THE FALLEN CHURCH OF ROME - PART TWO

"This people honoreth me with their lips; But their heart is far from me.  But in vain do they worship me, Teaching as their doctrines the precepts of men."

Matthew 15:8-9

Welcome back to our study of Catholic Fallacies.   We are going to dig deeper into a number of issues that affect millions of simple followers of Christ who are unfortunately ignorant of the New Testament teachings of Jesus.  He teaches us to love one another even when we disagree.  My sincere desire is to show you my love by helping you to please our Creator and Lord by examining our practices in the light of the Bible that we hold equally dear.

V.   Beliefs and False Doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church

• The Doctrine of Purgatory

The Council of Florence in 1438 AD mentions the subject of purgatory.  It decreed, 

“If any true penitents shall depart this life in love of God, before they have made satisfaction by worthy fruits of penance for faults of commission and omission, their souls are purified after death, by the pains of purgatory.”

In the Douay Catechism, we read, 

“Whither go such as die in venial sin, or not having fully satisfied the punishment due to their mortal sin?  The answer:  To purgatory, till they made full satisfaction for them, and then to heaven.  What is purgatory?  The answer:  A place of punishment in the other life where souls suffer for a time, before they can go to heaven.”

Many Catholic authors cannot decide what purgatory is.  Some like Gregory the Great thought it to be the earth’s center.  He as well considered it to be eruptions of Vesuvius and Aetna as flames arising from it.  Bellarmine thought of purgatory as a place between heaven and earth with demons of the air.  Damien with others concluded it might be in some flaming cavern or icy stream.

The RCC teaches that the souls of individuals who have died with venial sins (nonfatal transgressions but mild), that have not been forgiven, or with sins for which they have not undergone the temporal punishment do not go to hell or heaven, but to this placed called “purgatory.”  Purgatory serves as a place for the souls of these individuals to be purified with fire, from where they will eventually go to heaven. 

Now for them to prove this false doctrine, they cite 2 Maccabees 12:43, a vague text in an “apocryphal” book.   “Apocryphal” books are uninspired historical books from the period between the Testaments which are included in the Catholic Bibles as sacred.  They do not belong to the canon of Scripture.  They do not appear in the Septuagint, Greek version of the Old Testament.  They as well were not acceptable as legitimate Scriptures by the Jews or by Christ and the apostles in connection to the Truth. 

The words of 2 Maccabees 12:43 do not help their case.  In the previous verses (12:38-40), we learn that “they gather up the bodies of the men who had been killed in battle and bury them in their family tombs. 40 But on each of the dead, hidden under their clothes, they found small images of the gods worshiped in Jamnia, which the Law forbids Jews to wear. Everyone then knew why these men had been killed.”

These soldiers died guilty of idolatry. According to Catholicism, idolatry is a mortal sin that cannot be purged in Purgatory.  This text provides no support for the practice of praying for the dead who have committed “venial sins” and are suffering in Purgatory.  There is no mention of Purgatory.

In the New Testament, they refer to Matthew 12:32, 

“Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.”

Their argument is that there is no sin in heaven, and it does not refer to hell since there will be no forgiveness in hell.  Therefore, it must be “purgatory.”

Take note that one of the most important rules to understand and explain Bible texts is to consider what the parallel texts say.  For example, Mark 3:29 is parallel to Matthew 12:32. Matthew and Mark speak of the same event.  The words of Mark correctly explain the words of Matthew by saying, 

“Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.”

Notice that the phrase “never has forgiveness” is equivalent to “it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.”  Undoubtedly, the text in Mark sets the real meaning of Matthew’s words.

Also, another parallel passage, Luke 12:10 says, “it will not be forgiven him.”  These two texts (Mark 3:29; Luke 12:10) precisely explain what Matthew is saying in 12:32:  “it shall not be forgiven him.”  It is crucial that we allow the Bible to explain itself: the Bible must explain the Bible and nothing else.

They also cite I Corinthians 3:15 where those that supposedly die in mortal sin go to be purified with fire (and with prayers and “mass” indulgences, purchasing the remission of sins to deliver souls from Purgatory).  I Corinthians 3:13-15 says, 

“Each man’s work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each man’s work.  If any man’s work which he has built on it remains, he will receive a reward.  If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.”

On the surface, this text helps them since it says, “each man’s work will become evident… it is to be revealed with fire.”  However, the Roman Church does not teach that "each man" goes to purgatory. The word “work” in this text refers to those they have converted.  The “work” of everyone is tested as if by fire, and his work can be lost (i.e., the converts do not persevere).  However, if the worker accomplished his task, he will be saved.

Even though, they teach that the souls are purified in purgatory, I Cor. 3:15 does not speak of souls but rather works.  This text does not mean to “purify” but rather “to prove.”  “Each man’s work” (those whom they have converted) is to be tested by fire even though his work is lost (i.e., the converted ones do not persevere).  Regardless of whether the converted (the work that is tried by the fires of trials and persecution) remain faithful or is lost, he will be saved.

“Nobody is purified by fire.”  This doctrine denies the effectiveness of the blood of Christ.  We are purified, cleansed by the blood of Christ and our obedience to Him.  No Scripture teaches that fire helps to purify guilt or pay the price (punishment) for sin.  The doctrine of purgatory contradicts I John 1:7 and other verses that teach that we are redeemed by Christ and His blood.

Another basic text to consider here is Luke 16:19-31.  Jesus speaks of a certain man named Lazarus.  Please don’t dismiss this text as a parable.  This is not a parable.  The parables never speak of people by name.  Even if it were a parable, a parable is not a fable.  Parables always portray realistic everyday activities.

In this text, the rich man died and in Hades he lifted up his eyes, being in torment, saying, “Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus so that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool off my tongue, for I am in agony in this flame.”  It says nothing about a purgatory.  He was not given the hope of escaping after being purified by fire for some time (as long as his family was praying for his soul and paying for a certain number of masses and indulgences).

Lastly, let us consider I Peter 3:18-20.  It is stated erroneously that Jesus preached to the souls in purgatory.  They say that the spirits in prison are not in heaven and that those who go to hell are not called spirits in prison, so it has to be "purgatory."

It is amazing to see the RCC contradict itself over and over again.  Who do you think these spirits in prison are?  Naturally, the “disobedient” ones.  This word is translated as “unbelievers” in the Catholic Bible and is a mortal sin.  Therefore, the same text that they twist contradicts them.  Isn’t that amazing!

The spirits in prison in this text are not in purgatory but in a place that the apostle Paul calls “Tartarus,” or “pits of darkness” for such.  (“Tartarus” is the place of torment in Hades, the temporary dwelling of the disembodied spirits.  The faithful dead go to Paradise, a resting place in Hades).

Remember that I Peter 1:10-12 teaches that the spirit of Christ was in the prophets and Noah was one of those prophets.  So, this text (I Peter 3:18-20) is referring to the preaching of Christ by Noah’s mouth of which the passage speaks clearly.  The unbelieving (the ones who disobeyed Noah’s preaching) are the people who are presently imprisoned in “Tartarus” (Hades) awaiting final judgment.

• The Erroneous Doctrine Concerning Baptism

Before I start to discuss this subject, let me briefly make a few observations about the seven sacraments of the RCC since this is one of the seven.

The RCC declared seven sacraments or avenues through which grace was dispensed to individuals. They believe that these traditions came directly from God and that God revealed Himself to humankind through the church’s collection of Sacred Tradition.  Before the Reformation in the Middle Ages, most Roman Catholics were far more familiar with Sacred Tradition than they were with the Bible, especially since the Bible was available in Europe only in Latin and very few believers except the priests and scholars had access to the Bible.  This is the very “heart” of their religion.  Our Lord Jesus Christ did not institute them (although they teach that He did) since the Bible never mentions such “sacraments” in the Bible.

They are mere doctrines of men.  In Matthew 15:3-6 Jesus said that the Pharisees and Scribes transgressed the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition.  In Matthew 15:9 we read, 

“BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS OF MEN.’”  

Again, in Colossians 2:22, the apostle Paul condemned the “commandments and teachings of men.”

Consider the RCC’s seven sacraments;

1. Baptism (soon after birth).
2. Confirmation (of young children).
3. Communion (the weekly observance).
4. Marriage (when performed in the church with the couple promising to rear their children as Catholics).
5. Penance (upon confession of sin to a priest who assigns works often the repetition of ritual prayers).
6. Holy orders (the vow taken by priests, monks, and nuns), and
7. Rites or Extreme Unction (administered to a dying person).

Among some of their other traditions, we find:  Offering prayers to the saints, counting prayers on the rosary, the veneration (adoration) of their Virgin Mary, the veneration (worship, adoration) of relics, the Virgin Mary’s Immaculate Conception.

The RCC thus claimed the ability to impart grace to its members from birth to death.  Anyone who dared to step out of line with church practice and teaching back then faced the threat of being excommunicated or being declared ineligible to receive communion, the weekly dispensation of grace. I believe it is still the same way today.  A decree called the “papal interdicts” could even cut off the sacraments from an entire area until the king there repented of a sin.  This, of course, puts lots of pressure on any king to stay in line with the pope.  The system of sacraments threatened to make Christian practice a mechanical ritual because the church insisted that, grace was administered when the sacraments were observed, regardless of the lifestyle or dedication of either the priest or the supplicant.

The RCC has practiced “infant baptism” for centuries.  This is not found in the New Testament, and their origins and practice are unclear.  It became a way for the RCC to claim for its own the children who were thus sprinkled, pressuring parents to rear their children as Catholics.

They baptize babies by sprinkling water on them.  The Greek word for “baptism” literally means immersion in water.  The Greek word for immersion is used for baptism throughout the Bible.  The first recorded case of sprinkling was in 257 AD.  It was offered to someone who was sick in bed.  It wasn’t until 1311 AD that the RCC Council of Ravenna, declared that sprinkling was an acceptable substitute for immersion.

Catholics also teach that infants inherit their parents’ sin at conception, thus being condemned and totally wicked.  This is the doctrine of inherited sin.  It is nowhere in the Bible.  The answer is found in Ezekiel 18:20.

They apparently ignore what the Word of God teaches about baptism.  One must believe (Mark 16:16; repent (Acts 2:38); confess (Acts 8:37) are the prerequisites of Scriptural baptism.

Matthew 28:19 says, “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them… “  Jesus did not say, “baptize them when they are infants, and teach them when they grow up.”  Christ put teaching before baptism.

In Mark 16:16, Jesus said, “He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.”  Jesus did not say, “Baptize them in infancy and let them believe when they grow up.”  Our Lord and Savior puts belief before baptism.

Peter said, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”  (Acts 2:38).  Peter did not say, “Baptize them in infancy and let them repent when they become old enough.”  He put repentance before baptism.

When the eunuch asked in Acts 8:36-37, “What prevents me from being baptized?” Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.” And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”  Every positive law implies a negative one.  Hence, a baby cannot be baptized. Why?  Because in baptism we obey from the heart that form of doctrine (death, burial and resurrection of Christ) and then we are made free from the bondage of sin (Romans 6:17-18).  It is impossible for a baby to obey from his heart as it is also impossible for him to be baptized.   An infant cannot become free from sins, past, present or future, even if he had any sins.  Parents can take a baby to be baptized, but it is just a wet baby.  He is not a baptized baby.

