One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Faith, Religion, Spirituality
Explaining the heresy of the Catholic mass
Dec 15, 2018 09:39:47   #
Rose42
 
-snip

“For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens; who does not need daily like those high priests to offer up sacrifices, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. Because this He did once for all when He offered up Himself. For the Law appoints men as high priests who are weak, but the word of the oath which came after the Law appoints a Son made perfect forever.” The operative word is “once.” One sacrifice. There is no need for daily offering of sacrifices.

If you will look at the ninth chapter of Hebrews you will see this same truth repeated in verse 11. “When Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say not of this creation, and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood. He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained,” past tense, “eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled, sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?” Again, the operative word is “once.” “He entered the holy place,” verse 12, “once,” past tense, “having obtained eternal redemption.”

Go over to verse 24 of Hebrews 9, “For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, that is some earthly temple, some earthly sanctuary, some earthly altar, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us, nor was it that He would offer Himself often as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own. Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world, but now,” here’s that word again, “once at the consummation of the ages.” That is, the culminating point of the ages, the very event of His own death and resurrection. “Once at the consummation of the ages, He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. And inasmuch it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment, so Christ, also having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin to those who eagerly await Him.” Again the operative word appears in verse 28: “once.” He does not need to offer Himself often, verse 25 says. He does not need to suffer repeatedly, as verse 26 would indicate from the foundation of the world. Because again, “once,” at the culmination of the ages, He put away, past tense, sin by the sacrifice of Himself.

Chapter 10 of Hebrews, verse 10, “By this will,” that is the will of God, which Jesus came to do as it says in the prior verse 9. “By this will, we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.” Sanctified meaning separated from sin in a saving sense, as well as an ongoing sense. “And it was accomplished through the offering of Jesus Christ, the offering of His body, once. Every priest in contrast,” verse 11, “stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices which can never take away sins, but He having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time sat down at the right hand of God.” The finality of this is so clear. He came, He made one sacrifice which perfected forever them that are sanctified. He came, He made one offering for all, never to be repeated, in contrast to priests repeating over and over and over, sacrifices which can never take away sin. There’s only one sacrifice, made one time, by one person that can take away sin. It is that sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Any priests today are false claimants to a special priesthood, a special order of priests, since now we are all priests. We are a royal priesthood, all believers. We need no mediator; we all have immediate access to God. We need to make no sacrifices because there is no temple, there are no altars, there are no sacrifices, and we are not in need of any priests.

In spite of that, the Roman Catholic system has devised a priesthood, has built in every church on the face of the earth an altar, and around that altar continues to offer sacrifice. Tens of thousands of timed every day, as if they had reinvented the Levitical priesthood. And they will be doing this until the end of time, until the end of the world, it says there in their literature. They have reestablished what God Himself destroyed, and it is a variation of the Levitical priesthood. It is an illegitimate variation of that priesthood. I say variation because it is mingled with cultic pagan mystery and idolatry. The Mass is a sacrifice which can be made only on an altar of some kind and only by a priest.

-snip


https://www.gty.org/library/sermons-library/90-318/explaining-the-heresy-of-the-catholic-mass-part-1

Reply
Dec 15, 2018 09:47:50   #
bahmer
 
Rose42 wrote:
-snip

“For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens; who does not need daily like those high priests to offer up sacrifices, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. Because this He did once for all when He offered up Himself. For the Law appoints men as high priests who are weak, but the word of the oath which came after the Law appoints a Son made perfect forever.” The operative word is “once.” One sacrifice. There is no need for daily offering of sacrifices.

If you will look at the ninth chapter of Hebrews you will see this same truth repeated in verse 11. “When Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say not of this creation, and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood. He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained,” past tense, “eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled, sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?” Again, the operative word is “once.” “He entered the holy place,” verse 12, “once,” past tense, “having obtained eternal redemption.”

Go over to verse 24 of Hebrews 9, “For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, that is some earthly temple, some earthly sanctuary, some earthly altar, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us, nor was it that He would offer Himself often as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own. Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world, but now,” here’s that word again, “once at the consummation of the ages.” That is, the culminating point of the ages, the very event of His own death and resurrection. “Once at the consummation of the ages, He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. And inasmuch it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment, so Christ, also having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin to those who eagerly await Him.” Again the operative word appears in verse 28: “once.” He does not need to offer Himself often, verse 25 says. He does not need to suffer repeatedly, as verse 26 would indicate from the foundation of the world. Because again, “once,” at the culmination of the ages, He put away, past tense, sin by the sacrifice of Himself.

Chapter 10 of Hebrews, verse 10, “By this will,” that is the will of God, which Jesus came to do as it says in the prior verse 9. “By this will, we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.” Sanctified meaning separated from sin in a saving sense, as well as an ongoing sense. “And it was accomplished through the offering of Jesus Christ, the offering of His body, once. Every priest in contrast,” verse 11, “stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices which can never take away sins, but He having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time sat down at the right hand of God.” The finality of this is so clear. He came, He made one sacrifice which perfected forever them that are sanctified. He came, He made one offering for all, never to be repeated, in contrast to priests repeating over and over and over, sacrifices which can never take away sin. There’s only one sacrifice, made one time, by one person that can take away sin. It is that sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Any priests today are false claimants to a special priesthood, a special order of priests, since now we are all priests. We are a royal priesthood, all believers. We need no mediator; we all have immediate access to God. We need to make no sacrifices because there is no temple, there are no altars, there are no sacrifices, and we are not in need of any priests.

In spite of that, the Roman Catholic system has devised a priesthood, has built in every church on the face of the earth an altar, and around that altar continues to offer sacrifice. Tens of thousands of timed every day, as if they had reinvented the Levitical priesthood. And they will be doing this until the end of time, until the end of the world, it says there in their literature. They have reestablished what God Himself destroyed, and it is a variation of the Levitical priesthood. It is an illegitimate variation of that priesthood. I say variation because it is mingled with cultic pagan mystery and idolatry. The Mass is a sacrifice which can be made only on an altar of some kind and only by a priest.

-snip


https://www.gty.org/library/sermons-library/90-318/explaining-the-heresy-of-the-catholic-mass-part-1
-snip br br b “For it was fitting for us to hav... (show quote)


Very good Rose42 and now if only the Roman Catholics would wake up and read their bibles and realize this they to could be set free af the Roman Catholic Paganism and live a life that is free and in the will of both the Father and the Son and Holy Spirit.

