripture.

I understand what you're saying and agree to a certain extent. But I would also say that Calvinism and Arminianism encompass a whole bunch of doctrines.

Here is my question: What then determines what could be called a false gospel? For instance, I disagree with TULIP and other aspects of Calvinism, to the extent that I just might disagree with it as much or more than the RCC "system" of church and theology. But I am now hesitant to call either a false gospel, even though I think both are in grave error. Both would affirm orthodox statements of faith, so on what basis would we exclude either? And if you don't want to be as general as saying "Calvinism", well, lets take a conservative Presbyterian denomination like the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), and the RCC. If I disagree with the PCA just as much as I do the RCC and think both are in grave error, would I be justified or correct in saying they teach a false gospel? Since both would affirm orthodoxy, let's say as contained in the early creeds, on what basis can they be said to teach a false gospel?

 

[Bro. James]

A short kibbitz

The litmus test for all of the strawman arguements thus far: Do you baptize your infants? Why or why not?

Baptismal regeneration is the heresy which got most of the apostates started early in the history of New Testament Churches. This shows up in the 4th century as apostates joining forces(more at they were given special privileges) with paganized Imperial Rome. Later there was the "Holy Roman Empire". These apostates are still headquartered in Rome and they are still defining nominal Christianity.

Rome has been reformed and reformed, but baptismal regeneration is still the leaven which pervades her daughters as well. This is still a false gospel worthy of anathema according to the Apostle Paul. They are bringing another gospel.

Read the history of anti-pedobaptists--the ones who died refusing to baptize their infants. They were among those called heretics in the Inquisitions. "Recant or die." Not many recanted. They now have white robes.

How soon we forget.

Even so, come Lord Jesus.

Bro. James