The RCC tries to annul these prerequisites of baptism saying that such are the conditions of adult baptism and that such do not apply to infants.  But the truth of the matter is that these prerequisites do apply to all individuals.  Hence, if infants cannot qualify, then they cannot be baptized.  When the Catholic Church suggests that another class of people (babies) can be baptized without meeting the above-stated conditions, it puts them in a great dilemma of teaching and practicing two baptisms when the Bible explicitly says there is but one baptism (Eph. 4:5) and not two.  Infant baptism and adult baptism are not one baptism.  They are two baptisms.  They teach a “believer’s baptism” and an “unbeliever's baptism.”

When an infant comes to baptism with nothing but the flesh without any faith, repentance or confession, he is really not obeying the command to be baptized.  He cannot give his assent or dissent.

Those who practice a baptism without faith are under the obligation to prove that there are two baptisms:  One that requires faith and another one that requires flesh only.  My question is: 

1. If there is an “infant baptism,” why is it that the Bible only mentions “one baptism?”  
2. If there is such a thing as an “infant baptism,” why is it that there is no account of it in the Scriptures?  

While the Bible gives no instruction at all regarding infant baptism, the RCC is exacting, wordy and voluminous in her instructions on this institution.  The RCC theology is monstrously different from the Bible!

The RCC again distorts Acts 16:14-15.  They assume that the baptism of the house of Lydia included the baptism of infants.  They assume that Lydia was a married woman.  The Bible does not say that. Lydia’s “household” could mean that she had a house of maids, servants, and helpers without being married.  It is assumed she was married and had infant children.  It is a speculative argument!

They use the same sort of speculation in I Cor. 1:16 in speaking of Stephanus and his household. There are no infants mentioned as being in the household.  Again, they assume the thing to be proved. Paul declared that the members of this house were the “first fruits of Achaia,” and that they “set themselves to minister unto the saints.” (I Cor. 16:15).  Infants could not have ministered to the needs of the saints.  Period!

The third twisted text is found in Acts 16:25-34 of the jailer and his household.  Again, the speculation is that there were infants in this family.  The Bible teaches that there were no infants under consideration in this family.  Let me prove it:

After the jailer was baptized, he “rejoiced, believing in God with all his house.”  Who was baptized?  Who believed?  “He and his house.”  ALL!

Take notice,

1. All the jailer’s house believed in God.
2. Infants cannot believe in God.
3. Therefore, there were no infants in the jailer's house that are under consideration.

The Bible affirms that there is only one baptism (Eph. 4:5), forbidding two.  The fact that Jesus commanded to baptize believers (Mark 16:16) prohibits the baptizing of infants since they are not believers.  God commanded Noah to build the ark with gopher wood.  That prohibited steel or anything else.  Likewise, when Jesus explicitly commanded to baptize believers that prohibited the baptizing of infants.  Regarding communion, Jesus commanded that we take bread and the fruit of the vine.  This prohibits taking milk or something else at the Lord’s Supper.  Therefore, there is no command in the Word of God from beginning to end for infant baptism!  They are demonic and man-made doctrines.

• The Worship of Mary, the Goddess of Heaven

As someone who was raised as a devout Catholic and who also went to Catholic school for many years, this was a big one for me.  I was for many years indoctrinated by nuns about the adoration of Mary.  I was taught that Mary was “the mediatrix of our salvation, the ladder of paradise, the gate of heaven, the most true Mediatrix between God and man.”

For Catholics, Mary is Christ, the mediator here on earth.  This is what the pope teaches.  Catholics are more engaged in praising Mary than our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.  They actually (I was taught) pray to her to have their prayers answered.  They use what they call “rosary beads” to praise Mary more than God Himself.  Notice that of the 59 beads of the Rosary, 53 beads are “Hail Marys, ” and only 6 beads are to “Our Father.”  This is outrageous to me!  This is where most Catholics really have a problem.  No one can dare to belittle Mary.  It is when a Catholic is able to see the Truth of this demonic teaching, that he is able to set himself free from the RCC doctrine.  This is where many Catholics stumble!

The Rosary most often ends with a “Hail, Holy Queen” prayer to Mary, not God, our Father in heaven.  They claim that Mary was a perpetual virgin and never had any children.

Catholic officials (clergy) argue that Mary was chosen from among all creatures to bring the Redeemer into the world, entitling her to high praise as our mediatrix.  This is a big false teaching among the clergy.  Of course, Mary was a good woman, but she was a human being, not a divine being.  She is entitled to be praised as a good woman but not entitled to be hailed as “the Mediatrix of our salvation.”  How do I know that?  Because the Word of God gives that high office only to Christ our Lord (I Tim. 2:5).  Are we going to accept the Word of God or the precepts of man?  When they honor her as the mediatrix of our salvation, they unwittingly dishonor her and especially Christ because it is blasphemy to honor a human as only God is worthy of being honored.

They try to get around I Tim. 2:5 by saying that Jesus is “the one and only mediator of our redemption,” leaving it to imply that there are other mediators.  But none of them died for us!  So why is it that they cannot cite other texts to prove their argument?  It is just another example of them teaching a doctrine without any Scriptural proof.  

1. The text in I Tim. 2:5, “… one God and one mediator,”  nothing else!  There are no other mediators between God and man, but our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us.  Only One could qualify.  The word “mediator” literally means one who stands equidistant from two sides.  
2. Jesus lived with God in heaven before He came in the flesh, born of a woman (Matt. 9:6).  
3. He knew God, the Father.  
4. He understood His love for man and His attitude toward sin.  
5. He, living among men, was tempted as a man (Heb. 4:14-15).  
6. He knew man, his temptations, and his weaknesses.  
7. This automatically qualified Him to go back to heaven and to advocate on our behalf, representing us as man’s intercessor before the mighty throne of God (Heb. 7:25).  
8. Only Jesus could or can qualify for this high office. 
9. Only One Mediator is needed, and it is not Mary.  
10. Praying to Mary or the departed “saints” removes the One Mediator from that high office.  He alone can hold such a high office, of making intercession for us to God, the Father.  

This theology is more serious and dangerous than I could have imagined.

Man is not to pray to man but for man.  The RCC doctrine violates God’s Laws when they teach that man can pray to man.  We are taught and commanded to pray only to God (Matt. 6:9) through Christ (John 14:13-14;16:23) and that excludes everyone else, including Mary.

They also twist Luke 1:41-43 which tells of Elizabeth’s words to Mary, a very natural conversation, but there is not a word about Mary being “the Mediatrix of our salvation.”  Luke 1:48 says, “from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.”  The proof text disproves their theory rather than proving it.  In this song of praise, Mary is stating the character by which she wishes to be known, namely, the blessed or happy one.  She never said that all generations would call her the Mediatrix of their salvation.  She did not want that.  For she wanted to be known as the blessed one.  If the statement, “All generations shall call me blessed,” should be interpreted to imply that she is our mediatrix, then Leah is also our mediatrix for she said, “For women shall came me blessed.” (Gen. 30:13).  Take note that this quotation was taken from the Catholic Bible.

Roman Catholic theology asserts: 

 “And to increase our confidence, St. Anselm adds, that when we have recourse to this divine mother, we may not only be sure of her protection, but that sometimes we shall be sooner heard and be saved by invoking her holy name than that of Jesus our Savior.  And he gives the reason;  Because it belongs to Christ as our judge to punish, but to Mary as our advocate to pity.  By this he would give us to understand that we sooner find salvation by recurring to the mother than the Son.”  (The Glories of Mary, St. Alfonzo Liguori, p. 149).  

This boils down to this:  Christ is too hard, too difficult and too demanding (exacting).  Mary can manage things better than Christ since she is more qualified to act on our behalf.  So, Roman Catholics should take all their problems to Mary, who will either act independently of God or throw a woman’s influence upon Him until she has her way in everything.  What a shame for the RCC to make such a harsh, untruthful, disgusting statement about our Savior!  I cannot fathom that!  It is too much for me!

Alas, I ask the RCC,  how dare you treat our Savior this way?  Such disgusting and untruthful statement makes it easier to see why their prayers are filled with “Hail Mary,” and why their prayers addressed to Mary are more emphasized than the prayers to God.  

“The entire Rosary consists of one hundred and fifty Hail Marys…  The principal prayer of the Rosary is Hail Mary, repeated one hundred and fifty times.”

Take note that the Bible in contrast to this unscriptural doctrine says:  

1. "God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through Him [not Mary] might be saved."  (John 3:17).
2. “According to his mercy he [not Mary] saved us.”  (Titus 3:5).  
3. “The same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon Him [not Mary].” (Romans 10:12).  
4. “If ye shall ask anything in my name [not Mary’s name] I will do it.”  (John 14:14).  
5. “I [not Mary] am the way, the truth and the life:  no man cometh unto the Father, but by me [not by Mary]  (John 14:6).
6. “And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father,  Jesus Christ the righteous [not Mary].  (I John 2:1).  
7. “I write unto you, little children, because your sins are forgiven for His name’s sake [not for Mary’s name’s sake].”  (I John 2:12).  
8. “I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ [not Mary].”  (Eph. 3:14).  “Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father [not Mary] in my name [not Mary’s name] he will give it you.”  (John 16:23).

Catholic clerics assert that the Lord considers the glory of Mary as His own and exults in it!  They support this argument with Isa. 48:11 where He said, “And My glory I will not give to another.”  No man can make this text read that the LORD considers the glory of Mary as His own.  So it is RCC theology versus the Bible.  Another text from their own Bible, “I will not give my glory to another, nor my praise to graven things.”  (Isa. 42:8).  They implicitly are stealing the glory of Christ and giving it to Mary.  This is wrong!  Both Peter and Paul speaking of Christ said, “To whom be glory for ever and ever.”  (Galatians 1:5; II Tim. 4:18; Heb. 13:21; I Peter 5:11).  No inspired writer ever said, “To Mary be glory for ever and ever.”  The apostles were guided into all truth (John 16:13).  They were not guided by the doctrine of glorifying Mary.  Hence, this doctrine is not part of the Truths of God.

What they need to acknowledge is that Mary shares in Christ’s glory and not our Lord in her glory, exulting it.  This is blasphemy!

The RCC wishes to glorify Mary since she was the fleshly mother of Jesus. As I mentioned earlier, this outrageous error grows out of the mistake of placing too much emphasis on the physical relationship of Jesus.  If Jesus had wanted us to worship Mary as they do, He then missed a marvelous opportunity of glory.  Instead, Jesus taught that the greatest honor comes from obeying the Word of God.  His emphasis is mainly placed spiritually rather than physically.

They boldly assert that Mary is the “Mother of God.”  The Bible never calls Mary the “Mother of God.”  If she were to be the “Mother of God,” then she would be divine.  Jesus is divine since He is the Son of God.

1. Christ “was made flesh and dwelt among us.”  (John 1:14).
2. And in the process of this incarnation, Mary became the human mother of Jesus, not the mother of His divinity, not the “Mother of God.”  
3. God is the Creator of Mary. 
4. She is a creature, not a self-existing being like God.  
5. It is pure idolatry to worship and serve a creature rather than our Creator.  