Reply
Dec 15, 2018 10:25:59   #
Doc110 Loc: York PA
 
02/06/2007 Please . . . Don’t Call Protestants . . . Christians . . . They Are Heretics

Marian T. Horvat, Ph.D.
https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/m013rpProtestantsChristians.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPC0N0U0aco

It is very common today to hear Catholics call a Protestant “a Christian,” or even, “a good Christian.”

In the United States, it was already a practice before Vatican II because of the tendency of American Catholics to accommodate Protestantism, whose tonus dominated the social and business spheres.

Then, there was the question of adaptation as prominent Protestants joined the Catholic faith, or Catholics entered into marriages with Protestants.

It was just easier to call everyone “Christian.” Supposedly it underplayed differences.

It was meant to create the impression that Catholics and Protestants were cousins in one big, happy family.



Pope Leo XIII condemned this tolerance toward Protestantism under the name of Americanism, the heresy of Americanism, to be more precise.

After Vatican II, needless to say, the practice of calling Protestants Christias has snowballed, with the official conciliar documents assuming this same impropriety.

Hence, the Holy See, Prelates and priests have made its use as widespread as possible.

Accommodation to Protestantism in our days has reached such a point that some Catholics, to distinguish between Catholics and their Protestant “separated brethren,” call themselves Catholic Christians.

A redundancy if I've ever heard one.

Only Catholics can be true Christians.

No one who dissents from the Roman Catholic Church can be a Christian.



The terms are synonymous.

Every time I hear the term Christian used for Protestants, I cringe. Its usage clearly nourishes a trend toward a dangerous religious indifferentism.

Which denies the duty of man to worship God by believing and practicing the one true Catholic Religion.



It is an implicit admission that those who deny the one Faith can nonetheless be Christians, that is, be in the Church of Christ.

Inherently it leads to the progressivist notion that men can be saved in any religion that accepts Christ as Savior.

A “good Lutheran,” a “good Anglican,” a “good Presbyterian –

What does it matter so long as they are good people and sincerely love Christ?

Regardless of who is applying this usage today, I want to stress that it is at variance with the entire tradition of the Catholic Church until the Council.

To consider heretics as Christians is not the teaching of the Church.



Before Vatican II, the Magisterium was always very clear:

It is not a matter of an individual’s character or traits.

No one can be in the Church of Christ without professing the ensemble of the truths of Catholic Faith, being in unity with the Chair of Peter and receiving the same Seven Sacraments.

The only Christian is one who accepts Our Lord Jesus Christ and the Church he established.

Who can have God for Father and not accept the Church for Mother? (Pope Pius IX, Singulari quidem of March 17, 1856)

Who can accept the spouse Christ, and not his mystical bride the Church?

Who can separate the Head, the only begotten Son of God, from the body, which is His Church?
(Pope Leo XIII, Satis cognitum of June 29, 1896). It is not possible.



In short, only those who profess the one Catholic Faith and are united with the Mystical Body of Christ are members of the Church of Christ.

And only those members can legitimately bear the title of honor of Christian.

The Protestant sect started as a revolt, protesting the Church of Christ and, pretending to accept Christ without Peter, the authority He established on earth.

With this split, they left the Church and became heretics.

This used to be clearly said and understood, without sentimental fear of offending one’s neighbors or relatives:

A Protestant is a heretic because he severed himself from the Body of the Church.

He is not a Christian, and certainly not a “good Christian.”



Scriptures confirm this truth

My friend Jan thought I was being too severe on this topic.

“You’re making a mountain out of a molehill,” She said.

“Don’t Scriptures teach us to love our neighbor and not be judgmental?”



It is the same old post Vatican II story, claiming that it is “judgmental” to correct bad practices and false teachings and arguing with disputable interpretations of Scriptures.

Well, despite these subjective interpretations, the inspired words of Scriptures provide an unambiguous defense that the custody of the vineyard has been committed by Christ to the Catholic Church alone.

Let me quote just a few verses:

“He who hears you (Peter) hears me, and he who rejects you, rejects me, and he who rejects me, rejects him who sent me.
(Lk 10:16).”


It could not be clearer:

The Protestant who rejects the head, rejects Christ himself, and should not be granted the name Christian.

Christ establishes one Church with a single head:

"And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
(Matt 16:19).

St. Paul is severe in his condemnation of false teachers, e.g. Protestants:

“If any man preaches any other Gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.”
(Gal 1: 9).

In another passage he instructs Catholics to remove themselves from the bad society of non-Catholics:

“And we charge you, brethren, in the name of Our Lord Jesus Christ that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly and not according to the Tradition which they have received of us.”
(2 Thess 3:6).

The Apostle St. John forbade any intercourse with heretics: “If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house or welcome him.”
(2 Jo 1:10)”

Holy Scriptures are clear on the point that only those who belong to the one Church founded by Christ, the Catholic Church, can rightfully be considered Christians.



Popes reiterate this teaching

The traditional Papal Magisterium was also clear on this topic. Let me offer a few texts by way of exemplification.

Pius XII stated unequivocally:

“To be Christian one must be Roman.

One must recognize the oneness of Christ’s Church that is governed by one successor of the Prince of the Apostles who is the Bishop of Rome, Christ’s Vicar on earth”
(Allocution to the Irish pilgrims of October 8, 1957).

How is it possible to be clearer than this about those who can be called Christian?

Leo XIII makes it plain that separated members cannot belong to the same body: “So long as the member was on the body, it lived; separated, it lost its life.

Thus the man, so long as he lives on the body of the [Catholic] Church, he is a Christian; separated from her, he becomes a heretic”
(Encyclical Satis cognitum of June 29, 1896).

Emphasizing the fate of those who break away from the one Faith, he says:

“Whoever leaves her [the Catholic Church] departs from the will and command of Our Lord Jesus Christ; leaving the path of salvation, he enters that of perdition.

Whoever is separated from the Church is united to an adulteress.”
(ibid.).

Certainly, they do not share with us the same title of Christian.

Pope Pius IX stated:

“He who abandons the Chair of Peter on which the Church is founded, is falsely persuaded that he is in the Church of Christ.”
(Quartus supra of January 6 1873, n. 8).



In the Syllabus of Modern Errors,

The proposition that Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion was specifically condemned.
(Pius IX, n. 18)(1).

Therefore, there is only one Christian Church, the Catholic Church, and only those who belong to it should rightfully be called Christians.



How to fight Americanism?

Many persons ask me:

What can I do to fight Progressivism?

