Comparing Roman Catholicism and Biblical Christianity



Psalm 119:130

NKJV

The entrance of Your words gives light;
It gives understanding to the simple.


Though I’m a former Catholic, I haven’t gone to Proclaiming the Truth, Mike Gendron’s ministry, for learning resources. That will probably change. This morning my husband and I watched this extremely helpful video.



 

57 thoughts on “Comparing Roman Catholicism and Biblical Christianity

  1. Thanks for posting this, Maria. I have previously seen this good video. As he relates here, there are two facets to Gendron’s ministry; reaching out to Roman Catholics with the Gospel and having to counter the ecumenical damage of “big name” evangelicals who have embraced Rome like Billy Graham, Chuck Colson, and Bill Bright. I imagine that much of the opposition to his ministry comes from evangelical pastors, the very people who should be supporting him.

    Liked by 3 people

  2. After the Exile, the succession seems to have been, at first, in a direct line from father to son; but later the *civil authorities* arrogated to themselves the right of appointment.*
    *Read this as ROMAN CIVIL AUTHORITIES–not the church.*
    Antiochus IV Epiphanes for instance, deposed Onias III in favor of Jason, who was followed by Menelaus. Herod the Great [died 4 BC] nominated no less than six high priests; Archelaus [died 4 AD], two. The Roman legate Quirinius [died 21 AD] and his successors exercised the right of appointment, as did Agrippa I [died 44 AD], Herod of Chalcis [died 48 AD], and Agrippa II . Even the people occasionally elected candidates to the office. The high priests before the Exile were, it seems, appointed for life…
    I would challenge anyone to prove the RCC was actually a religious body before 1100 AD. Everywhere I read, the *Roman Government* itself was the one appointing High Priests and Bishops over each area. Note: Contrary to the decree laid out in Scripture, there was only *one Bishop* in an area–certainly not a biblical pattern.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. If people would spend half as much time actually learning what the Catholic Church teaches rather than regurgitating lies about it and coming up with their own personal brand of Protestantism, we wouldn’t have videos like this polluting the internet. For each time I have heard someone claim to have been Catholic for 30, 40, 50 years and who says they all of a sudden started reading the Bible “for themselves” and “realized” how “wrong” the Church is, I would say that they are either completely lying or that they spent decades being unimaginably apathetic toward their personal growth in the Faith. And I am supposed to believe that suddenly after all that time the “Holy Spirit” spoke to them the “truth” that the Catholic Church is so wrong. It just seems completely ridiculous. The more I see of this kind of “testimony” the more I am apt to believe that the “ex-Catholic” never was Catholic to begin with. They are like Judas.

    Like

      • Well Maria, I am a Catholic. You say you are former Catholic and I guess you might have eventually succumbed to the plethora of lies and misinterpretations that have always been peddled by the likes of Mike Gendron, Larry Wessels, Robert Zins and James White (to mention but a few) about the Catholic Church. This is so unfortunate. If I may ask, where did all these so-called expositors of Biblical truths derive their authority to make those abusive and putrid claims about Christ’s Catholic church. They would all point to the Bible, right??? Each one interpreting the Bible to suit their own prejudiced thinking and suppositions as if that was the norm for exegesis during the apostolic times.

        I dare say that the apostles and early bishops would stand dazed with wild, unspeakable amazement were they to visit the earth in our times and find out that the writings they left behind (some of which were compiled into the New Testament) are now being held out as the full deposit of Christian truth to be taught. The fact is that some of the apostles wrote letters to certain churches to address specific exigencies and misconceptions that were pertinent to those churches in question. Never for once did it cross any apostle’s mind that their writings compiled together represented the compendium of ALL Christian truth that were to be adhered, to the exclusion of the oral transmissions they were giving alongside, which were also equally authoritative.
        Hence, Paul’s instructions to Timothy in 2Tim 2:2: “And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable people who will also be qualified to teach others”. PLEASE PROTESTANTS, GIVE US A BREAK!!! You realize from the above quote that Paul believed in oral transmissions of the truths Christ entrusted to his apostles alongside what they were writing. They both form ONE DEPOSIT of the Word of God with the Church acting as the authentic and authoritative interpreter of the truths they contain. This was not to cease with the apostles. NEVER!!! The safeguarding of truth in this manner would continue throughout succeeding generations until the end of time just as Our Lord promised His disciples just before His ascension, Mat 28:20: “and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” The Church is therefore no less an authoritative interpreter or expounder of Christ’s truth than it was during the apostolic times.

