Response to the Right Reverend H. Graham & His Followers

[37818]

John 6:63 It is the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life

The singlur Greek verb "to be" is twice translated in the English plural "are" here for metaphor. Jesus explained that eating His flesh and drinking His blood was metaphor. Peter understood the words (John 6:68) He taught where actually life (John 6:47). He was traching we need to come and believe in Him.

 

[HankD]

Well another problem is who has the power of transubstantiation and how is it passed on? The RCC has a neatly packaged answer - the priest of the Catholic Church under the authority of the pope and apostolic succession - which is a topic with a life of its own.

 

[Adonia]

This is what I believe He meant to teach that the bread and wine were pictures of His body and blood.

Now this is something that I never have heard about before, so where exactly do you get this? I do not believe that this is even alluded to in the Scriptures, no mention of "body and blood" being meant as a "portrait" of Our Lord. Is this something you Pastor brought up, or did you just think of this yourself?

 

[Adonia]

Silly me I only had 5 semesters of Greek/Hebrew.

That is all well and good, but the end result of your biblical interpretation remains the same - filled with error. I wonder how much Hebrew and Greek that someone like St. Thomas Aquinas or the other "Doctors of the Church" had (plenty I am sure), yet have come up with a completely different interpretation of the Scriptures than you. So that then leads to the question of why should I believe you and your new fangled biblical revelations and not theirs?

 

[HankD]

Now this is something that I never have heard about before, so where exactly do you get this? I do not believe that this is even alluded to in the Scriptures, no mention of "body and blood" being meant as a "portrait" of Our Lord. Is this something you Pastor brought up, or did you just think of this yourself?

I'm not sure, if it is true then ultimately it came from God.

 

[HankD]

This is all well and good, but the end result of your biblical interpretation remains the same. I wonder how much Hebrew and Greek that someone like St. Thomas Aquinas or the other "Doctors of the Church" had (plenty I am sure), yet have come up with a completely different interpretation of the Scriptures than you. So that then leads to the question of why should I believe you and your new fangled biblical revelations and not theirs?

I can't answer that Adonia.

Addendum: lets say its just another understanding to be considered.

 

[Adonia]

Well another problem is who has the power of transubstantiation and how is it passed on? The RCC has a neatly packaged answer - the priest of the Catholic Church under the authority of the pope and apostolic succession - which is a topic with a life of its own.

Our Eastern Orthodox brothers also have a belief in the "Real Presence" that the Catholic Church duly recognizes, so it is not just our priests under the authority of the Pope who believe such a thing, though the E.O. just look at the same result as a "mystery".

 

[HankD]

Our Eastern Orthodox brothers also have a belief in the "Real Presence" that the Catholic Church duly recognizes, so it is not just our priests under the authority of the Pope who believe such a thing, though the E.O. just look at the same result as a "mystery".

Yes and i believe the Church of England had that same nod of approval from Rome for a while.

 

[Adonia]

I'm not sure, if it is true then ultimately it came from God.

Hey, how about those words "God is love", how do you see them? Is it just a metaphor like our friend posted earlier, or are they the truth in itself? I believe the Scriptures are full of this truth - God loving us so much that He sent His only son and Jesus as God Incarnate who was so full of love He willingly became the sacrifice for us. Yes, I believe the words "God is love" is the truth, the reality of God and not simply a metaphor.

 

[HankD]

Hey, how about those words "God is love", how do you see them? Is it just a metaphor like our friend posted earlier, or are they the truth in itself? I believe the Scriptures are full of this truth - God loving us so much that He sent His only son and Jesus as God Incarnate who was so full of love He willingly became the sacrifice for us. Yes, I believe the words "God is love" is the truth, the reality of God and not simply a metaphor.

Agree.

 

[Protestant]

Part 13

“I have read that God made man; but that man made God I never yet read, nor, I suppose ever shall read.” (Quote attributed to Anne Askew.)

This study began as a rebuttal to a Roman Catholic priest who imputed the preservation, defense and transmission of Holy Scriptures to his Roman Catholic Church. These same arguments are still being used by Roman Catholic apologists today as they have been for centuries.

In order to refute these claims, this present writer took the reader on a historical journey through Church history, proving the Roman Church purposefully denied the laity access to the Holy Scriptures on two counts. First, their official Bible, the Latin Vulgate, was impossible for its citizens to understand, being a dead language to all but the Church hierarchy. Thus, the laity had no other recourse but to believe the fairy tales told them by their religious superiors. Second, translations into the vernacular were decreed illegal. To possess such a translation was cause for heresy, with death the appropriate punishment.