Others have requested:
Give me some specific examples of how I can combat Americanism.



Let me offer one concrete way to fight in yourself the tendency toward accommodation with Protestantism.

When you catch yourself calling a Protestant a “Christian,”

Stop and correct yourself.

Call him a Protestant.

It is a way to affirm that you do not accept the Protestant errors and that you acknowledge it for the terrible thing it is:

Protestants denied many Catholic dogmas and for this reason caused that first major crack in the unity of the Catholic Church that caused untold damage to Christendom and the perdition of those souls adhering to it.

It is a small thing, but by such small customs we as a people have been walking steadily toward religious indifferentism.

It is time to set some roadblocks on that path. We should not veil in ambiguous terms our love for the ensemble of the Catholic Faith.

The only true union possible for Catholics with Protestants is by their return to the one true Church of Christ, the Catholic Church.

Only with such a return can they rightfully call themselves Christians.

Numerous traditional Catholic teachings on the this topic can be found in Atila S. Guimarães, Aniums Delendi II, Los Angeles: TIA, 2002, pp. 205-217.
See also "Christian Ecuemnism" in Simon Galloway, No Crisis in the Church? New Olive Press, 2006, pp. 1-51.

Posted on February 6, 2007

Related Topics of Interest

The Lutheran and Calvinist Mentalities
https://www.traditioninaction.org/Cultural/D015cpProtestantMentalities.htm

Reply
 
 
Dec 15, 2018 10:26:25   #
Doc110 Loc: York PA
 
Please . . . Don’t Call Protestants . . . Christians . . . They Are Heretics

Marian T. Horvat, Ph.D.
https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/m013rpProtestantsChristians.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPC0N0U0aco

It is very common today to hear Catholics call a Protestant “a Christian,” or even, “a good Christian.”

In the United States, it was already a practice before Vatican II because of the tendency of American Catholics to accommodate Protestantism, whose tonus dominated the social and business spheres.

Then, there was the question of adaptation as prominent Protestants joined the Catholic faith, or Catholics entered into marriages with Protestants.

It was just easier to call everyone “Christian.” Supposedly it underplayed differences.

It was meant to create the impression that Catholics and Protestants were cousins in one big, happy family.



Pope Leo XIII condemned this tolerance toward Protestantism under the name of Americanism, the heresy of Americanism, to be more precise.

After Vatican II, needless to say, the practice of calling Protestants Christias has snowballed, with the official conciliar documents assuming this same impropriety.

Hence, the Holy See, Prelates and priests have made its use as widespread as possible.

Accommodation to Protestantism in our days has reached such a point that some Catholics, to distinguish between Catholics and their Protestant “separated brethren,” call themselves Catholic Christians.

A redundancy if I've ever heard one.

Only Catholics can be true Christians.

No one who dissents from the Roman Catholic Church can be a Christian.



The terms are synonymous.

Every time I hear the term Christian used for Protestants, I cringe. Its usage clearly nourishes a trend toward a dangerous religious indifferentism.

Which denies the duty of man to worship God by believing and practicing the one true Catholic Religion.



It is an implicit admission that those who deny the one Faith can nonetheless be Christians, that is, be in the Church of Christ.

Inherently it leads to the progressivist notion that men can be saved in any religion that accepts Christ as Savior.

A “good Lutheran,” a “good Anglican,” a “good Presbyterian –

What does it matter so long as they are good people and sincerely love Christ?

Regardless of who is applying this usage today, I want to stress that it is at variance with the entire tradition of the Catholic Church until the Council.

To consider heretics as Christians is not the teaching of the Church.



Before Vatican II, the Magisterium was always very clear:

It is not a matter of an individual’s character or traits.

No one can be in the Church of Christ without professing the ensemble of the truths of Catholic Faith, being in unity with the Chair of Peter and receiving the same Seven Sacraments.

The only Christian is one who accepts Our Lord Jesus Christ and the Church he established.

Who can have God for Father and not accept the Church for Mother? (Pope Pius IX, Singulari quidem of March 17, 1856)

Who can accept the spouse Christ, and not his mystical bride the Church?

Who can separate the Head, the only begotten Son of God, from the body, which is His Church?
(Pope Leo XIII, Satis cognitum of June 29, 1896). It is not possible.



In short, only those who profess the one Catholic Faith and are united with the Mystical Body of Christ are members of the Church of Christ.

And only those members can legitimately bear the title of honor of Christian.

The Protestant sect started as a revolt, protesting the Church of Christ and, pretending to accept Christ without Peter, the authority He established on earth.

With this split, they left the Church and became heretics.

This used to be clearly said and understood, without sentimental fear of offending one’s neighbors or relatives:

A Protestant is a heretic because he severed himself from the Body of the Church.

He is not a Christian, and certainly not a “good Christian.”



Scriptures confirm this truth

My friend Jan thought I was being too severe on this topic.

“You’re making a mountain out of a molehill,” She said.

“Don’t Scriptures teach us to love our neighbor and not be judgmental?”



It is the same old post Vatican II story, claiming that it is “judgmental” to correct bad practices and false teachings and arguing with disputable interpretations of Scriptures.

Well, despite these subjective interpretations, the inspired words of Scriptures provide an unambiguous defense that the custody of the vineyard has been committed by Christ to the Catholic Church alone.

Let me quote just a few verses:

“He who hears you (Peter) hears me, and he who rejects you, rejects me, and he who rejects me, rejects him who sent me.
(Lk 10:16).”


It could not be clearer:

The Protestant who rejects the head, rejects Christ himself, and should not be granted the name Christian.

Christ establishes one Church with a single head:

"And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
(Matt 16:19).

St. Paul is severe in his condemnation of false teachers, e.g. Protestants:

“If any man preaches any other Gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.”
(Gal 1: 9).

In another passage he instructs Catholics to remove themselves from the bad society of non-Catholics:

“And we charge you, brethren, in the name of Our Lord Jesus Christ that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly and not according to the Tradition which they have received of us.”
(2 Thess 3:6).

The Apostle St. John forbade any intercourse with heretics: “If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house or welcome him.”
(2 Jo 1:10)”

Holy Scriptures are clear on the point that only those who belong to the one Church founded by Christ, the Catholic Church, can rightfully be considered Christians.



Popes reiterate this teaching

The traditional Papal Magisterium was also clear on this topic. Let me offer a few texts by way of exemplification.

Pius XII stated unequivocally:

“To be Christian one must be Roman.