If Rome had read the Bible, they would have encountered this verse in the Bible, in the letter to the Romans.  This letter was given to Rome before she invented the glorification of Mary, of saints and of angels.  They must heed the warning:

“Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshiped and served the creature more than the Creator.”  (Romans 1:25).

Oh!  Roman Catholics how can you kneel before an image such as Mary, praying to her saying, “Hail Mary,” “Hail Mary,” “Hail Mary,’ in the light of these Scriptures!!  How do you dare to make a creature such as Mary, the goddess of your religion when you know well our Only Creator is to be our Only God in heaven?

• The Doctrine of Celibacy

The RCC asserts that priests do not marry because they voluntarily follow the advice given in Scriptures:  

“But I want you to be free from concern. One who is unmarried is concerned about the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord; 33 but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how he may please his wife.”  (I Cor. 7:32-33; Matt. 19:20).

Celibacy for the priesthood is not a deliberate practice, but an ecclesiastical ruling.  If it were a voluntary matter, then there would be no issue here.  Those who wished could marry, and those who wished could refuse.  The Word of God teaches that single life is acceptable to God and so is married life.

The vast number of canons on celibacy passed by the RCC shows that it is not voluntary, but obligatory.  If it had been voluntary, it would not have been necessary for Gregory VII, in a council held in Rome in 1074 to decree that every layman who received communion from the hands of a married priest should be excommunicated, (Cyclopedia, McClinton, and Strong, Vol. IV., p. 175). This decree testifies that they enforced celibacy.  Human nature has not changed.

They added in the New Catholic Edition of the Bible (in their notes, under I Tim. 3:2), “priestly celibacy as a law is of the later ecclesiastical institution.”  They defend celibacy by saying that the church officials had the authority to add it.  They cannot support their practice with the Scriptures. Therefore, forced celibacy is not part of the Truth, and it is an error.  It is not a Scriptural doctrine nor a good work.

“All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.”  (2 Tim. 3:16-17)

Notice that the apostle Peter was married and so was Phillip the evangelist (Matt. 8:14; Mark 1:30; Luke 4:38; Acts 21:8-9).

• Auricular Confession

This is the practice of confessing to a “Priest” and being interrogated by the “Priest” concerning one’s sins. The members confess their sins into the ear of the “Priest,” but he does not confess his sins unto them.  The priests go to confession too but to another priest.  The Bible never said to “confess your sins to the priest.”  Instead, it says, “confess your sins one to another.’'  (James 5:16).  The Word of God says nothing about confessing sins to the priest, a confessor or “I absolve you.”  

The RCC seeks to prove that their members should confess their sins in private to the priest.  Again, they twist “confess your sins one to another…”  It is evident that James is not teaching the RCC doctrine of confession.  If so, he would not have used the expression “Confess, therefore, your sins one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed.”  (James 5:16); individuals to individuals.

They also to refer to John 20:21-23 to prove that the Lord gave to a special class of priests, the power to forgive sins.  By the way, this is a favorite proof text.  This Scripture tells us that Jesus gave the apostles power and sent them out to exercise it.  

1. If that power is the same as the RCC claims for their clergy to forgive sins, why is there no record of such authority in the Bible?  
2. Where did any of the apostles ever receive in secret any sinner, to hear his confession and absolve him?  
3. Where in the Bible do we find any apostle called a “confessor?”  
4. Where did any of the apostles ever say, “I absolve you”?  Let Scripture interpret Scripture!

Since the apostles did not practice “Auricular Confession,” then John cannot be writing about it.  It is out! Period!  What did they really do as apostles?

1. Our Lord promised the apostles, that they were to make known to men the divine Law of salvation after they had received the Holy Spirit Who was to guide them to all Truth. 
2. Obedience to this Law was to bring men forgiveness from God in heaven.  
3. The Holy Spirit spoke the Law through the apostles (Lk. 24:46-49; Acts 2:1-5; Isaiah 2:2-4). 
4. On the day of Pentecost, they presented the terms of pardon, and as a result, three thousand souls were forgiven of their sins (Acts 2:38-41).  
5. This is the sense in which the apostles forgave sins.  
6. They did this by preaching the terms of pardon upon which God was to be able to forgive sins.
7. Today, the same conditions of forgiveness apply to all those who obey.  
8. The apostles revealed how men may be forgiven, but did not practice “Auricular Confession.” 
9. Peter himself commanded Simon the Sorcerer to repent and pray to God that he might be forgiven (Acts 8:22). 
10. He did not demand that Simon confess to his “confessor priest.” 

It is clear that the apostles did not have the power to remit sins as the RCC claims.  They did not claim or exercise such power.  If so, I demand a Scripture.

The Roman Church uses the Jewish priesthood model of the Old Testament to support their Catholic priesthood.  The priesthood they speak of is in the present and not the past, the OT.  Even though the old priesthood and the Law had changed (Heb. 7:12), some Judaizers who accepted Christianity still kept some of the Law.  They had not accepted Christianity since they were still in Judaism.  

1. The Only High Priest that we have today is our Lord Jesus Christ (Heb. 4:14).  
2. Likewise, every Christian is a priest (I Peter 2:5) and does not need an intercessor other than Christ.  
3. Every Christian can “come boldly unto the throne of grace.”  (Heb. 4:16). 
4. Christ, our high priest, “ever liveth to make intercession” for us (Heb. 7:25).

So the argument of the Jewish priesthood disproves rather than approves their doctrine.  They err when they say “We are the successors of Christ, the high priest.”  NO!  It is not true, Christ our high priest, “ever liveth to make intercession.”  He is not dead and has not resigned His office. 

1. Therefore, He cannot have a successor.  Christ is “a priest forever.”  
2. Therefore, there cannot be a succession of priests or vicars.  Those who pretend to be vicars of Christ are imposters!!  
3. Therefore, Christ is the only High Priest, and no man can pretend to have this office without blaspheming the Son of God who by divine right holds the office legitimately.

“Auricular Confession” has been practiced for many years, but its history ceases before one gets back to the inspired apostles.  It is not mentioned in the Scriptures.  It did not originate in the first century with Christ and the apostles.  Therefore, it has no part at all in Christ’s doctrine.

Did you know that before 1215, the confessional was an optional thing in the church of Rome?  No canon compelled it.  It is also an absolute truth that the form of absolution, “I absolve you,” was not known as a practice of Christians till the thirteen century.  Thomas Aquinas in 1250 wrote in defense of the form, “I absolve you.”  There is no authority in Scriptures for “Auricular Confession.”  Period!

• The Doctrine of “Inherited Sin.”

Satan has always made things chaotic for the Lord’s church.  He used the famous “St. Augustine,” the son of a Christian mother and pagan father.  He lived an immoral life searching for the most suitable path through several philosophies.  After his mother died, he converted in 387 AD.  He became a monk and eventually the bishop of Hippo in northern Africa.  He was impressed with the moral depravity of man, which he believed to be inborn (influenced by his experiences and philosophy).  He also believed that the elect were predestined by God to obtain salvation.  He wrote a book named “Confessions,” where he retells his life story.  He is one of the most influential writers and teachers of the vast world of Catholicism/Protestantism (evangelical).  He taught that because of Adam’s sin everyone is guilty of “original sin.” That man is born with a corrupted nature, sinful, totally depraved and unable to do good or righteousness and unable to believe.

The Bible speaks of many kinds of sin:  in deed, in word, by thought, by refusing to do God’s will and much more.  But original sin?  What verse in the Bible speaks of original sin?  If there is one, I would like to know!

A.   In Genesis 3:16-19 we see the consequences of Adam and Eve’s sin without any reference to an “original sin” that was to be inherited by Adam’s descendants.  Such a fallacious concept contradicts all that the Bible teaches on the subject of sin!

Here are the major tenets of this doctrine:

1. That when Adam sinned, his descendants also sinned.  This is what is called “original sin.” 

According to this false doctrine, everyone (all mankind) is born sinful.  And that he sins because he is a sinner.  And it is human to sin.  The practical consequence of this teaching is that sins are reduced, and the guilt for personal sin is transferred to our ancestors.  Man sins because that is his nature; therefore he must do it.  Satan wants man to say willfully, “We sin all the time and cannot help it.”

My friends and brethren, this is nothing but one of Satan’s false doctrines (1 Tim. 4:1) to deceive all men about sin.  Satan uses his ministers (2 Corinthians 11:15) that teach that man’s sins are so great and so bad that the only explanation for it is that they are born depraved (corrupted).  They speak of the intensity, passion and strong inclination in doing evil, concluding that man is born corrupted, devoid of divine life, thus becoming God’s enemy.

They site many Bible texts that speak of the enormity of sin:  Genesis 6:5; Romans 3:10-18, Psalm 51:5; Job 14:14; Exodus 20:5; John 3:5; Ephesians 2:3; Romans 5:12 and following.  They conclude that since man is so corrupted (depraved), he had to be born with a sinful nature.  

Furthermore, they say that the corrupted man can never change:  They use the following texts to support their argument:  Job 14:14; Jeremiah 13:23.

Their favorite verse is Psalm 51:5:

"Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity; And in sin did my mother conceive me."

Another Scripture they twist is Romans 5:12-18: 

"Therefore, as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin; and so death passed unto all men, for that all sinned: for until the law sin was in the world; but sin is not imputed when there is no law.   Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the likeness of Adam's transgression, who is a figure of him that was to come.   But not as the trespass, so also is the free gift. For if by the trespass of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God, and the gift by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, abound unto the many.  And not as through one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment came of one unto condemnation, but the free gift came of many trespasses unto justification.   For if, by the trespass of the one, death reigned through the one; much more shall they that receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one, even Jesus Christ.   So then as through one trespass the judgment came unto all men to condemnation; even so through one act of righteousness the free gift came unto all men to justification of life."

The following is a refutation of their false doctrine as held by both Catholics and Protestants:

1. Genesis 3:16-19, 24:  Moses portrayed the consequences of Adam and Eve’s sin without making even the slightest reference to inherited guilt or depravity.
2. Psalm 139:13:  “For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.”
3. Zechariah 12:1:  God, “forms the spirit of man within him.”
4. Hebrews 12:9:  God is the “Father of spirits.”
5. Acts 17:29:  We are “children of God.”

My question:  Is the baby that is formed in the womb, the spirit, and body of man, corrupted by God?  Even to ask such a question is an accusation and blasphemy of our God who forms the spirit of man within him!

Undoubtedly, the “god” of Catholicism (and other religions that teach this false doctrine) is not the God of love we find in the Bible.  (I John 4:16).  “God is love.”  What kind of love would pervert or corrupt the spirit of a baby before he is born?

B.  Genesis 6:5 speaks of the perversity, wickedness, of man.  Notice that it does not say that man is born that way.  Verse 12 states, “God looked on the earth, and behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way upon the earth.”

C.   Psalm 51:5:  Does not say, “I was brought forth with iniquity inside me.”  They do not acknowledge that this verse implies that David was brought forth and was born in a world of wickedness (lawlessness).  It is figurative language (hyperbole, overstatement) to emphasize the intensity of his sins… By saying “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me,” he is speaking of the prevalence of sin in the world.  

Compare this text with Acts 2:8, “each in our own language in which we were born?” Are we born speaking?  No, but we are born into a world that speaks a certain language.  