        Protestantism has therefore no basis at all !!! It just dwells on pick-and-choose method of exegesis to suit one’s biased opinion as Mike Gendron has just done in his video. Protestantism distorts Scripture so pathetically, voiding its verses of their contextual and coherent meaning thereby making so many Scriptural passages meaningless and superfluous.
        To show you one example of pick and choose, why did Mike Gendron dwell on Paul’s saying (Acts 16:31): “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household ” to argue out his point that just believing is all that is required for salvation, and nothing else??? Paul was definitely responding to the jailer’s question in Acts 16:30: “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”. Is Mike not aware that this same question was posed to Peter by the Jews on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2:37:“Brothers, what shall we do?”? And what was Peter’s response??? “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.” (Acts 2:38).
        What makes Mike dwell only on Acts 16:30-31 in contending against the necessity of, for example, baptism for salvation? Another person in doing exegesis could also have started from Acts 2:37-38 in which baptism is clearly spelt out as necessary for forgiveness of sins which, of course is pertinent to salvation and consequently argue out strongly for the salvific nature of baptism . This is the kind of selectiveness I have been referring to. We pick and overstate verses in scripture and in so doing unfortunately eclipse and obliterate other verses equally bearing on whatever subject that is being discussed and this is the product of just one thing: PROTESTANTISM which borders on nothing other than one’s private opinion of the Bible instead of deferring to a teaching authority which was clearly intended by Christ to guide us into ALL truth always. Is it any wonder that Christendom is so fragmented and divided??? NOT AT ALL!!!

        Like

        • AYAW, I wish you had said more about yourself than, “I am a Catholic.” Aren’t you willing to take a stand for your beliefs?

          AYAW, I don’t have the ability to answer all your assertions but will answer what I can. I never knew of Mr. Gendron, Wessels, Zins, White, or other apologists like them at the time I came to the Lord Jesus Christ. Since then I’ve come to know of and benefited from their work. My salvation was brought about by hearing and believing God’s Word, in a home Bible study on Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians, and by publicly professing that Jesus is Lord, my Lord.

          Romans 10

          6 But the righteousness of faith speaks in this way, “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’”(that is, to bring Christ down from above) 7 or, “‘Who will descend into the abyss?’” (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). 8 But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (that is, the word of faith which we preach): 9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. 11 For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.”

          As Tom has mentioned, Protestants and Evangelicals agree on the essentials of the faith, and because of this I believe it is false to assert that we are interpreting the Scriptures privately, that is, with prejudice.

          Our authority is God-given. Anyone who knows the Lord, studies His Word, and desires to serve Him can do so. At times freedom causes problems, however this is preferable to following an institution which promulgates so much error. If the Lord has truly given the Roman Catholic Church sole authority to interpret and expound the Scriptures, why does it so frequently get things wrong, as in the case of its denial that Jesus Christ is the only Mediator between God and man and – contrary to what is written – by asserting that His Mother shares the mediatorial office with Him? Also, does an institution lead us into all truth or rather the Holy Spirit? Is the Bishop of Rome the head of Christ’s Church or rather Jesus Christ Himself?

          AYAW, you are right that Acts 2 is a fuller treatment regarding faith and baptism, but I have to correct what you’ve said in this context about Protestants. We do not go by private interpretation, and Protestantism isn’t the origin of division though we often share in the guilt of sectarianism. Roman Catholicism is divisive, sectarian according to the Scriptures:

          1 Corinthians 1

          10 Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. 11 For it has been declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of Chloe’s household, that there are contentions among you. 12 Now I say this, that each of you says, “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” or “I am of Cephas,” or “I am of Christ.” 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?