One must recognize the oneness of Christ’s Church that is governed by one successor of the Prince of the Apostles who is the Bishop of Rome, Christ’s Vicar on earth”
(Allocution to the Irish pilgrims of October 8, 1957).

How is it possible to be clearer than this about those who can be called Christian?

Leo XIII makes it plain that separated members cannot belong to the same body: “So long as the member was on the body, it lived; separated, it lost its life.

Thus the man, so long as he lives on the body of the [Catholic] Church, he is a Christian; separated from her, he becomes a heretic”
(Encyclical Satis cognitum of June 29, 1896).

Emphasizing the fate of those who break away from the one Faith, he says:

“Whoever leaves her [the Catholic Church] departs from the will and command of Our Lord Jesus Christ; leaving the path of salvation, he enters that of perdition.

Whoever is separated from the Church is united to an adulteress.”
(ibid.).

Certainly, they do not share with us the same title of Christian.

Pope Pius IX stated:

“He who abandons the Chair of Peter on which the Church is founded, is falsely persuaded that he is in the Church of Christ.”
(Quartus supra of January 6 1873, n. 8).



In the Syllabus of Modern Errors,

The proposition that Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion was specifically condemned.
(Pius IX, n. 18)(1).

Therefore, there is only one Christian Church, the Catholic Church, and only those who belong to it should rightfully be called Christians.



How to fight Americanism?

Many persons ask me:

What can I do to fight Progressivism?

Others have requested:
Give me some specific examples of how I can combat Americanism.



Let me offer one concrete way to fight in yourself the tendency toward accommodation with Protestantism.

When you catch yourself calling a Protestant a “Christian,”

Stop and correct yourself.

Call him a Protestant.

It is a way to affirm that you do not accept the Protestant errors and that you acknowledge it for the terrible thing it is:

Protestants denied many Catholic dogmas and for this reason caused that first major crack in the unity of the Catholic Church that caused untold damage to Christendom and the perdition of those souls adhering to it.

It is a small thing, but by such small customs we as a people have been walking steadily toward religious indifferentism.

It is time to set some roadblocks on that path. We should not veil in ambiguous terms our love for the ensemble of the Catholic Faith.

The only true union possible for Catholics with Protestants is by their return to the one true Church of Christ, the Catholic Church.

Only with such a return can they rightfully call themselves Christians.

Numerous traditional Catholic teachings on the this topic can be found in Atila S. Guimarães, Aniums Delendi II, Los Angeles: TIA, 2002, pp. 205-217.
See also "Christian Ecuemnism" in Simon Galloway, No Crisis in the Church? New Olive Press, 2006, pp. 1-51.

Posted on February 6, 2007

Related Topics of Interest

The Lutheran and Calvinist Mentalities
https://www.traditioninaction.org/Cultural/D015cpProtestantMentalities.htm


Rose42 wrote:


“For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens; who does not need daily like those high priests to offer up sacrifices, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. Because this He did once for all when He offered up Himself. For the Law appoints men as high priests who are weak, but the word of the oath which came after the Law appoints a Son made perfect forever.” The operative word is “once.” One sacrifice. There is no need for daily offering of sacrifices.

If you will look at the ninth chapter of Hebrews you will see this same truth repeated in verse 11. “When Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say not of this creation, and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood. He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained,” past tense, “eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled, sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?” Again, the operative word is “once.” “He entered the holy place,” verse 12, “once,” past tense, “having obtained eternal redemption.”

Go over to verse 24 of Hebrews 9, “For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, that is some earthly temple, some earthly sanctuary, some earthly altar, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us, nor was it that He would offer Himself often as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own. Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world, but now,” here’s that word again, “once at the consummation of the ages.” That is, the culminating point of the ages, the very event of His own death and resurrection. “Once at the consummation of the ages, He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. And inasmuch it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment, so Christ, also having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin to those who eagerly await Him.” Again the operative word appears in verse 28: “once.” He does not need to offer Himself often, verse 25 says. He does not need to suffer repeatedly, as verse 26 would indicate from the foundation of the world. Because again, “once,” at the culmination of the ages, He put away, past tense, sin by the sacrifice of Himself.

Chapter 10 of Hebrews, verse 10, “By this will,” that is the will of God, which Jesus came to do as it says in the prior verse 9. “By this will, we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.” Sanctified meaning separated from sin in a saving sense, as well as an ongoing sense. “And it was accomplished through the offering of Jesus Christ, the offering of His body, once. Every priest in contrast,” verse 11, “stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices which can never take away sins, but He having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time sat down at the right hand of God.” The finality of this is so clear. He came, He made one sacrifice which perfected forever them that are sanctified. He came, He made one offering for all, never to be repeated, in contrast to priests repeating over and over and over, sacrifices which can never take away sin. There’s only one sacrifice, made one time, by one person that can take away sin. It is that sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Any priests today are false claimants to a special priesthood, a special order of priests, since now we are all priests. We are a royal priesthood, all believers. We need no mediator; we all have immediate access to God. We need to make no sacrifices because there is no temple, there are no altars, there are no sacrifices, and we are not in need of any priests.

In spite of that, the Roman Catholic system has devised a priesthood, has built in every church on the face of the earth an altar, and around that altar continues to offer sacrifice. Tens of thousands of timed every day, as if they had reinvented the Levitical priesthood. And they will be doing this until the end of time, until the end of the world, it says there in their literature. They have reestablished what God Himself destroyed, and it is a variation of the Levitical priesthood. It is an illegitimate variation of that priesthood. I say variation because it is mingled with cultic pagan mystery and idolatry. The Mass is a sacrifice which can be made only on an altar of some kind and only by a priest.

-snip


https://www.gty.org/library/sermons-library/90-318/explaining-the-heresy-of-the-catholic-mass-part-1
br br b “For it was fitting for us to have suc... (show quote)

Reply
Dec 15, 2018 10:28:45   #
Doc110 Loc: York PA
 
Please . . . Don’t Call Protestants . . . Christians . . . They Are Heretics

Marian T. Horvat, Ph.D.

https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/m013rpProtestantsChristians.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPC0N0U0aco

It is very common today to hear Catholics call a Protestant “a Christian,” or even, “a good Christian.”

In the United States, it was already a practice before Vatican II because of the tendency of American Catholics to accommodate Protestantism, whose tonus dominated the social and business spheres.

Then, there was the question of adaptation as prominent Protestants joined the Catholic faith, or Catholics entered into marriages with Protestants.

