mardi 13 juillet 2010

Added today to someone who claimed the Pope as "vicar of Christ" is an admitted "substitute for Christ"

K., the link you gave as a "Roman Catechism" goes to an anti-Catholic propagandist.

"Exposing the Idolatry of Mary Worship: An Overview John MacArthur, Jr. - Explaining the Heresy of Catholicism (Part 1)"

is the first of the sublinks.

If you want to know, or presuming you already know, prove to others something about Catholic Doctrine, I suggest you go to Catholic sources.

Not necessarily exclusively the most modern ones, I (being Catholic myself) tend to prefer older material (yes, some of it is on the web), like St THomas Aquinas or Catechism of St Pius X.

A vicar is not a substitute.A vicar namely claims to obey the one he is vicar for.

George Washington was a substitute for George III (who was himself something of a substitute for James III or Charles III Edward or ...), and Wilhelmus van Oranje-Nassau was a substitute for the Spanish King Philip II. A substitute means substituting ones own points of view to those of the ruler.

If you want to see a real adoration of a substitute rather than a vicar look at Notre Dame during French Revolution, where "Goddess Reason" was adored. Since that goddess was personified or acted by a harlot, it gives you a bit "harlot in scarlet" as well.

And if you say "the harlot in scarlet is supposed to rule Rome" (as in Seven Hills) consider please the fact that the French Revolution definitely took over Rome just when those words about the Pope as Vicar were definied by Vatican Council (I as those say who acknowledge a II). The ruler of the Seven Hills now is Berlusconi, not Benedict XVI. But the mayor of Rome in 1870's and 1880's (just after taking it away from Papal administration) really was into the substituting business.

A Pagan temple had been made for the "all of the gods" - pantheon. One Pope removed Pagan statues, made an exorcism, dedicated it to the special intercession and protection of St Mary and All Saints (which is the reason we celebrate November 1st), but that mayor of Rome took it away from the Church and - renamed it Pantheon, making it a tomb for excommunicated freemasons of renown, like the robbers of Rome.

(Written under my FB Profile Hans-Georg Lundahl)

(Added after a comment in which K. says she did not believe the Pope was vicar of Christ in Catholicism when she was a Catholic, i e she had been adapting the beliefs that should have been Catholic to Protestant Bible interpretation:)

I did not say John MacArthur charges money, I say he is anti-Catholic.
I did not say the pope was not a vicar, I said a vicar is not a substitute. A rebel is a substitute. A vicar is not a rebel. It is another matter if a vicar is a real vicar or a sham one, but a vicar is in matters of state or other things easier than Bible to check in a dispassionate manner, something other than a rebel who substitutes his rule for that of the ruler.

So, even if what you discovered about the Catechism was right, it was the Bible study or comparison with Bible made by JMcA that was not right.
Besides you do not listen very well.

Eric told you Luther did not accept all of the Bible and you answered "surely, we must accept the Bible".

No Catholic here has attacked the Bible - a safe bet even before reading all of the comments - we have been saying Catholicism is Biblical and your Protestantism is not Biblical. Also: God gave us a Church to trust before entrusting it with the New Testament Books of the Bible.

Patriarchs came before Prophets, because there was a people before there were people speaking to it.

Apostles came before Evangelists, because St Peter on Pentecost had to save as many Jews from beginning Judaism into Christianity as possible before someone could sit down and write about it (St Luke, a convert from Pagan ignorance or maybe even worship).

(She had earlier said the Roman Church must be wrong because the killers of Christ were Romans, so I added:)

Besides you forget that the Roman Centurion who pushed a lance in Christ's side immediately converted.

THAT is in the Gospel. Catholic France and Orthodox Roumania have had some dispute about the honour of having later had the legion of that first Roman convert, the Centurion Longinus.

Whether Pilate later converted and died a martyr, as Copts say, or committed sacrilege and died by his own hand and had his corpse taken by demons to a lake in the Alps, as the neighbours of "Pilatus-See" say, is not universally accepted, but Longinus was for sure and certain a convert.

They shall look up to whom they have pierced through, I think the Gospeller quoted a Prophecy, and it was fulfilled then and there.

1 commentaire:

  1. @R.: "Jesus is the rock not Peter"

    It is even more clear Jesus is the good shepherd, not Peter. Yet He made Peter precisely good shepherd when meeting him after resurrection at lake Genesareth.

    If Jesus is Rock and Made Peter Rock or if Jesus is shepherd and made Peter shepherd, either way Jesus made Peter vicar.

    Whatever is the rock Jesus refers to in verse 18, verse 19 continues:

    "... and I will give THEE the keys of the kingdom of Heaven."

    He did not say he would keep them exclusively for himself, but that he would give them to Peter.