But, as history testifies, when Holy Writ began to be translated into the vernacular, the simple common folk soon understood their religious superiors were living lives antithetical to the teachings of Jesus and His Apostles. Furthermore, the doctrines, religious orders and rituals of the Catholic Church were easily exposed as specious and unbiblical.

This present writer purposefully chose the central, pivotal religious teaching of the Roman Catholic Church – transubstantiation in the sacrifice of the Mass - as that which needed particular scrutiny. Why? It was because this specific fraudulent doctrine caught the attention of innumerable so-called ‘heretics’ throughout centuries, leading to their torture, imprisonment and death.

Transubstantiation No Longer Condemned as Blasphemy by Evangelical Church Leaders Today

To put the state of our present day Christian Church into perspective, one need only cite a handful of quotes by recognized Church leaders who are held in the highest esteem by professing Christians:

· In an interview published in the National Catholic Register, May 9, 1982, Jerry Falwell said that Ronald Reagan and Pope John Paul II are “the greatest men in my lifetime.” (source)

The Pope a ‘great man’ who claims to make his Maker, while denying the sufficiency of Christ’s sacrifice?

· In 1979 Dr. John R. Rice’s Sword of the Lord Publishers distributed, Was Pope John Paul 1 a Born-Again Christian? In the introduction he declares his message is “neither anti-Catholic or anti-pope.” He continues, “In the first message I bring the honest question, Was Pope John Paul 1 a Born-Again Christian?.....we can hope that he was, though we are not sure.”

Really? Not sure?

· Rice’s second message is entitled, Pope John 23 Seemed to Put His Trust in Christ. Rice writes “But about Pope John 23, there is some sweet evidence of a forgiven heart, of a trusting soul, of one who personally knew the Lord Jesus and loved and trusted him.”

The Pope ‘loved the Lord’ while refuting His once for all perfect sacrifice?

· The Reverend Billy Graham: “Since his election, Pope John Paul II has emerged as the greatest leader of the modern world, and one of the greatest moral and spiritual leaders of this century” (The Saturday Evening Post, Jan/Feb 1980).

“I’ve found that my beliefs are essentially the same as those of orthodox Roman Catholics, for instance. They believe in the Virgin Birth, and so do I. They believe in the blood atonement of the cross, and so do I. They believe in the resurrection of Jesus and the coming judgment of God, and so do I. We only differ in some matters of later church tradition” (McCall’s, Jan 1978).

Oh, really? The sacrifice of the Mass, a denial of the sacrifice of Christ, a small matter? Worshipping bread as God a small matter? The murder of Christians over the span of centuries a small matter?

The numbers of hugely popular evangelical leaders who publicly extol the virtues of the Popes, past and present, grows steadily every year. Among them are Joel Osteen, Rick Warren, Luis Palau, Pat Robinson, Trinity Broadcasting Network, Jack Van Impe, James Robison, Ken Copeland, Prof. Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher, to name a few.

NEXT: What it all means.

 

[Protestant]

The Lollards and their spiritual forefathers (e.g. Henry of LeMans, Peter of Bruys, the Cathars, Albigenses & Waldenses, etc.) would not have wept over the destruction of the Notre Dame Cathedral, dedicated to the worship of Our Lady, The Blessed Virgin Mary. Rather, they repudiated everything such religious edifices stood for: outrageous egotistical extravagance in pursuit of garnering the honor and obedience of the ignorant masses of unregenerate. Furthermore, they did not believe God inhabited that which promulgated anti-biblical superstition, and that certainly by the likes of an evil clergy.

15th century Lollard, Margery Baxter, was interrogated by a fellow female townsperson, (faithful to the Roman Church), under the auspices of the local bishop. When Margery asked the woman what she did every day at church, she answered that she kneeled down and said five Pater-Nosters in worship of the crucifix, and as many Ave Marias in worship of our lady. Whom Margery rebuked, saying, ‘You do evil to kneel or pray to such images in the churches, for God dwelleth not in such churches, neither shall he come down out of heaven; and he will give you no more reward for such prayer than a candle lighted and set under the cover of the font will give light by night to those who are in the church:’ saying, moreover, in English: ‘Lewd wrights of stocks [evil builders of wood] hew and form such crosses and images, and, after that, lewd painters gleer them [in merriment paint them] with colours. And if you desire so much to see the true cross of Christ, I will show it you at home in your own house.’ Which this deponent being desirous to see, the said Margery, stretching out her arms abroad, said to this deponent: ‘This is the true cross of Christ, and this cross thou oughest and mayst every day behold and worship in thine own house; and therefore it is but vain to run to the church, to worship dead crosses and images’(Source).