Also note Psalm 58:3, “The wicked are estranged from the womb; These who speak lies go astray from birth.”  Is this verse speaking in a literal or figurative sense?  Job 31:17-18 helps us with the answer:  

Job insisted that he helped the orphan by saying, “Or have eaten my morsel myself alone, and the fatherless hath not eaten thereof; (For from my youth he was brought up with me, as with a father, and I have guided her from my mother's womb).”  

Clearly, the phrase, “from my mother's womb,” is the same as “from my youth.”  (Let us allow the Bible to speak and explain itself!)

From birth:  

• Isaiah 48:8:  “And you have been called a rebel from birth.”  
• Psalm 22:10:  “You have been my God from my mother’s womb.”
• Psalm 71:6:  “By You I have been sustained from my birth; You are He who took me from my mother’s womb.”  

This is poetic language, figurative to give emphasis.

In Psalm 51, David speaks of:

•  “my iniquities,” 
• “my transgressions,”
• “my sin,” 
• “Against You, You only, I have sinned,”
• “done what is evil in Your sight,” (“done” not “inherited").  

All these expressions point out free will and that David himself was responsible and guilty…

SIN IS NOT INHERITED, RATHER IT IS COMMITTED:  I John 3:4: “Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.”

A. James 4:17:  “To him therefore that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.”  One sins when he disobeys the will of God.

B. Ezekiel 18:20:  “The soul that sinneth, it shall die: the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.”   

In this chapter, we learn that the consequences of the sins of the parents are visited upon the children, but not the guilt of sins.  God calls us to bear the consequences of the sins of others without bearing the guilt of those sins.  No Scripture teaches that Adam’s descendants will inherit the guilt of those sins.  (2 Cor. 5:10).  It is true that we bear the consequences of the sins of Adam and Eve’s sin (Gen. 3:3; 17-19; Romans 5:17).  However, we will not be accountable for some supposed inherited sin inherited from our parents or Adam.  That would be very unfair.  Why?  Because,

1. “ For we must all be made manifest before the judgment-seat of Christ; that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he hath done, whether it be good or bad.”  (Romans 2:6).
2. Not according to what Adam or our parents have committed or done. “who will render to every man according to his works.”  (Romans 2:6)
3. “So then each one of us shall give account of himself to God.”  (Romans 14:12).  Where is the text that says that we will give account for the inherited sin of Adam or our parents?  
4. “Therefore, as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin; and so death passed unto all men, for that all sinned.”  (Romans 5:12).  Notice that the apostle Paul does not place a “period” here!  The phrase does not end here.  Is there something else!  “for that all sinned.”  I don’t see why those who teach “original sin” don’t read and take note of this last phrase.  Why?  Because it is not convenient for them.  Because this phrase shows and points out the responsibility and accountability of man for his own sin.  “for all have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God.”  (Romans 3:23).

The role of Adam is clearly stated here:  

1. Because of him, “sin entered into the world.”  
2. Adam introduced sin into the world, then death (spiritual death) passed unto all men for all had sinned.  
3. Then the apostle Paul goes on to explain the subject in Romans 5:17-18, “For if, by the trespass of the one, death reigned through the one; much more shall they that receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one, even Jesus Christ. 18 So then as through one trespass the judgment came unto all men to condemnation; even so through one act of righteousness the free gift came unto all men to justification of life.”
4. The truth is that Adam introduced sin into the world and all of his descendants have imitated him voluntarily (Romans 3:23; 5:12).
5. And have fallen short of the glory of God.  That means they fall into condemnation.  
6. Nobody is born a sinner.  
7. No one has been or is condemned because of Adam’s sin.  
8. No one is or has been convicted or condemned unconditionally.  
9. No one is born with a sinful nature.  
10. Such doctrines are merely Satan’s doctrines!

The doctrine of inherited sin is responsible for much of our lawlessness today.  Both Catholicism and Protestantism mistakenly say that man came to this condition unconditionally.  That is not what Paul is saying!

In Philippians 2:8, Paul speaks of Christ’s work that undoes the consequences of sin:  

Through one act of righteousness (He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross, there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men, Philippians 2:8) there resulted justification of life to all men.  If we were to reverse this to make it fit the twisted “reasoning” of Catholicism and Protestantism (unconditional original sin), we would simply say that one’s righteousness resulted in unconditional universal salvation.   The advocates of the “original sin” doctrine and “born with a sinful nature” simply are not honest not to teach unconditional universal salvation.  This doctrine is pure folly and madness.

• The Doctrine of  “Consubstantiation” or “Transubstantiation” (The Eucharist)

The practice of the Lord’s Supper changed from a remembrance of Christ’s death and resurrection to a more typical event in which Christ supposedly is sacrificed all over again, and the bread and grape juice of the vine actually became the body and blood of Jesus.  Communion came to be seen as a sacrament, a means or way by which God’s grace was dispensed.  Someone who was excommunicated could not partake of communion (therefore not receive grace) until he repented and got back in line.  These changes were pure control and manipulation over church members (laity).

The Catholic Church teaches that the priest has absolute power to change the bread and wine into the very body, blood, soul and deity of Christ.  This is amazing!

When Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper He commanded an observance the night before His death as the apostle Paul recorded it in I Corinthians 11:23-26:

“For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; 24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 25 In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes.”

Notice that Jesus took bread and said of it, “This is my body.”  When Jesus made that statement, He was living in the flesh of His body, His earthly body.  Jesus used the present tense of the verb declaring when He made this statement.  If the bread became His literal body, then He had two literal bodies at the same time.  Jesus also said, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood."  Notice that the cup did not become His literal blood, for His blood was still flowing in His veins.  So why add the word “literal” or “actual" to qualify it if it does not mean anything but the “literal” and “actual” body and blood?  Notice what Jesus commanded, “This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me [Christ].”  

So, can the bread be at the same time the memorial and the thing memorialized?  Paul tells us that the Lord’s Supper is a memorial of the death and resurrection of Christ until He shall come (I Cor. 11:26).  

• Don’t you think that the cup can literally mean the new covenant?  So why argue that the cup is the actual blood of Jesus and not the actual new covenant? Both are found in this same passage.
• Remember that Jesus also said, “I am the vine, you are the branches.”  (John 5:5).  
• Don’t you think that we can deduct from this text that Jesus was literally the vine and His disciples were the branches literally?

Also, they justify their position using John 6:53-55 that says, 

“So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in your-selves…  For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink.”  

Notice that Jesus was not talking about the Lord’s Supper at all.  That was said before He instituted the Lord’s Supper.  If you keep reading the whole chapter you will find Jesus’ explanation, “It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life.”  (verse 63).  Let the very words of Jesus refute the Catholic teaching,

“And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, saying,“Drink from it, all of you.”  (Matthew 26:27). 

Also,

“And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, and they all drank from it.”  (Mark 14:23).

• The Doctrine of  "Extreme Unction."

Extreme unction is one of the sacraments practiced by the Catholic Church.  She describes it thus, 

“Extreme unction is a sacrament in which by the anointing with holy oil and by the prayers of the priests, the sick receive the grace of God for the good of their souls, and often also their bodies… It [extreme unction] increases sanctifying grace; it remits venial sins, and those mortal sins which a sick person repents of; it strengthens the soul in its sufferings and temptations; it often relieves the pains of sick persons and sometimes restores him to health… We should receive extreme unction when we are in danger of death from sickness.”

The above statement is presumptuous.  The Bible does not mention such a practice.  The Scriptures cited are Mark. 6:13; James. 5:14-15, though these passages have nothing to do with preparation for death. The doctrine of  "extreme unction" was defined at the Council of Trent.

James 5:14-15 says that this was done by New Testament elders (not priests) to heal the sick (not the dying) during the time in the New Testament church when some who were miraculously endowed could indeed bring about healings. 

• The Veneration of Images and Relics

In 787 AD, The Second Council of Nicaea introduced this doctrine.  In 1545 AD, the Council of Trent pronounced a decree that said, “images were to be retained and due honor and veneration to be given them as presenting those whose likenesses those images bear.”  Thomas Aquinas stated, “The same reverence is to be paid to the image of Christ, as to Christ Himself.”

Their clergy cites Ex. 20:4, 5; Deut. 4:15-16 to say that these texts forbid “the making of images to be adored,” and that these warnings were given to prohibit idol worship.  Certainly, this commandment had to do with the bowing down to and serving images (Ex. 20:4-5) and adoring them.  

They also cite Numbers 21:8-9 of the brazen serpent but fail to mention II Kings 18:4 where Hezekiah destroyed it because this relic had become an object of adoration and worship.

The bronze statue of Peter in the Vatican is an excellent example of veneration and worship.  Its continual press of human worship has disfigured it because of those who bow and kiss it though they deny it.  So, if they deny that those worshipers were not bowing down and adoring it, what were the doing?

Yes, the RCC cannot claim to be guiltless concerning the adoration and veneration of images and relics.  All the facts are against them and shame them.  They are guilty of idolatry.  Why?  Well, let me prove it.  

1. When the Israelites made a golden calf, they said, “This is your god, O Israel, who brought you up from the land of Egypt!’” (Ex. 32:8).  
2. They knew the golden calf did not bring them out of Egypt since verse 5 says that they made a “feast to the LORD.”  (Ex. 32:5).  
3. It was only a symbol of deity but the apostle Paul calls the creation of such a symbol idolatry (I Cor. 9:7).  

So, we can clearly see that the Word of God condemns any image that symbolizes deity.  It is idolatry!

The problem that man has is that he thinks it 's hard to draw nearer to any being if he cannot see it.  Therefore, he creates some sort of symbol to represent such being.  However, our faith as Christians is not of sight and image making but of faith, (II Cor. 5:7).  This violates our faith.  It violates the second commandment, Exodus 20:4-5.

The New Testament teaches that Christians are not to revere, worship or venerate idols, etc.  (I John 5:21; Acts 17:29).  So why is it that that the Roman Catholic officials have removed this commandment of God from their Catechism allowing multitudes to be deceived into thinking that God did not give it?

• Instrumental Music

As in many cases, the church adopted pagan rituals giving them a Christian meaning.  Music in the church was apparently the reciting of psalms or the singing of compositions perhaps in the form of a chant.  Melodies were later developed by the 4th century.  Instruments were not introduced in the assemblies until the middle Ages.

The RCC practices and teaches the use of mechanical instruments of music in their worship.  Anyone who uses mechanical instruments of music in his worship disregards the authority given by God. The Law of Christ teaches us to make melody in our hearts (Ephesians 5:19) with the fruit of our lips (Hebrews 13:15).  This melody of our lips, our singing, is to be with the spirit and the understanding (I Cor. 14:15).  Can a mechanical instrument qualify?  No, since there is no authority for such use.  

CONCLUSION

It is undeniable that the church described in the book of Acts and its believers were devoted to the apostle's teaching.  God had given the apostles authority and power to perform many signs and wonders (Acts 2:42-43).  Each congregation of believers was established in a city by the preaching of the gospel.  Those who became Christians met regularly to encourage one another and to listen to the teachings of the apostles or evangelists such as Timothy or Titus.  Elders were appointed as pastors (overseers, bishops, elders) to watch over the local flock (Acts 14:23, 20:17; Titus 1:5).  Although Christians met several times during the week, on the first day of the week (Sunday), they came together to remember the death and resurrection of our Lord and Savior (the breaking of the bread, i.e., to observe the Lord’s Supper) and share fellowship.  