          You must see that Rome claims that she is “of Cephas [Peter]” by claiming that the Papacy is the Petrine office and that Peter had primacy. May our gracious Lord open your eyes! Many of us have been where you are. It was painful but blessed to be taught of the Lord.

          Liked by 4 people

          • Well, Maria, let me begin with your last point where you accuse Catholicism of sectarianism. It is ridiculously surprising you are using 1Corn 1:10-13 to justify this claim of yours!!! This is one case of misapplication of scripture, that of putting a square peg in a round hole. We see in those verses that Paul was condemning factionalism that was rife within the church at Corinth because the congregation then was being split along various factions identified respectively with Paul, Peter, Apollo, etc. For example, the faction for Apollo would deny and disclaim having to do anything with Paul and his teachings and vice versa. This definitely was breeding disunity and divisiveness and Paul was cautioning against that.
            How is such a phenomenon identifiable with the Catholic Church, Maria????? Has the Church for example denounced the epistles of Paul just because it upholds the primacy of the Petrine ministry??? Weren’t the writings of Paul included as part of the New Testament canon by the Catholic Church??? Doesn’t the Church even commemorate these two glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, together on their feast day which falls on every year, June 29th??? How does Peter-Paul factionalism play out here? You see, your interpretation is clearly out of context and therefore very inapplicable in this regard.

            What is your view now on the salvific role of baptism given that you have conceded Acts 2 treats it as integral to faith in the believer’s born again experience??? How does it play out in the Protestant Sola Fide tenet?

            Does Catholicism place Mary on the same level with Jesus as Mediator, as you claim? Not at all! The intercession of Mary and the saints benefits us only through the infinite merits of Jesus Christ the God-Man. The saints in heaven (Church Triumphant) as well as those of us on earth (Church Militant) and also those in purgatory (Church Suffering) are all integrated into that inseparable bond of love which is in Christ Jesus even as Paul says that: “neither death, nor life, nor angels, …………………………can separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus”, Rom 8:38-39.
            Devotion to Mary therefore doesn’t usurp Christ’s sole mediatorship as Protestants claim. He only is our mediator in the context of the Redemption He has singularly accomplished for us all when He offered Himself as infinite atonement to God on Calvary’s tree.

            Touching on your claim that Protestantism doesn’t go by private interpretation and that you are united on “essentials” of your faith, the evidence to the contrary is so glaring and indisputable. It has to be emphasized here that Protestantism does not so much teach Christ’s saving faith as it is to lead people to the Bible so that the Bible itself could teach them Christ’s saving faith. It maintains that while it is good and edifying to hear the voice of the church, the Christian must needs go to the Bible, the “Constitution” of the church for the final binding convictions of their faith. This view doesn’t characterize the Church as Christ our Lord constituted it, from the outset. The fullness of apostolic authority to teach the Faithful began in the Church right from the very day of its inauguration by the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. That authority was never consigned to a book; neither was it also superseded when the New Testament was written. Protestants arrive at the notion of Sola Scriptura just by default. The “Bible Alone” concept was never in existence during the time of the apostles. It was given birth and became full-blown (though it had had some antecedents in the likes of Wycliffe, Hus, etc.) after the “Reformers” burst onto the scene and rejected the authority of the Catholic Church.

            You pray the Lord opens my eyes. Thankfully, He has opened it already regarding this web of confusion that has tangled both Catholics and Protestants for centuries. I only pray for you all who have abandoned the Catholic faith that the Lord opens your eyes to its legitimacy. May the good Lord unite us all even as He Himself said: “there shall be one flock and one shepherd”, John 10:16.

            Like

              • Maria, you seem to suggest the phrase “the likes of ” is a derogatory expression. I don’t think so. It is just used to classify a group of people or things of a given type or kind and in my case, Wycliffe and Hus, since they are in a way considered forerunners of the Protestant Reformation. My intention is not to deride anybody, far from that !!!