 

[Protestant]

Part 14: What It All Means

Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:

3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. (1 John 4: 1-3).

For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist (2 John 7).

1 John 4 begins with a warning: do not unconditionally believe every so-called prophet of God. Rather test their validity using Scripture as the rule.

Both 1 & 2 John emphasize the flesh of Christ. Why? This is because the Antichrist will denigrate, attack and insult the unparalleled preeminent importance of Christ’s flesh and sacrifice.

This blasphemous hubris is seen in the Roman Catholic ‘Sacrifice of the Mass’ containing the doctrine of Transubstantiation which declares Christ is come to be sacrificed over and over again as their bread-God. They would have us believe the transubstantiated bread is the very flesh, blood, soul and divinity of the God-man, Jesus Christ. Yet in reality it is neither flesh nor man, nor God nor Jesus Christ. It is unleavened bread made by the sinful hands of sinning nuns.

Therefore, the Pope and his priests are false prophets, fulfilling the warning of 1 John 4:1.

CONFESS NOT

Both 1 & 2 John use the phrase “confess not.” To confess not is to deny. To deny is to be in a state of unbelief. To be in a state of unbelief is to be condemned by God (John 3:18-19).

By perpetually offering the Sacrifice of the Mass, the Pope, Roman priests and Roman Church all deny the very reason for Christ’s fleshly advent in the first place.

It was absolutely necessary Christ’s sacrifice be made in the flesh because flesh has the properties necessary to experience death. Bread does not experience death, though it may rot over time and be eaten by mice.

Christ’s flesh was holy, without sin, and was given once for all, For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified (Hebrews 10).

The Pope denies the perfection of Christ’s unique flesh sacrifice which He made upon the cross, preferring his own profane perpetual bread sacrifice as an offering acceptable to God the Father.

This is the spirit of Antichrist.

NEXT: The ‘heretics’ through the ages knew where the spirit of Antichrist resided.

 

[Walter]

Yikes, Rand, Yikes!!!! I know you would never read this, but others might:
The Protestant Inquisition

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Amen.

Great Caesars Ghost, you are turning Catholic!

 

[HankD]

Great Caesars Ghost, you are turning Catholic!

Don't let anyone know

 

[Protestant]

Part 15: The ‘heretics’ through the ages knew where the spirit of Antichrist resided.

The material used as the basis of this article has been compiled by the arch enemy of the so-called ‘heretics’, the Roman Catholic Church, as compiled and translated by Wakefield & Evans in their superb publication, Heresies of the High Middle Ages.

Although information as to the beliefs and lives of the ‘heretics’ may be tainted, misunderstood, or intentionally falsely reported by their antagonists, from whose writings Wakefield & Evans based their work, this present writer has shown a consistent accusation by the Roman authorities that the ‘heretics’ disavowed the Sacrifice of the Mass, which always included the doctrine of transubstantiation.

It will now be proven these same ‘heretics’ consistently identified the Roman Catholic Church, her Pope and clergy as the fulfillment of prophetic Scripture which warns of the Harlot Church and Beast Antichrist.

· The Italian Cathars, circa 1176-90: “They say that the [sign of the] Cross is the sign of the Beast of which one reads in the Apocalypse [Rev. 13:16-17]; and is an abomination in the holy place [Matthew 24:15]. They assert that the Blessed Sylvester was the Antichrist of whom one reads in the Epistle, ‘The son of perdition’ [2 Thess. 2:3]; ‘who is lifted up above all that is called God’ [2 Thess. 2:4]. From that day, they say, the Church was lost” (pp. 172-3).

· The Albigenses of Southern France, circa 1213: “They called the Roman Church a ‘den of thieves’ [Luke 19:46] and that harlot of whom we read in Apocalypse” [Rev. 17] (p. 238).