It was just easier to call everyone “Christian.” Supposedly it underplayed differences.

It was meant to create the impression that Catholics and Protestants were cousins in one big, happy family.



Pope Leo XIII condemned this tolerance toward Protestantism under the name of Americanism, the heresy of Americanism, to be more precise.

After Vatican II, needless to say, the practice of calling Protestants Christias has snowballed, with the official conciliar documents assuming this same impropriety.

Hence, the Holy See, Prelates and priests have made its use as widespread as possible.

Accommodation to Protestantism in our days has reached such a point that some Catholics, to distinguish between Catholics and their Protestant “separated brethren,” call themselves Catholic Christians.

A redundancy if I've ever heard one.

Only Catholics can be true Christians.

No one who dissents from the Roman Catholic Church can be a Christian.



The terms are synonymous.

Every time I hear the term Christian used for Protestants, I cringe. Its usage clearly nourishes a trend toward a dangerous religious indifferentism.

Which denies the duty of man to worship God by believing and practicing the one true Catholic Religion.



It is an implicit admission that those who deny the one Faith can nonetheless be Christians, that is, be in the Church of Christ.

Inherently it leads to the progressivist notion that men can be saved in any religion that accepts Christ as Savior.

A “good Lutheran,” a “good Anglican,” a “good Presbyterian –

What does it matter so long as they are good people and sincerely love Christ?

Regardless of who is applying this usage today, I want to stress that it is at variance with the entire tradition of the Catholic Church until the Council.

To consider heretics as Christians is not the teaching of the Church.



Before Vatican II, the Magisterium was always very clear:

It is not a matter of an individual’s character or traits.

No one can be in the Church of Christ without professing the ensemble of the truths of Catholic Faith, being in unity with the Chair of Peter and receiving the same Seven Sacraments.

The only Christian is one who accepts Our Lord Jesus Christ and the Church he established.

Who can have God for Father and not accept the Church for Mother? (Pope Pius IX, Singulari quidem of March 17, 1856)

Who can accept the spouse Christ, and not his mystical bride the Church?

Who can separate the Head, the only begotten Son of God, from the body, which is His Church?
(Pope Leo XIII, Satis cognitum of June 29, 1896). It is not possible.



In short, only those who profess the one Catholic Faith and are united with the Mystical Body of Christ are members of the Church of Christ.

And only those members can legitimately bear the title of honor of Christian.

The Protestant sect started as a revolt, protesting the Church of Christ and, pretending to accept Christ without Peter, the authority He established on earth.

With this split, they left the Church and became heretics.

This used to be clearly said and understood, without sentimental fear of offending one’s neighbors or relatives:

A Protestant is a heretic because he severed himself from the Body of the Church.

He is not a Christian, and certainly not a “good Christian.”



Scriptures confirm this truth

My friend Jan thought I was being too severe on this topic.

“You’re making a mountain out of a molehill,” She said.

“Don’t Scriptures teach us to love our neighbor and not be judgmental?”



It is the same old post Vatican II story, claiming that it is “judgmental” to correct bad practices and false teachings and arguing with disputable interpretations of Scriptures.

Well, despite these subjective interpretations, the inspired words of Scriptures provide an unambiguous defense that the custody of the vineyard has been committed by Christ to the Catholic Church alone.

Let me quote just a few verses:

“He who hears you (Peter) hears me, and he who rejects you, rejects me, and he who rejects me, rejects him who sent me.
(Lk 10:16).”


It could not be clearer:

The Protestant who rejects the head, rejects Christ himself, and should not be granted the name Christian.

Christ establishes one Church with a single head:

"And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
(Matt 16:19).

St. Paul is severe in his condemnation of false teachers, e.g. Protestants:

“If any man preaches any other Gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.”
(Gal 1: 9).

In another passage he instructs Catholics to remove themselves from the bad society of non-Catholics:

“And we charge you, brethren, in the name of Our Lord Jesus Christ that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly and not according to the Tradition which they have received of us.”
(2 Thess 3:6).

The Apostle St. John forbade any intercourse with heretics: “If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house or welcome him.”
(2 Jo 1:10)”

Holy Scriptures are clear on the point that only those who belong to the one Church founded by Christ, the Catholic Church, can rightfully be considered Christians.



Popes reiterate this teaching

The traditional Papal Magisterium was also clear on this topic. Let me offer a few texts by way of exemplification.

Pius XII stated unequivocally:

“To be Christian one must be Roman.

One must recognize the oneness of Christ’s Church that is governed by one successor of the Prince of the Apostles who is the Bishop of Rome, Christ’s Vicar on earth”
(Allocution to the Irish pilgrims of October 8, 1957).

How is it possible to be clearer than this about those who can be called Christian?

Leo XIII makes it plain that separated members cannot belong to the same body: “So long as the member was on the body, it lived; separated, it lost its life.

Thus the man, so long as he lives on the body of the [Catholic] Church, he is a Christian; separated from her, he becomes a heretic”
(Encyclical Satis cognitum of June 29, 1896).

Emphasizing the fate of those who break away from the one Faith, he says:

“Whoever leaves her [the Catholic Church] departs from the will and command of Our Lord Jesus Christ; leaving the path of salvation, he enters that of perdition.

Whoever is separated from the Church is united to an adulteress.”
(ibid.).

Certainly, they do not share with us the same title of Christian.

Pope Pius IX stated:

“He who abandons the Chair of Peter on which the Church is founded, is falsely persuaded that he is in the Church of Christ.”
(Quartus supra of January 6 1873, n. 8).



In the Syllabus of Modern Errors,

The proposition that Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion was specifically condemned.
(Pius IX, n. 18)(1).

Therefore, there is only one Christian Church, the Catholic Church, and only those who belong to it should rightfully be called Christians.



How to fight Americanism?

Many persons ask me:

What can I do to fight Progressivism?

Others have requested:
Give me some specific examples of how I can combat Americanism.



Let me offer one concrete way to fight in yourself the tendency toward accommodation with Protestantism.

When you catch yourself calling a Protestant a “Christian,”

Stop and correct yourself.

Call him a Protestant.

It is a way to affirm that you do not accept the Protestant errors and that you acknowledge it for the terrible thing it is:

Protestants denied many Catholic dogmas and for this reason caused that first major crack in the unity of the Catholic Church that caused untold damage to Christendom and the perdition of those souls adhering to it.

It is a small thing, but by such small customs we as a people have been walking steadily toward religious indifferentism.