The early church (Christians) was aware of the powerful influence on those of the world.  Jesus has always wanted His followers to live in such a way as to glorify His Father in heaven (Matthew 5:16). He also said that the world (non-Christians) would be able to identify His followers by the way they lived (their works or fruits)and their love for one another, (John 13:35, 15:8).  

Moreover, Paul urged these Christians to live wisely among outsiders, redeeming the time, and doing what was right.  Their speech was to be seasoned with salt, i.e., filled with good and not evil (Colossians 4:5-6).  He also urged them to be ready to present a defense of their faith to anyone who asked them of their hope, but to do it in a gentle and loving way (I Peter 3:15).  All Christians must be aware of their influence, to live and speak in such a way that would draw others to their Savior, our Lord Jesus Christ.  

Faith in Jesus spread from Jerusalem and throughout the Roman Empire.  Those who were scattered abroad included many cultures (Jewish, Roman, Greek, Asian and African).  Apostles and evangelists were the primary teachers.  The first-century believers shared everything they had with anyone who had a need (Acts 2:44-45). 

The message of the glorious gospel of Jesus our Lord was intended to be proclaimed worldwide, and it still continues to change the world two thousand years later as no other force, idea, and philosophy has ever done.  (2 Cor. 5:19).

While the Roman Empire was declining, the Lord’s church was growing in numbers.  However, the church that was developing was far different from the simple faith that we read about in the New Testament.  As Rome became more Christian, the church became like a worldly empire.  The church went through many changes and practices as the Roman Empire weakened and fell.  

Paganism and mystery religions were still predominant in the Roman Empire centuries later after Christ and the apostles.  The cult of emperor worship was growing, becoming the official religion of the state.  The peculiar ways of Judaism were tolerated by the Roman government as well.

However, the NT church underwent many drastic changes over the four hundred years that followed the first century AD.  The church went from being an illegal cult to the official religion of the Roman Empire.  Sadly, the church went from being simple, rooted in God’s Word as described at the beginning of the church, to a more powerful and highly organized institution.  

As the church grew, it generated considerable criticism from skeptics and opponents who refused to grasp what it was about.  Many ridiculed the church.  Some would call the Way the third race, meaning neither pagan nor Jewish.  Some did express respect for the Christian’s moral code, character, and bravery in the face of persecution.  As some said, “The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church.”

By the end of the third century, many saw a need for universal religion to unify the empire.  Those who refused to accept the worship of the emperor were considered enemies of the state.  These were primarily Jews and Christians.  And in 303 AD, the emperor Diocletian ordered church buildings confiscated, church officials condemned and Christians were given the choice of repenting or being put to death.

Christianity was then changed by the actions of Emperor Constantine in the empire.  Even though he did not make it official, he indeed prohibited persecution.  This meant that some would become Christians because it was safe to have the emperor on their side and not because of a genuine conversion to Christ and His cause.  Unfortunately, Constantine began to influence the church practices and policy.  With the blessing of safety came the danger of compromise with the world.

All these developments in church practice caused leaders not to be concerned about following the perfect pattern established by the apostles under the Lordship of Christ.  Instead, they were driven to control the practices of the churches, introducing false teachings, precepts, doctrines and conforming the lives of Christians to a more easy pattern.  The church then began to develop a hierarchy of leadership copying in great measure the political divisions of the Roman Empire. The bishop of Roman claimed the authority to oversee the church just as the emperor managed the empire.  The bishop of the empire buttressed his position arguing that Peter was the first Pope, claiming apostolic succession to make decisions for the Roman Catholic Church.  By the fifth century, the bishop of Rome was called the Papa or Pope, the ultimate father figure.  

Without a doubt, the church, the one Jesus purchased with His blood, faced threats of false religions both from without and from within.  The philosophy of Gnosticism and skepticism grew in the second century influencing the view of Christ held by some people.  Likewise, other false doctrines were growing in their influence on the thinking of Christians.  Many Christians struggled with what it meant to be a Christian in a pagan world.  They confronted many questions.  How they answered these questions reflected how rooted their faith was in the Doctrine of Christ and how much they were willing to be different from the world of paganism (I John 2:17).

Evidently, some in the church failed to follow or obey God’s Word.  Lest we forget, the Bible must be our only standard in matters pertaining to God.  (Rev. 22:18-19; I Cor. 4:6).  Our goal must be that of “thus saith the Lord” for everything we do.  Sadly, some in the church did not follow this rule.  The church was obviously more influenced by the world than by the Word of God.  Instead of growing and imitating Christ.  The power of Tradition became a stumbling block violating the Word of God, keeping others from obeying the gospel of Christ.

Around 1200, The Roman Catholic Church was at the height of its power.  The pope influenced the world politically.  “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

One of the problems that the church faced after Christ and the apostles was worldliness since they were driven and motivated by the world.  One of Satan’s great deceptions is to influence Christians to think and act like the world as an acceptable way of living.  This affects the preachers, church leaders, young and old when their lives look no different from the lives of those in darkness. Likewise, the church is worldly when it pursues policies of power and the accumulation of riches.  It is worldly when Christians exalt the ways of the pagans without regard to how much this would impact their faith or the faith of others.

We Christians are called to keep ourselves unstained from the world (James 1:27).  We don’t have to leave the world to avoid becoming worldly (I Cor. 5:10).  We are to be changed in our heart by developing godly thinking and following God’s divine standards while we live in this world (Romans 12:1-2).

This has been an excellent and long study.  I have done it for God’s glory, for His Truth and because I care about those who are trapped in the Roman Catholic Church (and other religious error) as I was.  I want to see them free from the bondage of sin and error and experience true salvation and fellowship with Christ and the Father.  I want to apologize if I was overly blunt, but the Truth of God must not be compromised.  We must tell the Truth and nothing but the Truth.  

I pray that those who are in error like those in the Catholic system, will see the Truth and see the errors taught by their false teachers that are but doctrines of demons.  I have presented the Truth because of my love for their souls and my concern for the Truth.  (John 17:17).  

The Word of God is Truth, it is unchangeable, it is determined, certain and it is not contradictory. The Truth of God is always right. Therefore all men must eagerly desire it and thirst for it.  Jesus said, 

"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."  (John 8:32).

Let us desire the Truth like the Bereans who honestly and unbiasedly searched for the Truth, 

"Now these were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of the mind, examining the Scriptures daily, whether these things were so."  (Acts 17:11).

Now that you continued with me to the end, I hope this essay has been useful for you. There are several issues that I might not have examined, but it seems to me that these are the most important. May God bless you in your studies of God's Word.

May we always love the Truth and never compromise the Truth and tell it like it is.  May we allow God’s Word, Truth, to mold us to see the errors and false teachings while we distance ourselves from the evil doctrines of men.  May we always stand up boldly for the Truth and embrace it with all of our heart, soul, mind and strength.  May we always separate ourselves from the world, from the most popular road to take, and learn from His Word alone and conform to it.  May we always live holy lives for the Lord Who has promised us eternal life.  May we be the lights that this darkened world may ever see.  May we proclaim the glorious gospel of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ to the lost.

Luci

THE FALLEN CHURCH OF ROME - PART ONE

"But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron, men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth."

(I Timothy 4:1-3)

THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE BIBLE

The new pope of the Roman Catholic Church has made news lately with his visit to our halls of government. Conservative politicians find him liberal.  The greater issue, however, is his claim to be the Vicar of Christ.  The things that he stands for are directly condemned not only by Jesus but also by the prophecies of the apostles of Christ.  Allow me to share with you my analysis of the issues represented by the world-renowned Pope Francis.

I was raised as a devout Catholic and was mostly educated by nuns until 8th grade.  My father was a Catholic but not devout.  My Catholic mother was raised by nuns and in turn, raised us to be devout Catholics.  I went to confession before the priest, took communion, attended mass every Sunday and studied Catechism and many other things.  I also served as an altar girl.  Although my mother was a devout Catholic, she always encouraged her children to read and study the Bible only, never to worship idols and above all to love God alone and His Word.  She taught us to be faithful servants. She is the reason I began searching for the Truth (the whole truth and nothing but the truth) since she was searching for it as well.  By the grace of God, my mother and I found the Truth that set us free.  I had been blinded by all the deceptions and false teachings, but my eyes were opened.  For my faith in Christ today, I owe much to my mother by the grace of God.

Before my mother and I began our search for the Truth, there were many things that caused us to suspect the fallacy of the Catholic Church and begin our journey to seek the true church that Jesus our Lord purchased with His blood.  We left the Catholic Church because of their deception and hypocrisy but ultimately because their teachings contradicted the inspired Word of God. Since Catholics disregard the Word of God, that became the most obvious reason for us to leave this false doctrine.  

It is a sad fact that so many souls in the world are lost, blind and without the Truth to set them free from the bondage of sin and error. The Roman Catholic Church has not made it easier to many of these souls since she exercises tremendous force in advancing her carnal religious views not only in the political arena but also in the hearts of a devastated number of followers who are under her dominion.

In my study, I will consider:  The Definition of a Roman Catholic, the rise of the Roman Catholic Church, Developments in Church Practice, and some of the Beliefs and False Doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church.

I.    The Definition of a Roman Catholic

The Roman Catholic Church believes that,

• They are the true church that Christ built or established in 30 A.D.
• Their appointed Pope is God’s appointed head of His church on earth.  He is the supreme authority.  He has God’s given authority to rule and to teach.
• Therefore, they claim to have all authority to make laws.
• The Church’s organization is superior to the Bible.
• The Pope’s teachings and decrees are equal to the Bible in authority.  
• The Church and her councils (popes, bishops, and priests) are the only infallible interpreters of the Bible.
• The Traditions of Catholicism are equal to the Bible in authority.
• All Catholics believe that the Church’s theocratic organization determines what doctrine is to be taught and practiced.
• The Bible is just one of many sources of religious authority.

The Roman Catholic Church is an apostate church that sustains many false doctrines, false teachings that began to develop as early as 18 centuries ago, although some doctrines are not even a century old.  There is a total of 67 Roman Catholic denominations in the world.  Likewise, there are at least 22 different liturgies within the Roman Catholic Church and 66 independent schisms.

II. Rise of Catholicism

• What Happened to the Lord’s Church?

The first-century church was devoted to the apostles’ teachings.  Everything the church did came directly from the authority God gave the apostles.  These first-century Christians owned no buildings in which to meet to worship.  They were not concerned about bishops, dioceses or councils.  The Bible never authorized the bishop of Rome, the monastic life, priestly celibacy or catechisms.  Yet, in the second and later centuries, the faith was overshadowed by many such issues.  So, 

1. What happened to the early church?  
2. What caused such drastic change from a mere body of Christ’s believers led by the Holy Spirit (the pure doctrine of Christ) to an institution mainly concerned with power and control?