· The Amalricians of Paris, circa 1210: “They said that to erect altars to the saints and to use incense before sacred images was idolatry They made mock of persons who kissed the bones of the martyrs”….William the Goldsmith prophesied….”fire will come down upon the prelates of the Church, who are members of Antichrist, for the Pope was Antichrist, Rome was Babylon”(pp. 259-60).

· The Poor of Lyons [Waldenses], the Poor Lombards and Speronists, circa 1235: “You can plainly see that those who are called Cathars [N.B. Greek: KATHAROS = PURE: Matthew 5:8; i.e. ‘Puritans’] have been convicted of heresy….And although you may not be in such profound heresy as the heretics who are called Cathars, heretics you are, nonetheless…..It is an evident fact that the Cathars were once part of the Roman Catholic Church and in that faith they received baptism and confirmation and the other sacraments, and in it they remained for a time. But they left it. And against that Church they make ever more blasphemous statements which arise from their fatuous discernment – whatever occurs to them – declaring the Church to be a harlot, a den of serpents, a beast. And you stupid people say the same things” (p. 271).

· Dominican Moneta’s Summa Against Cathars, circa 1241-44: “The heretic makes an objection [against the claim of his antagonist that the Roman Catholic Church is the Church of God], saying: ‘As we find in Matthew 7:7-18, a tree is known by its fruits. The fruit of the Roman Church is evil; therefore, the Roman Church is evil……’

Also, the heretic objects, saying: ‘Since the fruit of the Roman faith is evil, its faith is evil…..’

The heretic in opposition objects: ‘Ten parts or more of the Roman Church are evil [i.e. speaking of the members of its body]; therefore it ought to be called the church of the devil, rather than of God…..’

Also, (the heretic says): The faith of the Roman Church is dead; hence, so also is the Roman Church. For from dead faith there is no life. But if the Roman Church is dead, while the Church of God is life, it is not the Church of God……

Again, the heretic seeks to prove the Roman Church is not the Church of God because of its many usages which are not recorded in the Gospel or any other book of the New Testament, nor is there proof it was practiced in the primitive Church…..

Again, to defame the Church the heretic quotes Matthew 23:4; such they say are the priests of the Roman Church….

They also cite, against the Church, the words of the Lord to the scribes and Pharisees, Matthew 23:13. Now they say we are like them because we do not enter the kingdom of heaven, that is, we do not enter the Church of God through faith [N.B. The Cathars taught justification by faith] , nor do we allow those who wish to enter to do so…..

They also base an objection on the Lord’s words to the scribes and Pharisees in Matthew 23:29-33….The heretics say that the priests of the Roman Church, whom they call modern Pharisees, fired by the same wrath, plot the same kind of murders. They say that the Jewish Pharisees, whom they call the fathers of our priests, killed the Apostles, persecuted the primitive church of the saints; our priest build and adorn the sepulchers of the slain and construct altars over them. But fired by the same wrath, they fill up the measure of the Pharisees by murders and by persecuting the church of the heretics……

Also, the heretic says the Roman Church talks about good but does it not. If it does any good thing, its purpose is that the eyes of men may behold it…..It says long prayers, so as to lay hold of the goods of widows, and that it may collect tithes and the first fruits of oil and beasts from a prince. Of all these things Christ harshly accused the scribes and Pharisees in Matthew 23.

Also, the heretic says, ‘If the head [Christ] be good, how astonishing that it has such evil members…..’

Also, the heretics says, ‘The Church should suffer persecution in this world [John 15:19-20], not practice it against others. But the Roman Church persecutes others, while itself remaining free from persecution……’

Also, the heretic objects, ‘The Church of Christ, threatened by persecution, was often hungry and thirsty, was naked and buffeted, and made weak; it worked with its hands, not seeking the wealth of others, gladly giving of its own to Christ’s poor, so there was no one in want in their midst. It was cursed, yet it blessed; hence, 1 Corinthians 4:11. The Roman Church is not in this condition. For the Roman Church is rich in great possessions, in luxuries. It is garbed in purple and linen, and it has splendid feasts every day, It is untroubled and is established in this world, works not with its hands; but being itself wanton and idle, devours the labors of others. It is blessed by others and it curses…..’

Also, they say, ‘The Church of Christ was scorned and blasphemed by the world; on the other hand, the world honors the Roman Church…..’"

NEXT: Moneta’s Summa Against the Cathars continued.

 

[Protestant]

Part 16: The heretics knew where the spirit of Antichrist resided (cont).