It is time to set some roadblocks on that path. We should not veil in ambiguous terms our love for the ensemble of the Catholic Faith.

The only true union possible for Catholics with Protestants is by their return to the one true Church of Christ, the Catholic Church.

Only with such a return can they rightfully call themselves Christians.

Numerous traditional Catholic teachings on the this topic can be found in Atila S. Guimarães, Aniums Delendi II, Los Angeles: TIA, 2002, pp. 205-217.
See also "Christian Ecuemnism" in Simon Galloway, No Crisis in the Church? New Olive Press, 2006, pp. 1-51.

Posted on February 6, 2007

Related Topics of Interest

The Lutheran and Calvinist Mentalities
https://www.traditioninaction.org/Cultural/D015cpProtestantMentalities.htm

Rose42 wrote:


“For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens; who does not need daily like those high priests to offer up sacrifices, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. Because this He did once for all when He offered up Himself. For the Law appoints men as high priests who are weak, but the word of the oath which came after the Law appoints a Son made perfect forever.” The operative word is “once.” One sacrifice. There is no need for daily offering of sacrifices.

If you will look at the ninth chapter of Hebrews you will see this same truth repeated in verse 11. “When Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say not of this creation, and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood. He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained,” past tense, “eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled, sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?” Again, the operative word is “once.” “He entered the holy place,” verse 12, “once,” past tense, “having obtained eternal redemption.”

Go over to verse 24 of Hebrews 9, “For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, that is some earthly temple, some earthly sanctuary, some earthly altar, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us, nor was it that He would offer Himself often as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own. Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world, but now,” here’s that word again, “once at the consummation of the ages.” That is, the culminating point of the ages, the very event of His own death and resurrection. “Once at the consummation of the ages, He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. And inasmuch it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment, so Christ, also having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin to those who eagerly await Him.” Again the operative word appears in verse 28: “once.” He does not need to offer Himself often, verse 25 says. He does not need to suffer repeatedly, as verse 26 would indicate from the foundation of the world. Because again, “once,” at the culmination of the ages, He put away, past tense, sin by the sacrifice of Himself.

Chapter 10 of Hebrews, verse 10, “By this will,” that is the will of God, which Jesus came to do as it says in the prior verse 9. “By this will, we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.” Sanctified meaning separated from sin in a saving sense, as well as an ongoing sense. “And it was accomplished through the offering of Jesus Christ, the offering of His body, once. Every priest in contrast,” verse 11, “stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices which can never take away sins, but He having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time sat down at the right hand of God.” The finality of this is so clear. He came, He made one sacrifice which perfected forever them that are sanctified. He came, He made one offering for all, never to be repeated, in contrast to priests repeating over and over and over, sacrifices which can never take away sin. There’s only one sacrifice, made one time, by one person that can take away sin. It is that sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Any priests today are false claimants to a special priesthood, a special order of priests, since now we are all priests. We are a royal priesthood, all believers. We need no mediator; we all have immediate access to God. We need to make no sacrifices because there is no temple, there are no altars, there are no sacrifices, and we are not in need of any priests.

In spite of that, the Roman Catholic system has devised a priesthood, has built in every church on the face of the earth an altar, and around that altar continues to offer sacrifice. Tens of thousands of timed every day, as if they had reinvented the Levitical priesthood. And they will be doing this until the end of time, until the end of the world, it says there in their literature. They have reestablished what God Himself destroyed, and it is a variation of the Levitical priesthood. It is an illegitimate variation of that priesthood. I say variation because it is mingled with cultic pagan mystery and idolatry. The Mass is a sacrifice which can be made only on an altar of some kind and only by a priest.

-snip


https://www.gty.org/library/sermons-library/90-318/explaining-the-heresy-of-the-catholic-mass-part-1
br br b “For it was fitting for us to have suc... (show quote)

Reply
Dec 15, 2018 13:45:08   #
Rose42
 
In a nutshell...Christians have the ultimate authority - the bible - and Catholics use...men's opinions.

Catholicism denies the single sacrifice of Christ on the cross by continuing to sacrifice him. Its mostly pagan with a bit of Christianity here and there.

Reply
Dec 15, 2018 13:49:04   #
Doc110 Loc: York PA
 
02/06/2007 Please, Don’t Call Protestants Christians . . . Call them Heretics . . .

Marian T. Horvat, Ph.D.
https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/m013rpProtestantsChristians.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPC0N0U0aco

It is very common today to hear Catholics call a Protestant “a Christian,” or even, “a good Christian.”

In the United States, it was already a practice before Vatican II because of the tendency of American Catholics to accommodate Protestantism, whose tonus dominated the social and business spheres.

Then, there was the question of adaptation as prominent Protestants joined the Catholic faith, or Catholics entered into marriages with Protestants.

It was just easier to call everyone “Christian.” Supposedly it underplayed differences.

It was meant to create the impression that Catholics and Protestants were cousins in one big, happy family.



Pope Leo XIII condemned this tolerance toward Protestantism under the name of Americanism, the heresy of Americanism, to be more precise.

After Vatican II, needless to say, the practice of calling Protestants Christias has snowballed, with the official conciliar documents assuming this same impropriety.

Hence, the Holy See, Prelates and priests have made its use as widespread as possible.

Accommodation to Protestantism in our days has reached such a point that some Catholics, to distinguish between Catholics and their Protestant “separated brethren,” call themselves Catholic Christians.

A redundancy if I've ever heard one.

Only Catholics can be true Christians.

No one who dissents from the Roman Catholic Church can be a Christian.



The terms are synonymous.

Every time I hear the term Christian used for Protestants, I cringe. Its usage clearly nourishes a trend toward a dangerous religious indifferentism.

Which denies the duty of man to worship God by believing and practicing the one true Catholic Religion.



It is an implicit admission that those who deny the one Faith can nonetheless be Christians, that is, be in the Church of Christ.

Inherently it leads to the progressivist notion that men can be saved in any religion that accepts Christ as Savior.

A “good Lutheran,” a “good Anglican,” a “good Presbyterian –

What does it matter so long as they are good people and sincerely love Christ?

Regardless of who is applying this usage today, I want to stress that it is at variance with the entire tradition of the Catholic Church until the Council.

To consider heretics as Christians is not the teaching of the Church.



Before Vatican II, the Magisterium was always very clear:

It is not a matter of an individual’s character or traits.

No one can be in the Church of Christ without professing the ensemble of the truths of Catholic Faith, being in unity with the Chair of Peter and receiving the same Seven Sacraments.