It is sad to imagine that the church departed from the divine pattern authorized by God, causing the faith of God to suffer overall.  Perhaps this will help us to see the terrible consequences to the Lord’s church so that we may avoid making the same mistakes.  Consider some of their failures:

The practice of monarchical bishops was against the divine pattern.  The New Testament describes a plurality of elders serving in each church.  The bishops (literally overseers), elders (presbyters), and pastors (all three terms are used interchangeably) were specifically commanded not to lord over the flock (1 Peter 5:1-3).  There is nowhere in the Bible that one can see a hierarchal system of priest-bishop-archbishop-cardinal-pope.  When any system of that sort develops, it begins to form a life of its own, whose main interest is protection and continuation of the same.

Even though, Jesus said not to call anyone on earth your father (Matt. 23:9), the priests and the pope came to be called that.  The apostle Paul also said that it was demonic to forbid marriage and demand the abstention from certain foods (I Tim. 4:3).  Moreover, Jesus said that His followers were to be the salt and the light of the earth (Matt. 5:13-16).  Paul also declared that we should expect to associate with sinners in the world (1 Cor. 5:9-10).  However, the monastics withdrew from any association with the world so that they might pursue a form of personal holiness they perceived to be desirable.  In doing so, they made a distinction among Christians that the Bible does not teach or authorize.

Monasticism was an attempt to address the problem of worldliness in the church.  It became a poor answer to the problem.  The best answer to the problem would have been to confront the error and worldliness in the church, turning away from it as Christians who must be living lights in this world of darkness.  Paul declared that self-made religion, self-abasement and severe treatment of the body (commandments and teachings of men) have the appearance of wisdom “but are of no value against fleshly indulgence.”  (Col. 2:21-23).

Obviously, the church in the second century and the following centuries tried to follow these practices of worldliness and error as the thing to do.  This, of course, is what happens when man is led by his own thinking and reasoning rather than God’s ways and thoughts.  (Prov. 14:12; Isaiah 55:8-9).

1.    The Influence of the World

The early church went through some drastic changes that showed the influence of the world.  The changes are seen in the development of church hierarchy.  They seemed to have forgotten the Lordship of Jesus and the divine pattern ordained by God that would have protected them from error and later apostasy.  This divine pattern was meant to be followed!  Lest we forget, Christians are to be governed by God’s rule.  We must grow in the knowledge of Christ becoming imitators of Him. Certainly, we must not follow man-made additions or rules.  If we ignore and disobey the Lordship of Christ and His Law, we detract from the power of the pure Gospel of Christ and complications and chaos will arise.  It is imperative for Christians not to pursue a policy of control that is not what God has ordained.  Why?  Because it would prevent them from growing in Christ’s doctrine which gives us eternal salvation.

Another problem the church had to face was that the hierarchy insisted that all Christians had to follow their system to reach God and go to heaven.  Each congregation of simple New Testament Christians observing the doctrinal teachings and organization taught by the apostles was declared heretical and pressured to conform to the human system.  Paul warned the brethren in Galatia of the false teachers who were eagerly seeking them, “not commendably, but they wish to shut you out so that you will seek them.”  (Galatians 4:17).  In other words, the false teachers in Galatia claimed that their system of rule was best for the Christians.  In fact, it was best for these false teachers since it gave them a much bigger group of followers over whom they could have more control and power.  Such a system or approach is very far from confessing Jesus as Lord of lords and King of kings.

2.    The Problem and Power of Tradition

One of the problems that the church faced from the beginning was the power of tradition.  Tradition (customary ways of doing things) is not necessarily bad.  In fact, the apostle Paul praised the church in Corinth for holding “firmly to the traditions, just I delivered them to you.”  (I Cor. 11:2). Assembling with other Christians every Lord’s Day, praying at a regular time every day, studying and meditating on the Word of God every day, gathering with family members to celebrate certain special days are all examples of good traditions since they encourage each other.

However, we must be careful since traditions can also hurt the church and even violate the Word of God.  Our Lord Jesus said that keeping man-made traditions can cause others to neglect and ignore God’s commandments.  Jesus condemned the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, the Jewish leaders, who would hold on to the tradition of giving money to the Temple rather than honoring their mother and father supplying what they needed (Mark 7:6-13).  They obviously violated God’s commandment. 

Perhaps, the tradition of giving to the Temple had an honest beginning, namely to enable the maintenance of God’s holy place.  However, the Jewish leaders enforced such a practice, using their human reasoning and thinking to imply that giving to the Temple was in fact honoring one’s parents when in reality that was not what God had ordained by the fifth commandment at all.  This is something they invented out of their stubborn and carnal heart.  When man insists on keeping man-made traditions, such traditions become more important than the Word of God, keeping all believers from obeying His Word.  To these Christians, it was easier and wiser to follow the lead of the bishop of Rome rather than the leadership of Christ.  These Christians should have known they were going to be in an awkward and difficult situation when they found out that their bishop was wrong, as inevitably he was.

Unfortunately, the monastic life created another hierarchy of believers. Church buildings began to dominate the time and money of their believers (fellowship).  Baptizing infants changed the meaning of saving faith, of baptism and church membership.  Mary, the mother of our Lord Jesus, became nearly another deity.   When something is done over and over again, being justified, we have what is called a “tradition.”  Let us make sure we keep traditions that are for our edification and not our destruction.

As we can see, the commandments and inventions gradually led to apostasy and the development of the Roman Catholic Church.  And even though many men tried to reform the Catholic Church, bringing her back to the Truth, back to the Light, their efforts only resulted in the establishment of more man-made churches led by false teaching.  Their man-made efforts only gave birth to denominationalism along with their false doctrines.  Denominationalism is the offspring of Catholicism.  The true and pure church that Jesus died for and was founded by Him and the apostles in the first century was neither Catholic nor Protestant, but merely the church that belonged to Christ composed of Christians.

3.    Keeping the Faith

We are surrounded by many influences that appear to be good.   The way in which some churches have always done things seems to be the only way to do it.  Whatever is popular, easy, feels good in our culture seems to have great attraction.  But, those who confess to being followers of Christ obey God’s laws and do not conform to the standards of this world, our culture.  The better way is always less popular and more difficult to follow, but God still demands that we follow His ways that we may be equipped for every good work.  (2 Tim. 3:16-17).

We must trust and love God’s Word with all of our heart, mind, soul, and strength.  His Word is sufficient for us, and we must seek to follow it to receive salvation.  (James 4:4).

III.    Developments in Church Practice

• Changes in Church Organization

Christ’s church remained pure and uncorrupted for some time until apostasy (the one that was predicted) began to sneak into the church, fulfilling the prophecy we read in Acts 20:29-30; II Thess. 2:1-4; I Tim. 4:1-3.  Because of human doctrines, traditions, changes, and commandments, many of the Lord’s churches apostatized giving place to the Roman Catholic Church.

The pure and uncorrupted local churches that Jesus established beginning on the day of Pentecost, the pattern that we find in the book of Acts, began to change significantly after the days of the apostles. Though a great number of practices and faith still existed by the 2nd century even among the apostate churches, the divine pattern that characterized the New Testament church of the first century began to change throughout many regions that had been converted to Christ.  The simple pattern of independent congregations, overseen by local elders (also called bishops) began to change as well. These church leaders were not concerned anymore about the Lordship of Christ and His divine pattern.  Indeed, the driving control of the hierarchy began to flourish:  control of church practices; control of error and false teachings; and control and conform of the lives of Christians into a more manageable pattern.

The Biblical pattern in the New Testament was for each local congregation to be overseen by elders who were also called bishops (overseers) or shepherds (pastors) in Acts 20:28 and I Peter 5:1-2. Around 100 AD, some congregations were still recognizing elders or bishops as those who presided and were considered the wisest men in the congregation.  By the late second century, the established pattern ordained by Jesus began to change.  Bishops began to claim authority over still larger areas as Christians looked for guidance.  These bishops began to enforce their authority with the claim of apostolic succession.  They claimed that their authority came in a direct line from the apostles.  Alas, not many Christians were willing to challenge such false authority.  

Consequently, the Lord’s church began to develop a hierarchy (sacred rule) of leadership.  

• First, a division arose between the ordinary people in the church (the Greek word for “people” is “laos,” from which we get laity) and those who were qualified to lead the services in the church. (The Greek word for priest is “hiereus” (1 Peter 2:9) and “heritage” (1 Peter 5:3) is from the Greek “cleros,” from which we get clergy. Both words in context refer to all Christians or the saints.)  
• Next, a hierarchy (rule of priests) grew among the clergy.  A priest was now declared to be qualified to perform the rites and rituals of a parish or local district of the church.  A bishop can oversee a diocese of several parishes.  An archbishop was to oversee several dioceses.

Isn’t it something that the church that our Lord purchased with His blood has now copied significantly the political divisions of the Roman Empire?  How?  In 303 Diocletian had divided the 120 provinces into twelve diocese or administrative divisions.  Rome had local officials, provincial governors, and diocesan administrators.  The church straightforwardly followed such arrangement in the name of control and oversight.

Of course, a hierarchy needs someone to be on top of the pyramid.  The question arose as to whether it was going to be a council of bishops (a super-eldership over the entire universal church) or one bishop, just as local churches (congregations) were overseen by a single bishop or elder.  The bishop of Rome could now claim all authority to oversee the church the same way the emperor oversaw the empire.  The bishop of Rome (head of the church in the capital city) could now claim all authority, having great influence and power over the church.

Ultimately, the bishop of Rome, the capital city of the empire, defended and supported his position by blatantly claiming that the apostle Peter was the first bishop of Rome when he was there.  This claim of apostolic succession from Peter is the foundation or beginning of the pope’s authority to make all decisions for the Roman Catholic Church.  Thus, the position of bishop of the capital city of the empire was rooted in the false doctrine of apostolic succession converting Jesus’ kingdom into an earthly government ruled by men.  

This claim was first made in 354 AD and was opposed by bishops in the east.  Sadly, when the bishop in Rome claimed authority and was deferred by others, the pattern was established.  The Pope became the “Bishop of Rome, Vicar of Christ and the ‘visible’ Head of the Roman Catholic Church.”  Eventually, his authority became supreme in all matters of faith and morals as head of the church.  As a result of this, in recent years Roman Catholics began to believe heartily that the Pope is infallible when speaking “ex-cathedra” or “from the throne” on church doctrine.  The truth is that Peter never claimed to be infallible.  How pathetic it is for the Catholic Church to claim such establishing control and dismiss those who differ.

When Jesus spoke in Matthew 16:19 of the keys of the kingdom, He was making reference to Peter being the first one to proclaim the gospel message of Christ opening the door with the keys of knowledge, so that all could enter the kingdom.  It had nothing to do with the power of the bishop of Rome to lead or control the church.

There is no evidence that shows that either Peter or Paul started the church in Rome.  Perhaps, the visitors from Rome mentioned in Acts 2:10 might have started the church there in Rome.

By the fifth century, the bishop of Rome was called the "Papa or Pope," the maximum father figure in the Church.  This is the origin of the word “papacy.”  To show how much influence the Roman Empire had, the pope was also called Pontifex Maximus or highest priest (one of the titles held by the pagan emperor).

A council of bishops took place in Arles, France in 314 to discuss the condition of priests who had denied the faith and had applied for reinstatement.  The Council of Arles decided “once a priest, always a priest” reinstating them.  This was not a church-wide council.