· Dominican Moneta’s Summa against Cathars, circa 1241-44 (continued from previous post; Wakefield & Evans, pp. 326-329):

“Also, the heretics say that the Church of Christ first gave instructions before it would baptize anyone, as is found in Matthew 28;19. The Roman Church baptizes before it teaches, as is obvious in the case of infants. Furthermore, Christ and His disciples are never known to have baptized anyone who lacked faith and the ability to reason. But the Roman Church does….

“Also, the heretic says, ‘The Church of God did not kill or swear [oaths]. The Roman Church does so…..

“Also, the heretic says that the children of the Roman Church rob and steal, contrary to God’s command….

“Also, they object that many there are in the Roman Church who are in want, half dead from hunger, thirst and cold, on whom the wealthy members of the Roman Church have no pity, but allow them to weep, to be afflicted by these sufferings. [N.B. Consider the construction of Notre Dame Cathedral while the vast majority of the population lived in poverty.]

“Also, the heretic objects that the Roman Church has multiplied and spread throughout the world, but the Church of God, on the contrary, is few in number: Matthew 7:14.

“Also, the heretic objects, saying: ‘The Church of Christ is called a heresy by the priests and leaders, as appears in Acts 24:14 [therefore, we, too, are called a heresy].’

“Also, the heretic objects, saying, ‘Orders such as Augustinian and Benedictine orders were not present in the Church of Christ. They exist in the Roman Church…..

“They also say that no one maybe saved, but in Christ’s teaching, which the Apostles transmitted……. [N.B. Sola Scriptura].

“In execration of the Roman Church the heretic cites the text of Apocalypse 17:3; and, to sum it up briefly, the Cathars, and the Leonists [Waldenses] as well, believe that all or almost all of what is found in the Apocalypse, Chapters 17 - 18, unto chapter 19 verse 3 was recorded against the Roman Church. For they interpret ‘the beast’ and ‘the woman’ as references to the Roman Church. The beast, we read, was scarlet. These words are applicable to the lord Pope, who is the head of the Roman Church. Likewise, we find in verse 4 that the woman was clothed with scarlet and purple and gilt with gold and precious stones and pearls having a golden cup in her hand. This symbol they attach to the Roman Church. The woman drunk with the blood of the saints (verse 6) is referred to in the same connection. This symbol they attach to the Roman Church because it orders their death, for they believe they are saints. At the end of chapter 17, verse 18 one reads, “And the woman which thou sawest is the great city which has kingdom over the kings of the earth’ [which was Rome at the time of the Apostle’s writings]. They also seek to prove their point [that the woman, the Church of Rome, is Mystery Babylon] from the fact that the woman is called Babylon at the end of chapter 16, verse 19, and in Apocalypse 18:2, says, ‘Babylon the great, is fallen, is fallen.’ Furthermore, Peter says, ‘The church that is in Babylon, elected together with you,’ that is, in Rome….”

· The Summa of Inquisitor Rainerius Sacconi, circa 1250: Against the Cathars:

”They believe all the sacraments of the Roman Church, namely baptism of actual water and the other sacraments, are of no avail for salvation and that they are not the true sacraments of Christ and His Church, but are deceptive and diabolical and belong to the church of the wicked…..Never do they implore the aid or intervention of angels, or of the Blessed Virgin Mary, or of the saints, nor fortify themselves by the sign of the Cross……the existence of Purgatory they totally deny……no works are required of them for penance or for the remission of sins…..”(pp.330, 332, 333).

Against the Poor of Lyons [Waldenses]……..”They say the Roman Church is not the Church of Jesus Christ” (p. 345).

Against the Poor of Lombardy……”They say that the Roman Church is the church of the wicked, the beast and the harlot which are described in the Apocalypse; consequently they say it is no sin to eat meat during Lent and on Fridays……It was through Blessed Sylvester that the Church fell away until they themselves restored it. Nevertheless, they assert there were always some who feared God and were saved. They also say that infants are saved without baptism” (p. 246).

· Stephen of Bourbon, Against the Waldenses, circa 1249-1261:

“Purgatory is nonexistent; prayers for the dead are of no avail…..They deride papal indulgences, absolutions and keys of the Church, calling the dedication and consecration of churches and altars feasts of stones. Also, they say that all ground is equally consecrated and blessed by God. They hold Christian cemeteries and churches in contempt…..