The only Christian is one who accepts Our Lord Jesus Christ and the Church he established.

Who can have God for Father and not accept the Church for Mother? (Pope Pius IX, Singulari quidem of March 17, 1856)

Who can accept the spouse Christ, and not his mystical bride the Church?

Who can separate the Head, the only begotten Son of God, from the body, which is His Church?
(Pope Leo XIII, Satis cognitum of June 29, 1896). It is not possible.



In short, only those who profess the one Catholic Faith and are united with the Mystical Body of Christ are members of the Church of Christ.

And only those members can legitimately bear the title of honor of Christian.

The Protestant sect started as a revolt, protesting the Church of Christ and, pretending to accept Christ without Peter, the authority He established on earth.

With this split, they left the Church and became heretics.

This used to be clearly said and understood, without sentimental fear of offending one’s neighbors or relatives:

A Protestant is a heretic because he severed himself from the Body of the Church.

He is not a Christian, and certainly not a “good Christian.”



Scriptures confirm this truth

My friend Jan thought I was being too severe on this topic.

“You’re making a mountain out of a molehill,” She said.

“Don’t Scriptures teach us to love our neighbor and not be judgmental?”



It is the same old post Vatican II story, claiming that it is “judgmental” to correct bad practices and false teachings and arguing with disputable interpretations of Scriptures.

Well, despite these subjective interpretations, the inspired words of Scriptures provide an unambiguous defense that the custody of the vineyard has been committed by Christ to the Catholic Church alone.

Let me quote just a few verses:

“He who hears you (Peter) hears me, and he who rejects you, rejects me, and he who rejects me, rejects him who sent me.
(Lk 10:16).”


It could not be clearer:

The Protestant who rejects the head, rejects Christ himself, and should not be granted the name Christian.

Christ establishes one Church with a single head:

"And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
(Matt 16:19).

St. Paul is severe in his condemnation of false teachers, e.g. Protestants:

“If any man preaches any other Gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.”
(Gal 1: 9).

In another passage he instructs Catholics to remove themselves from the bad society of non-Catholics:

“And we charge you, brethren, in the name of Our Lord Jesus Christ that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly and not according to the Tradition which they have received of us.”
(2 Thess 3:6).

The Apostle St. John forbade any intercourse with heretics: “If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house or welcome him.”
(2 Jo 1:10)”

Holy Scriptures are clear on the point that only those who belong to the one Church founded by Christ, the Catholic Church, can rightfully be considered Christians.



Popes reiterate this teaching

The traditional Papal Magisterium was also clear on this topic. Let me offer a few texts by way of exemplification.

Pius XII stated unequivocally:

“To be Christian one must be Roman.

One must recognize the oneness of Christ’s Church that is governed by one successor of the Prince of the Apostles who is the Bishop of Rome, Christ’s Vicar on earth”
(Allocution to the Irish pilgrims of October 8, 1957).

How is it possible to be clearer than this about those who can be called Christian?

Leo XIII makes it plain that separated members cannot belong to the same body: “So long as the member was on the body, it lived; separated, it lost its life.

Thus the man, so long as he lives on the body of the [Catholic] Church, he is a Christian; separated from her, he becomes a heretic”
(Encyclical Satis cognitum of June 29, 1896).

Emphasizing the fate of those who break away from the one Faith, he says:

“Whoever leaves her [the Catholic Church] departs from the will and command of Our Lord Jesus Christ; leaving the path of salvation, he enters that of perdition.

Whoever is separated from the Church is united to an adulteress.”
(ibid.).

Certainly, they do not share with us the same title of Christian.

Pope Pius IX stated:

“He who abandons the Chair of Peter on which the Church is founded, is falsely persuaded that he is in the Church of Christ.”
(Quartus supra of January 6 1873, n. 8).



In the Syllabus of Modern Errors,

The proposition that Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion was specifically condemned.
(Pius IX, n. 18)(1).

Therefore, there is only one Christian Church, the Catholic Church, and only those who belong to it should rightfully be called Christians.



How to fight Americanism?

Many persons ask me:

What can I do to fight Progressivism?

Others have requested:
Give me some specific examples of how I can combat Americanism.



Let me offer one concrete way to fight in yourself the tendency toward accommodation with Protestantism.

When you catch yourself calling a Protestant a “Christian,”

Stop and correct yourself.

Call him a Protestant.

It is a way to affirm that you do not accept the Protestant errors and that you acknowledge it for the terrible thing it is:

Protestants denied many Catholic dogmas and for this reason caused that first major crack in the unity of the Catholic Church that caused untold damage to Christendom and the perdition of those souls adhering to it.

It is a small thing, but by such small customs we as a people have been walking steadily toward religious indifferentism.

It is time to set some roadblocks on that path. We should not veil in ambiguous terms our love for the ensemble of the Catholic Faith.

The only true union possible for Catholics with Protestants is by their return to the one true Church of Christ, the Catholic Church.

Only with such a return can they rightfully call themselves Christians.

Numerous traditional Catholic teachings on the this topic can be found in Atila S. Guimarães, Aniums Delendi II, Los Angeles: TIA, 2002, pp. 205-217.   
See also "Christian Ecuemnism" in Simon Galloway, No Crisis in the Church? New Olive Press, 2006, pp. 1-51.

Posted on February 6, 2007

Related Topics of Interest

The Lutheran and Calvinist Mentalities
https://www.traditioninaction.org/Cultural/D015cpProtestantMentalities.htm


Rose42 wrote:
In a nutshell...Christians have the ultimate authority - the bible - and Catholics use...men's opinions.Catholicism denies the single sacrifice of Christ on the cross by continuing to sacrifice him. Its mostly pagan with a bit of Christianity here and there.

Reply
 
 
Dec 15, 2018 13:51:03   #
Rose42
 
Roman Catholicism is a mix. It is mostly paganism with a little Christianity sprinkled into it and with a lot of Christian terminology in order to deceive and delude souls. It is a demonic religion that does not bring salvation. Cannot.

Reply
Dec 15, 2018 14:24:11   #
Doc110 Loc: York PA
 
Ahhhh - - the joy of creating strife and division !!!

Yup . . . that all Protestant are, is schismatic Heretics, separated from the One true Church founded by Jesus Christ himself.

Yeah religious sectarianism, . . . that's why Protestants just throw out 1,484 years of Christian Catholic doctrine, or 1,987 years old present day biblical teaching, and Christian Church oral and written historical traditions.