In 455, Emperor Valentinian III decreed that all western bishops were to submit to the pope.  This decree was disregarded somewhat in the West but in the East totally.  Such a decree was to enforce and reflect the bishop of Rome as the head of the Church.  

• Councils and Creeds

The church had to face the threats of both false religions (outside) as well as false teaching (inside).  In the second century, Gnosticism (emphasis on inner knowledge) and skepticism of the material world, grew, influencing the view of many Christians.  Among these Gnostics, there were those who denied that Jesus really came in the flesh.  To them, anything that involved the flesh was inherently evil.  Other mystery religions were also growing, influencing the Christian’s thinking.

Councils were summoned in matters of controversy that had arisen in the church whenever the emperor wanted the bishops to make a decision or resolve anything.  One of these was Constantine’s council at Nicaea in 325.  These councils were of great importance because,

1. They demonstrated the power and influence that the bishops had over the churches.  
2. They established church doctrine by council rather than just simply studying the Bible.  
3. The creeds (from the Latin credo, meaning “I believe”) defined orthodoxy (authorized doctrine, practice) and thus exerting control over what would be considered faithful.
4. Finally, the councils demonstrated the role of the emperor as the de facto leader of the church. That is to say, the church did what the emperor said without any objection.

• Monasticism

Before Christ came in the flesh, some people wanted to escape the corruption or defilements of the world, drawing nearer to God by means of contemplation and separated living.  The Jewish sect of the Essenes lived apart from the rest of Israel near the Dead Sea.  Buddha trained some of his followers to live as monks (from the Greek, meaning alone).

As the Lord’s church became worldlier, the pressures of the flesh increased.  Some Christians wanted to escape the influence and corruption of this world to live a holier life for Jesus.  Others wanted to overcome their wrongdoings, the desires of the flesh.

By the 4th century, thousands of believers (Christians) were living in the Egyptian dessert.  Some were living in solitary huts and others in small communities.  By the mid-fourth century, the first monasteries were established on the Nile River for monks to live alone.

Many of these hermit monks lived rigidly strict lives where they were allowed to eat once a week. They beat themselves to remove the lusts of the flesh.  Some of their other methods of self-abuse were even more severe. The monastic communities developed many rituals and established special orders of group life.  Benedict established orders for a monastery in Italy around 500 AD.

To overcome sexual temptations, monks committed themselves to a life of celibacy. Although they believed that marriage intimacy was not wrong, they still thought that abstaining from marital intimacy was better.  Sometimes monks were chosen to serve as priests and bishops.  But when they went back to the world, they remained celibate.  The church expected their leaders to be unmarried and celibate.

This monastic movement served the church as well as the world in many ways.  For instance, 

• Monasteries served as evangelists since the monks’ dedication attracted the attention of the outsiders who were persuaded to seek Christ.  
• The monks provided education and health care in their communities.  
• Monasteries were developed to produce hand-written manuscripts, copies of the Scriptures and classic literature to preserve ancient works from deterioration.  
• One famous monk was Jerome, who studied Hebrew as a way of overcoming temptation.  He is the one who translated the Bible into Latin about 400 AD.  This translation was called the Vulgate (the Latin word vulgus means common people).  Jerome’s Vulgate became the standard authorized translation used by the Roman Catholic Church for centuries until other translations of the Bible were available around one thousand years ago.

IV. Beliefs and False Doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church

• The False Doctrine of  the Infallibility of the Roman Catholic Church and Its Pope

The word “infallible” means incapable of making mistakes or being wrong.   The Roman Catholic Church teaches that the “Pope” is infallible when he speaks Ex Cathedra (from the “pope’s chair” with full authority of office).  The RCC doctrine teaches that when the Pope speaks Ex Cathedra his message is binding as the Word of God since he is viewed as the Vicar of Christ.  All her members must accept this doctrine.  However, the actual doctrine is that the official belief of the Roman Catholic Church is infallible.  Why?  Because the Roman Catholic Church made the “Pope” infallible (a hierarchy composed of cardinals and bishops).

The faith and doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church are founded upon “that deposit of faith given to it by Christ and through the apostles, sustained by the Bible and by tradition.”  (A Catechism of Christian Doctrine, p. 44).  The Catholic Church disregards the Truth of God, His Word.  They are so bold as to say that Christ made His church infallible (which according to them is the Roman Catholic Church!).  In their Catholic Catechism they state,

 “Why can't the Catholic Church ever teach error? Because Jesus promised to be always with His Church to protect it from error.”  

It also states, 

“Jesus Christ promised to preserve the Church from error.”  “Jesus Christ commanded all men to listen to and obey the Church, under pain of damnation.  If His Church can teach error then He is responsible for the error, by commanding all to obey.”  

“Does everyone have to obey the Catholic Church?  Yes, because she alone has the authority of Jesus to rule and to teach.”  

Without a doubt, Catholics have placed authority in the wrong places.  Why?  

1. Because all authority is not in the body but in the Head (Eph. 1:22-23; Col. 1:18).  
2. Because all rule of government is not in the kingdom but in the King (Heb. 7:1-2; Rev. 1:5-6).
3. Because all authority is not in the church but in Christ alone (Matt. 28:18; 1 Peter 3:22).  
4. The church is not the Savior of the souls but merely the body of the saved souls (Acts 2:47; Eph. 5:22-24).  
5. Christ the Head warns the church, His body, repeatedly not to depart from His teachings. (Acts 20:25-31; Ephesians 4:17-24)

The Roman Catholic Church is mistaken when they claim that the church could never go into error because they are preserved from error by the Catholic leadership.  They intentionally ignored those texts in the New Testament that tell us that the church would not be preserved from error, (Acts 20:17, 28-30; 2 Peter 2:13; 1 Tim. 4:1-3; 2 Tim. 4:3-4; 2 Thess. 2:3-11).  It is clear from these texts that the church was going to go through a significant falling away from the Truth, apostasy.  All this falling away was to come from within the church's leaders, their bishops or elders (false teachers).  

Peter said, 

“But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves.  Many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of the truth will be maligned; and in their greed they will exploit you with false words; their judgment from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep.” 2 Pet. 2:1.  

Likewise, Paul warned them that the apostasy was already underway, (2 Thess. 2, 7-12).

"That you not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come...  For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way... Then that lawless one will be revealed whom the Lord will slay with the breath of His mouth and bring to an end by the appearance of His coming; that is, the one whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power and signs and false wonders, and with all the deception of wickedness for those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved. For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness."

The flawed Roman Catholic doctrine of an “infallible church” rejects the warning of Christ about embracing error, being rejected and eventually losing salvation significantly.  The early churches had to fight earnestly for the faith and to be steadfastly on guard against all error that would arise from within.  The truth is that the Roman Catholic Church does not recognize error nor does it correct its own mistakes.

• Was Peter the First Pope?

The following are some texts that the Roman Catholic Church distorts to teach that the apostle Peter was the first “Pope.”

1.   Matthew 10:2:  “Now the names of the twelve apostles are these: The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; and James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother.”

The Roman Catholic Church claims that since Peter was the first one to be mentioned in this text, that automatically made him superior to the rest of the apostles.  But what they want to ignore is what Mark 9:33-35 says,

“ They came to Capernaum; and when He was in the house, He began to question them, “What were you discussing on the way?” 34 But they kept silent, for on the way they had discussed with one another which of them was the greatest. 35 Sitting down, He called the twelve and said to them, “If anyone wants to be first, he shall be last of all and servant of all.”

My question to them is:  If Peter had been the prince of all the apostles, don’t you think this would have been the time to affirm it?

2.   Matthew 16:18-19:  “I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.  I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.”

This is the most distorted text used to teach that Peter was the first pope of the church.  They affirm that the name “Peter” (Petros) means rock or stone and that upon him (Peter), Christ was going to build His church.  This interpretation is fallacious.  Why?  Because two different words are used in this text:  “You are Peter [Petros] and upon this rock [petra] I will build my church.”  Therefore, Jesus never promised to build His church upon Peter (Petros) but rather upon the rock (petra).  This rock or stone is the Deity of Christ whom Peter had just confessed in verse 16.  Christ is the foundation of His church.

“For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.”  (I Cor. 3:11).

To deliver or give “the keys of the kingdom” implies that Peter was going to preach the glorious gospel of Christ that would show all the steps of obedience to enter the kingdom of heaven.  Indeed, Peter did this on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2).  He opened the door to the Gentiles when he preached to Cornelius and all his household (Acts 10).  Now concerning the words “bind” and “loose,” Jesus said the same thing to all the apostles (Matthew 18:18).  It does not mean that Jesus was going to give them authority to teach whatever they thought was suitable or convenient, but rather they were to bind and loose on earth what was already bound and loosed in heaven.  

3.   Furthermore, they teach that Matthew 16:18 promises infallibility to the Church.  They misuse Matthew 28:20 that says, “I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”  They teach that the church will be protected from all error because if it fell into error, the doors of Hades would have prevailed against it.  What they forget to mention is the first part of Matthew 28:20, “teaching them to observe all that I commanded you…”  

The Roman Catholic Church tramples on the teachings of Jesus Christ that do not suit them.  For instance, they insist on calling their leaders “Father.”  They completely ignore what Jesus said, “Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven.”

The teaching of the infallibility of the Church violates several Scriptures:  

Galatians 1:6-9; Romans 16:17; 1 Timothy 1:20; 4:1-4; 2 Thessalonians 2; 2 Timothy 4:2-4 and many more.  These texts clearly indicate that the apostles and the prophets were inspired by the Holy Spirit.  Therefore, their teachings were infallible (the Truth and nothing but the Truth, without error). There is no Scripture that promised such infallibility to the church even when there were men inspired by God.  On the contrary, the verses cited here speak of an apostasy.  The Catholic Church, far from being an infallible church, is the apostate church.  It is the fulfillment of these prophecies.

Another favorite verse that they use to establish that Peter was the first “Pope” is John 21:15-17. Jesus said to Peter, “Tend My lambs…  “Shepherd My sheep.”  They conclude from this text that Jesus entrusted to Peter the charge or control of the whole church.  Peter would have never thought that Jesus was implying such a thing.  Catholicism is based, from beginning to end, on doctrines of men, inventions, fables and human imaginations.

4.   Moreover, they also misuse Acts 2:14, “But Peter, taking his stand with the eleven, raised his voice and declared to them: “Men of Judea and all you who live in Jerusalem, let this be known to you and give heed to my words.”  

5.   Acts 2:37, “ Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brethren, what shall we do?”

In Acts 10 and 11, Peter was the first one to preach to the Gentiles.  But he also learned “that God is not one to show partiality.” (Acts 10:34).  In Antioch “he stood condemned.” (Galatians 2:11-12). Paul had to exhort him (“I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned”).  How wonderful that the first pope of the church would commit such error, having to be reprimanded or rebuked by the apostle Paul!  Maybe, it would have been better for the RCC to have chosen Paul as their pope.