“Also, they say it suffices for salvation to confess only to God and not to man, and that good works are not necessary to salvation. But no matter how great and numerous the sins he may have committed, when any sinner repents and then dies, he ascends at once to heaven……

“Also, they say our clerics and priests who possess wealth and worldly goods are sons of the devil and of damnation, and that one who gives them tithes or oblations commits sin. For they say that to do so is like adding fat to lard. Also, those who offer candles to the saints for lighting the churches they find worthy of derision.

“Also, they scorn the chants of the Church and the holy offices [i.e. Liturgy of the Hours], affirming that those who sing their invocations to God seem to deride Him, as though he could not understand unless one sings to Him or beseeches Him in song.

“Also, they assert that the Roman Church is the harlot of Babylon of whom one reads in the Apocalypse. Also, they say that those who observe saints’ days are a laughingstock and that those who work on those days commit no sin……

“Also, they deny entirely the necessity of obedience to the Roman Church. Also, they assert that God alone is to be adored with every kind of adoration and that persons who adore the Cross or that which we say to be the body of Christ [i.e., transubstantiated Eucharist], or adore other saints of God or their image, commit sin” (pp. 347-349).

NEXT: Further evidence the ‘heretics’ knew where the spirit of Antichrist resided.

 

[Protestant]

Part 17: Further evidence the ‘heretics’ knew where the spirit of Antichrist resided.

N.B. It was a common tactic by the Inquisitors to slander both the theology and character of the so-called ‘heretics’ by unjustly accusing them of Manichaean doctrines coupled with depraved secret sexual practices. By so doing, the Roman authorities hoped to damage their reputation, thereby limiting the numbers of new converts, for the heretics were forever gathering a formidable force consisting of adherents from all strata of society. See G.S. Faber, The History of the Ancient Vallenses and Albigenses; and E. B. Elliott, Horae Apocalypticae, for refutations of these slanders.

In truth, it was the Roman Church that harbored clergy who back then, and to this day, were publically infamous as the very ones who practiced immorality and sexual depravity. See ex-Carmelite John Bale’s historical exposé of the Roman Church’s doctrine of mandatory celibacy which has always resulted in depraved secret sexual practice: The Actes or Unchast Examples of the English Votaries, [i.e. religious orders requiring vows of chaste celibacy], published in 1551. In his conclusion, Bale cites 1 Timothy 3:2 and Titus 1:6 as proof the Roman Church has historically countermanded the clear admonishments of Scripture. He then explains how the Roman Catholic religious orders have been able to deceive the public ignorant of Scripture: they ‘must pretend a perpetual chastity;’ they ‘must outwardly profess never to touch a woman,’ no matter whatsoever they do under cover of darkness. They ‘shall appear more holy than other people.’ They ‘shall have preachers obedient’ to their carnal affections, who ‘shall not rebuke their horrible dark doings by the Gospel.’ ‘They shall, for want of women, have uncomely lusts in their hearts, whereby they will be given over of God to themselves [Romans 1:24]. So shall they become buggerers and whoremasters. Yea, and such blind buzzards and beasts as to be unable to abide no truth. Thus, shall their wickedness become an affectation of perfection and holiness in the sight of the people.’

· Dominican Inquisitor Bernard Gui, circa 1323: Concerning the Errors of the Manichaeans of the Present Time

“They pretend there are two churches: The beneficent one, they say, is there sect, which they declare to be the Church of Jesus Christ. But the other they call the evil church; this they hold to be the Roman Church, which they shamelessly refer to as the mother of fornication, the great Babylon, the harlot and cathedral of the devil, and the synagogue of Satan. They despise and distort all its offices, its orders, its ordinations, and its statutes. They call all who hold its faith heretics and sinners, and they declare as dogma that no one can be saved in the faith of the Roman Church. They declare all sacraments of the Roman Church empty and vain” (Wakefield & Evans, p. 379).

“They usually say of themselves that they are good Christians who do not swear [i.e. swear oaths] or lie or speak evil [i.e. falsely] of anyone…..and that they hold the faith of the Lord Jesus Christ and His Gospel as Christ and the apostles taught it. They say they occupy the place of the apostles and that it is because of the foregoing facts that the members of the Roman Church, to wit, the prelates, the regular and secular clergy, and especially the inquisitors of heretics, persecute them and call them heretics, just as the Pharisees persecuted Christ and His apostles, although they are actually good men and good Christians” (p. 383). [N.B. The Lollards also called themselves ‘good men.’]