And then you Protestant try saying, we have new Protestant religion, Which has been proven time wrong, biblically, time again.

Protestantism, Its just a man-Made fabricated invention, by Martin Luther, Jon Calvin and other, with a new total different teaching doctrines theology and philosophy loosely united by the existing Bible's.

Protestantism, ls just another man-made religion, that tries to unite It's self to the Christian bible.


That's a self serving Protestant religious purpose, don't you think . . . ?


On top of that, Martin Luther ("Dumbed-Down") the KIV Bible, which further lead's up to independent Bible self-interpretation against a strict Catholic Magisterium biblical teaching.

Which leads us to the; 30,000 plus, present modern day schismatic Protestant Churches today and growing. It's a literal translation and self-interpretation of the 1611 KIV bible.

And the consequences of this man-Made authority doctrines, by the Protestant 30,000 religion's and the laity Protestants, or little Pope's, thinking they can interpret bible any which way they want or think they can.

We haven't spoken about the charismatic Evangelicals and the fundamentalists Protestants, that is a totally new schismatic protestant church unto themselves.
They believe in anything by scriptural literal verses and at the same time totally not unified with so many contradictions and believing a false Jesus.

The "5 Horse-men Horse-women of the Protestant Fundamentalist Apocalypse.” They will try and (brow-beat) you into Protestant evangelical fundamentalists religious submission.

We Catholics have a saying; From John Henry Newman a convert to Catholicism in the 1890's very controversial.
To be deep in history, is to cease being Protestant.

Thats why the Protestant heretics, don't want to talk about the history or the History of the Catholic Church.

For example a manuscript found in 1887 in Constantinople dating back to the mid to late 1st century AD.

It's called, The Didache “The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, The Early Church Patristic Fathers.
https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-148097-1.html

In the manuscript, are the teachings and the 7 sacraments practices and the Catholic Mass liturgy, of the Early Christian Church and is still practiced 1,987 years to this day.

Also by that time "The Church" started to call themselves "The Universal Church" or from the Greek, The Catholic Church.

Can't change history or Church history, that's just the way it is.

So if Martin Luther, John Calvin, Zwingli and other reformists, if they had this document, The Didache" back in the AD 1517 Protestant reformation, would they have the 7 Sacraments in their protestant churches ?

I'm not too sure, because Luther, Calvin and others rejected anything remotely Catholic, most Protestant Churches might observe those one or two of the 7 sacraments and only as a

Only a symbolic gesture, and not the 7 sacrament that Jesus, the Apostles the early Church fathers and the Church hierarchy taught. etc.


So is this is why I call Protestants a schismatic apostate heresy ? It's all factual, I'm not embellishing these factual statements.

The Catholic Church from the beginning of "The Church" e.g. The Catholic-Universal Church" has been fighting heresies, schismatic division since the beginning foundations of the Catholic Church


And that's why Protestants revised the Catholic bible from 73 books, minus several chapter and verses, to the present day King James version Bible, of 66 books minus the several chapters and verses from other books.

I guess the cliché analogy, "The Mean's Justify the End's," . . . wouldn't you agree . . . ?

Consider also that new Greek biblical texts, was not from the old Greek Septuagint bible Greek text type, e.g. The Old Testament that was written in and completed around BC 250.


Hmmmmm now why would those rascally protest's do that ?


Justification for Protestantism ? Hmmmmm kinda undermine's Christian, to justify their own type of religious Protestant existence.


So, Remove 7 books out of the Bible, and chapters and verses also out several books, to help identify and explain your new man-Made Protestant theology and Church.

And then to top it off, reject and modify the Bible to the new Protestant for of teaching the bible. multiply that by 30,000 plus, Churches, you have total Protestant chaos and Protestant dis-unity.

That's not what Jesus Christ taught and instructed his Apostles and early Church Patristic Fathers and Church hierarchy. etc.

I'd say that is what is a Protestant heresy in religion.

By the way, Love how you are cofounding the Protestant heretics . . . your driving them nuts . . .


When you bump into Protestant knuckle-heads, you finally met, the cause of Protestant strife here on the OPP Religious forum.


And that's why Protestants are heretics . . .


Rose42 wrote:
Roman Catholicism is a mix. It is mostly paganism with a little Christianity sprinkled into it and with a lot of Christian terminology in order to deceive and delude souls. It is a demonic religion that does not bring salvation. Cannot.

Reply
Dec 15, 2018 14:36:26   #
Rose42
 
Here's some more heresy from the same article. On how priests blaspheme Christ's perfect sacrifice.

"John O’Brien, a Catholic priest, has helped Roman Catholics to understand the importance of the Mass. He has written a book called “The Faith of Millions: The Credentials of the Catholic Religion.” It is a classic work. This is what he writes, John O’Brien, a very popular work. “When the priest announces the tremendous words of consecration,” this is the Mass, “he reaches up into the heavens, brings Christ down from His throne and places Him upon our altar to be offered up again as the victim for the sins of man. It is a power exercised by the priest greater than that of saints and angels, greater than that of seraphim and cherubim. Indeed, it is a power greater even than the power of the Virgin Mary. While the Blessed Virgin was the human agency by which Christ became incarnate a single time, the priest brings Christ down from heaven, and renders Him present on our altar as the eternal victim.” You wonder why you always see a crucifix and not an empty cross? “The priest brings Christ down from heaven and renders Him present on our altar as the eternal victim for the sins of man, not once but a thousand times.” "

Reply
Dec 17, 2018 08:04:49   #
jack sequim wa Loc: Blanchard, Idaho
 
Hello Rose42,

Then there are the satanic Black Masses in the Vatican.

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/vatican/esp_vatican44.htm

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2018/01/25/multiple-catholic-priests-expose-the-practice-of-satanism-within-the-vatican/


The link I'm posting below has multiple "international Court" links to crimes of the Catholic Church that the courts are pressing charges...... It is terrifying.
I'm becoming more and more convinced when dealing with some indoctrinated Catholics, Satan's grip and strongholds go so deep, many times the dealings are demonicaly lead Catholics.
Keep the Ephesians armor on sister and God bless you.

http://itccs.org/2018/06/22/%e2%80%8bninth-circle-catholic-black-mass-halted-in-geneva-after-pope-francis-confronted-by-common-law-sheriffs-popes-illness-cover-story-conceals-incident-and-real-purpose-of-papal-visit/

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Faith, Religion, Spirituality
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.