• The Roman Catholic Church is the Apostate Church Prophesied by the Apostle Paul

“Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, that you not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come.  Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God.”  (2 Thess. 2:1-4)

It is a fact that the Roman Catholic Church forbade Catholics from eating meat on Friday and still forbids their priests and nuns to marry.  In 1079, AD celibacy was first enforced for priests and bishops by Pope Gregory VII.  They were allowed to marry before it was enforced.  They neglected to accept what the Scriptures say, I Tim. 3:2-5, about the qualifications of a bishop or elder.  The Catholic Church believes and teaches that the apostle Peter was not married even when the Bible affirms it. They go as far as to say that Peter had a wife when he first met Jesus but that he got rid of her.  Mark 1:30 affirms that Peter had a wife.  All the apostles had the right to be married, I Corinthians 9:5.

There can be no doubt that the RCC is the fulfillment of that great apostasy preached and prophesied by the apostle Paul.  Their deeds speak for themselves.  The pope of Rome is the man of lawlessness. As to displaying himself as being God, it is undeniably true.  Why?  Because he is revered among his cardinals as “LORD God, the Pope.”

• The RCC Teaches that the Catholic Bishops are the Apostles’ Successors and Bishops (Elders)

“Teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”  (Matt. 28:20).

Jesus said this to His apostles.  This promise given by Jesus coincides with John 14:18, “I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you” in the person of the Holy Spirit, John 14:26; 16:13, etc. The promise of sending the Holy Spirit to guide them into all Truth. The Holy Spirit was with them in their teaching and when they wrote the books of the New Testament.  Yet, Jesus never promised that the church could never fall into doctrinal error. 

They also teach that Matthew 28:20, mainly addressed to the apostles, also applies to the apostles’ successors.  They conclude that Christ will always be with the church, that for them it means that Jesus will be with the pope and his hierarchy (cardinals and bishops), that they may not fall into error. The reality is that the whole Catholic system, from beginning to end, is erroneous and fallacious. Their name, organization (hierarchy), worship, doctrines, and practices are all wrong.  They are all man-made.

• They Teach that the Church is the Infallible Interpreter of Scriptures

They claim that the Bible is a Catholic product.  They had councils to determine which books should be in the Bible.  They declared that only they can interpret infallibly.  They willingly ignore that the apostles, prophets and members of the church who received the gifts of the Holy Spirit were entirely inspired in order to interpret the Bible.  For example, 1 Timothy 5:18 cites Matthew 10:10. Likewise, Luke 10:7 as “Scriptures.”  Peter refers to the epistles of Paul as “Scriptures.”  The apostolic writings were inspired of God long before any church declared them Scriptures.

“As also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.”  (2 Peter 3:16).

They teach that the infallibility of the church gives their members encouragement (Catholics in general) instead of living preoccupied with various doctrines.  They can place their faith in the infallible church and relax.  In this way, the hierarchy enslaves their followers, convincing them that they cannot study the Scriptures and think for themselves.  Ha!  What a way to brainwash their followers!

Another text they twist is 2 Peter 1:20, “But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation.”  From this text, they mistakenly conclude that the “laity” are not able to interpret the Scriptures, but that they must allow the bishops to do it for them.  They willfully ignore explanation that follows, “for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.”  (2 Peter 1:21).  Peter was merely referring to the origin and source of the Scriptures.

We must love the Truth and have the right attitude toward it.  The clergy does not allow or encourage them to test what they teach, privately or publicly.  The laity follows blindly what the clergy teaches them without question, like the blind leading the blind.  They are not encouraged to point out error and will not listen to those who try to do so.  Catholics are not allowed to hear both sides:  Truth and error.  They are not permitted by their clergy to examine anything that differs from their doctrine. Their motive for not encouraging their members to examine and oppose their evil doctrine is that they are afraid, as with all false teachers, to be exposed as false and lose their members.

Catholicism affirms, 

“Not all truths revealed for us by God are found in the Bible.  Some are found only in Divine Tradition.  By Divine Tradition is meant the revealed truths taught by Christ and His apostles which were given to the Church only by word of mouth and not through the Bible, though they were put in writing principally by the Fathers of the Church.  Divine Tradition must be believed as firmly as the Bible because it also contains the Word of God”

The Catechism states, “Can you learn to save your soul just by reading the Bible?  No, because certain things in the Bible can be misunderstood, and because the Bible does not have everything God taught.”  

Although, the first part of this statement answers NO to their question, their translation of the Bible teaches the opposite.  They also claim that “The Bible does not contain all the teaching of the Christian religion, nor does it formulate all the duties of its members.”  This is a fallacy.  The Bible says otherwise, “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” (2 Tim. 3:16-17).  They misuse John 20:30 as their text to indicate that the Bible does not contain everything that God taught.  

What John 20:30 says is that Jesus performed many other signs (miracles) that he did not record. Catholics seem to disregard what John says in the next verse, " ….but these were written...”  The apostle John evidently wrote enough to produce a life of sufficient faith in Jesus.  This life refers to eternal life that man can obtain by believing in those things that were written by the inspired writers.

Even though the Bible does not contain everything that Jesus did (John 21:25), we have everything we need for salvation.  We have enough revealed in the Scriptures to give us abundant life.

The next question in the Catechism is, “Can you learn to save your soul just by the Bible?  NO, because certain things in the Bible can be misunderstood....”  What they imply is that the Bible cannot be understood.  That the Bible is not clear nor is it an easy guide to understand at all.  They contradict the revealed Word of God, 

 “If indeed you have heard of the stewardship of God’s grace which was given to me for you; 3 that by revelation there was made known to me the mystery, as I wrote before in brief. 4 By referring to this, when you read you can understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, 5 which in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit.” (Eph. 3:2-5).  

Paul declares that we can understand what he wrote since the mystery had been made known to him by God's revelation of His Word.  In a few words, what Paul understood and wrote was inspired by the Holy Spirit.  It is so easy for us to understand, that all we have to do to understand it is to read it. He also declared, 

“For we write nothing else to you than what you read and understand, and I hope you will understand until the end.” (2 Cor. 1:13). 

 “So then do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is.”  (Eph. 5:17).  

Hence, we can certainly understand the revealed Word from what Paul and the other inspired writers taught and wrote.

The Catholic Church officials affirm that one cannot understand the true meaning of the written Word of God unless he receives it from the Catholic Church.  In their Catechism they ask, “How can you get the true meaning of the BIBLE?  You can get it only from God's official interpreter, the Catholic Church.”  They support their claim through human logic and reasoning since they cannot support their claim with the Bible.  They forget what Scriptures say, “let God be found true, though every man be found a liar, as it is written,” (Romans 3:4).  They ignore the warning, “See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ.”  (Col. 2:8).

This doctrine of the “infallible interpreter” has the audacity to imply that God did not make Himself clear and understandable.  It suggests that God's revealed Word is flawed and still needs more revealing.    The only TRUTH is that God never failed when He revealed His Word to man. These Catholic officials have but one purpose, to convince us that only they can express God's will, and they can do it even better than God Himself.  How dare they!  We know that God made man in His image, with an intelligent mind that is fully capable of understanding His will, as expressed in His Words without any problem whatsoever.

As you can see, one of the Catholic Clergy’s biggest claims is that they have all authority over the Word of God so that the Words of Jesus actually have less authority over the church.  They ignore what Jesus said, 

“He who rejects Me and does not receive My sayings, has one who judges him; the word I spoke is what will judge him at the last day.” (John 12:48).  

Only Christ has all authority on earth and in heaven by which we all will be judged on that last day, Matt. 28:18.  Jesus also said,

"THIS PEOPLE HONORS ME WITH THEIR LIPS, BUT THEIR HEART IS FAR AWAY FROM ME. ‘BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS OF MEN."  (Matt. 15:8, 9)

 “But He answered and said, “Every plant which My heavenly Father did not plant shall be uprooted.” (Matthew 15:3).

The Clergy claims, “If you accept the Bible, you must accept us for the Bible has been preserved by us and has come to you through us.”  How dare they claim that!  Our Lord Jesus is the only One responsible for preserving His Word.  He said, “Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.” (Mark 13:31).  Those who love and obey the Bible alone know that they reject all else.

The Bible maintains that the New Testament is the complete and final revelation of God’s will for all mankind. (2 Tim. 3:16-17).  God forbids us to go beyond the revealed will of Christ, 2 John 9, 10. We must not teach anything other than the gospel revealed by the apostles in the New Testament.  To do otherwise is to be accursed.  (Gal. 1:6-9).

Sadly, there are others besides Catholics:  The Jehovah Witnesses, the Mormons, the Adventists, the Pentecostals and many other religious groups that refuse to think for themselves and indeed regard the superiors of their religion as infallible; that they are right and cannot be wrong at all.  Therefore, the Catholic who is subject to the Catholic hierarchy it is no blinder nor more a slave than the Jehovah’s Witness, Mormon, Baptist, Pentecostal, Adventist and so on.

• Tradition

While they maintain the use of certain texts in the Bible as an effort to justify their peculiar and false doctrines, they make no claim to obeying the teachings of the revealed Word of God.  Furthermore, they have added what they call “Divine Tradition.”  

The RCC teaches that there are many teachings of Christ and the apostles that were not written.  They cite 2 Thessalonians 2:15; 2 Timothy 2:2 to support their arguments.  These teachings are called “tradition.”  Tradition is not bad as long as it is in harmony with divine inspiration as in these texts.  Also, I Cor. 11:2 and verse 23 explains the idea:  It is simply the teaching that one receives from another and turns it over to others.  In this case (I Cor. 11:23), Paul received from Christ that which he also delivered to the Corinthians.

Jesus in Matthew 15:9 and Colossians 2:2 condemned the doctrines and precepts of men.  Undoubtedly, the traditions of the RCC are precisely traditions of uninspired men who are apostates.  (1 Timothy 4:1-4; 2 Thess. 2)  Therefore, that which Catholics call “Divine Tradition” is nothing more than man’s doctrines and commandments which Jesus said makes religion vain. (Matt. 15:8-9).

• The RCC Believes that Its Tradition is Superior to Scriptures

They insist that the RCC has given the Bible to the world, that it is a Catholic product and that only they can interpret it infallibly.  They erroneously teach that after the apostolic time, the church had expanded, developed and improved the teachings of Christ and the apostles.  Thus adding doctrines and practices according to the pope’s criteria and his council.  They boast of being “the voice of the living church.”

They brazenly say that Christ is and will be with the RCC to protect it and prevent it from teaching error.  They even say that if the RCC fell into error, then the gates of Hades would have prevailed against her.  They make these claims in spite of all their practices and human doctrines that contradict the Scriptures.  They do not care that their teachings and practices contradict the teachings of Christ and the apostles since they think theirs is superior.  Take, for example, if one were to ask if Peter left his wife to be a pope, they would say no because the doctrine of celibacy did not originate until centuries later.  They say that now to be a priest, the man who is married has to leave his wife (as long as she is in agreement with that).

Conclusion to Part One

I hope that you will forgive my emotional presentation of these issues.  You must understand just how much joy I found in the simple truths of the Scriptures once I was free from the shackles of the Clergy.  I feel like the person that Jesus described who found a priceless pearl and joyfully sold all that he had to buy that pearl.  The Truth of the Gospel has given me that joy.

In Part Two, we will briefly discuss the doctrines of Purgatory, Baptism, the Intercession of Mary, Supreme Unction, the Eucharist, and perhaps a few others.

Luci