“Also, they discuss with laymen at every opportunity the wicked life of clerics and prelates of the Roman Church. They give examples and speak at length about their pride, cupidity, avarice, their uncleanness of life , and whatever other evils they know. In this connection, they cite the texts of the Gospels and the Epistles, as they interpret and understand them, against the state of the prelates, clergy and members of religious orders, whom they refer to as Pharisees and false prophets, those who ‘say and do not’” (pp. 383-4).

“Also, they read the Gospels and the Epistles in the vernacular, interpreting and expounding them in their own favor and against the existing establishments of the Roman Church” (ibid.)

· Inquisitor Gui, circa 1323: Concerning the Sect of the Waldenses:

“Now the principal heresy of the aforesaid Waldenses was and still continues to be contempt of ecclesiastical authority…..The foolish followers and impious teachers of this sect hold and teach they are not subject to our lord pope, the Roman Pontiff, or to other prelates of the Roman Church, for they declare the Roman Church persecutes and censure them unjustly and unduly…..This sect does not accept or consider valid, but despises, rejects and damns the canonical decrees, the decretals of the supreme pontiffs, the rules concerning observance of fasts [e.g. Lent and meatless Fridays] and holy days [e.g. Christmas and Easter], and the precepts of the Fathers” (pp. 388-9).

“Also, they censure and condemn prelates and the secular and regular clergy of the Roman Church, speaking disparagingly of their office. They consider them to be the blind who lead the blind, who neither preserve Gospel truth nor practice apostolic poverty. In a bitter lie, they aver the Roman Church is a house of falsehood……Also, they say there are no real miracles in the Church by the merits and prayers of the saints, for none of the saints ever performed miracles. Also, they say and affirm in private that the saints in heaven hearken not to the prayers of the faithful nor do they heed the acts of veneration whereby we on earth honor them. They say the saint to not pray for us and so it is useless for us to seek their help”(p. 391).

“Also, they have no use for the salutation to the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Hail Mary, or for the Apostles’ Creed because, they say, these were provided and composed by the Roman Church, not by Christ……They tell their believers that inquisitors and others in the Roman Church persecute them unjustly for serving God and observing His commandments, for pursuing evangelical poverty and perfection as did Christ and the apostles. They say, too, that they know the truth and God’s way better than do chaplains, clerics, or members of religious orders of the Roman Church, who, out of ignorance of the truth, persecute them. They also say they flee before the persecutions of their adversaries because Christ in the Gospel told His apostles and disciples to flee from city to city when persecuted for the name of God” (pp. 394-5).

“They say those only may be successors of the apostles who imitate and uphold their way of life. From this, they argue and conclude that the pope, bishops, prelates and clerics who own the riches of this world and do not imitate the sanctity of the apostles, are not true pastors and governors of the Church of God, but are rapacious and devouring wolves; that to such Christ did not deem it fitting to entrust the Church, His spouse. Therefore, they should not be obeyed, They say also that an unclean person cannot cleanse another, nor he who is bound loose another, nor can a criminal soothe a judge’s wrath against another criminal, nor can one who is headed to destruction serve as another’s guide to heaven. Thus do they disparage the clergy and prelates to render them detestable, lest they be believed or obeyed” (p. 396).

NEXT: More damning testimony against the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[Protestant]

Part 18: More damning testimony against the Roman Catholic Church.

· Inquisitor Gui, circa 1325, Concerning the Sect of the Pseudo-Apostles, Who Call Themselves the Apostles of Christ:

“The apostate and heretical sect of the ‘Apostles’ originated about the year of our Lord 1260. It was founded by a certain Gerard Segarelli of Parma, who was finally condemned as a heresiarch by judgment of the Church in the same city and was burned. Succeeding him as a teacher and leader was one Dolcino of Novara, bastard son of a priest, who attracted a large number of followers to his faction. He was finally captured, together with one Margarita, his consort in heresy and crime. Both were, by judgment of the Church, condemned as heretics and burned” (Wakefield & Evans, p. 404).

“The inconstant adherents of the aforesaid sect at first taught their doctrines in stealth. Now they teach even more covertly to whom, when and where they may, the following errors: that all the authority once conferred upon the Roman Church by our Lord Jesus Christ [Romans 1:7] has become utterly void and has ceased to exist because of the wickedness of the prelates [Romans 11:18-22]; also, that the Roman Church, which is controlled by the popes, cardinals, prelates, secular and monastic clergy, is not the Church of God, but a church rejected and fruitless; also, that the Roman Church is that Babylon, the great harlot, of which John writes in the Apocalypse and which has forsaken the faith of Christ; also, that all the spiritual power which, from the beginning, Christ gave to the Roman Church has been transferred to the sect of those who call themselves the Apostles or Order of Apostles. This sect or order they regard as a spiritual congregation sent by God, and chosen for these last days” (p. 405).

“Also, they teach that to live without taking a [religious] vow is a more perfect [i.e. married, moral] life than to live under a vow [whose adherents have proven to live an amoral lifestyle]; also, that it is no better to worship God in a consecrated church than in a shed for horses and swine, and that Christ may be worshipped in grooves as well as or better than in churches” (pp. 406-7).

· Inquisitor Gui, circa 1325, Concerning the Errors of the Beguins of Recent Times:

“Now Beguins, or Poor Brethren of Penitence, consist of both sexes, having been discovered in the year of our Lord 1317, in various places in the province of Narbonne and Toulouse. They have confessed before the court to having many errors and wrong opinions. They set themselves up against the Roman Church and the Apostolic See, against the primacy of that See, and against the apostolic power of the lord pope and of the prelates of the Roman Church. By lawful inquisition and through the declarations and confessions by many of them, for which they have chosen to die by burning rather than to recant as is canonically required, the source of their errors and pernicious opinions has been discovered. They have culled these from the books and pamphlets of Brother Peter John Olivi, that is to say, from his commentary on the Apocalypse, which they have both in Latin and in vernacular translations…..” (p. 412).

“They believe the teaching of Brother John Peter Olivi was altogether true and that the carnal church, that is, the Roman Church, was the great harlot of Babylon, destined to be destroyed and cast down, as was in times past the synagogue of the Jews at the beginning of the primitive Church…..Also, they say the prelates and inquisitors who judged and condemned them as heretics, as well as their supporters, have by this act become heretics….Also, they say that none of such persons are the Church or any part of the Church of God. Nor are they numbered among the faithful…..All those who do not believe that the men [and women] condemned as heretics were glorious martyrs [i.e. true Christians who died in the faith of Christ], are no part of the Church of God, but are outside it” [1 John 2:11; 1 John 3:10] (p. 420).

“Also, they say that prelates and members of religious orders who wear unnecessary and costly apparel act contrary to the perfection [i.e. simplicity] of the Gospel, against the precepts of Christ, and in obedience to the command of Antichrist. They, and with them members of the clergy of pompous men, are of the family of Antichrist” (p. 421).

“They claim Brother Peter John, when compared with the writings of the recognized church doctors, discloses more plainly and intelligibly the malice of Antichrist and his disciples, namely, the Pharisees, who are, in their opinion, the prelates, monks and friars of the present day…..Also, thus informed, or rather deformed, by the doctrine which they draw from the commentary on the Apocalypse by the said Peter John, they say that the carnal church, by which they mean the Roman Church (not merely Rome herself, but the whole area of Roman jurisdiction), is that Babylon, the great harlot, of which John speaks in the Apocalypse. They set forth and explain [how the Roman Church fulfills Mystery Babylon] drunk with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus Christ…..”(pp. 422-23).

“Also, they distinguish between two churches: the carnal Church, which is the Roman Church, with its reprobate multitude, and the spiritual Church, composed of people whom they call spiritual and evangelical, who follow the life of Christ and the apostles. The latter, they claim, is their Church. But others say there is only one Church [consisting of both the carnal reprobate as well as] the elect, whom they call the evangelicals, meaning themselves….(p. 424).

“Also, they violently and shamefully inveigh against our lord the pope, vicar of Jesus Christ. Like madmen and schismatics, they call him the mystical Antichrist, the precursor who prepares the way for the greater Antichrist. Also, they call him a rapacious wolf, whom the faithful should avoid; a prophet who is one-eyed or blind; a Caiaphas, the high priest who condemned Christ; or a Herod, who mocked Christ and made sport of Him….They aver that he has done more evil in the Church than all the heretics who preceded him because in the former day of heresies the Church held her [biblical] position, but today the [Roman] Church seems not to be the Church of God, but the synagogue of the devil” (pp. 426-27).

NEXT: A Cathar treatise vindicating their Church of heresy.