                Liked by 1 person

            • AYAW, Catholics really do maintain that they are “of Peter,” in saying that their church is founded upon Peter as the rock. The Church is founded upon The Rock, Jesus Christ, and Peter’s testimony about Jesus, that He is the Christ, the Son of the Living God, which is the entire apostolic testimony, the universal – that is, catholic – testimony of the Apostles.

              Romans 9:33

              33 As it is written:

              “Behold, I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and rock of offense,
              And whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.”

              1 Corinthians 10

              1 Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, 2 all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, 3 all ate the same spiritual food, 4 and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ.

              Baptism is a subject I can’t speak to right now because I am not knowledgeable in this area. But what always strikes me is the simplicity of the statement of the Lord in the context of this question, in John 6:

              28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? 29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent. 

              AYAW, among many other unscriptural titles, the Roman Catholic Church has given Jesus’ Mother Mary the title “Mediatrix of all graces,” which are said to flow from Christ through her. She is active, it is claimed, in this way:

              “Mary places herself between her Son and mankind in the reality of their wants, needs and sufferings. She puts herself ‘in the middle,’ that is to say she acts as a mediatrix not as an outsider, but in her position as mother. She knows that as such she can point out to her Son the needs of mankind, and in fact, she ‘has the right’ to do so. Her mediation is thus in the nature of intercession: Mary ‘intercedes’ for mankind…”

              (Redemptoris Mater, 41).

              The Son of God needed a mother to become a human being – the Son of Man. As Prophet, Priest, and King, who has been perfected forever by His sufferings, He does not need His dear Mother either to arouse His compassion and interest in us, or  – as I have read elsewhere – to appease His anger against us. He mediates between the Father and us, having made the perfect sacrifice. No one stands between Him and us! It’s perfect and glorious and simple – One Mediator!

              God the Father ← Jesus, Son of God and Son of Man → man.

              God ← God-Man → man.

              I remember the worship we gave Mary when, in Catholic grade school and high school, we recited to her “The Litany to the Blessed Virgin Mary,” which offers her praise suitable to God only, as the “refuge of sinners.”

              Every time we preach the Gospel – which Catholicism does not do -we preach saving faith in Jesus Christ. The Gospel is a proclamation of the death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord with the call to repent and trust in Him only to be saved, not to trust in a church or any other intermediary.

              The Catholic Church’s adherence to both Holy Scripture and Tradition has led to her promotion of Tradition over Holy Scripture. This Tradition includes the “sacrifice of the Mass,” which obscures the understanding of the finished work of Christ, undermining His unique and everlasting priesthood set forth in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Additionally, Tradition is never said to be “God-breathed” as Holy Scripture is. 

              Thank you for your kindness in being willing to pray for us but there can’t be unity with the Church of Rome because you preach another gospel, and Christ alone is Head of the Church, His body.

              Liked by 1 person

    • AYAW, I am an ex-Catholic who has accepted Jesus Christ as my Savior by faith alone and I once thought as you do. Catholics look at evangelical Protestantism and see a disorganized patchwork, but it is within evangelicalism that the Holy Spirit is bringing people to Jesus Christ. Our sole authority is God’s Word. Not an institution and not a man. Although we disagree on secondary issues, we are united in the Good News of salvation by God’s grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone. We are not a worldly institution, like Catholicism, but a spiritual body, headed by Christ and made up of all who have placed their faith in Him. Accept Jesus Christ as your Savior by faith alone and enter the Body of Christ!

      Catholics have always boasted in their institutional church with its infallible pope who was incapable of leading the church into error. Yet many Catholics now view pope Francis as a heretic because he has lifted the ban on communion for remarried divorcees. Do you follow the Catholicism of Francis or the Catholicism of his conservative opponents? If Francis is fallible, what does that say about Catholicism’s other non-Scriptural traditions? When you give authority to men, you will always be led into error and disappointment. The only sure standard is the unchanging Word of God.

      Man’s salvation isn’t in an institution, it’s in a Person, Jesus Christ. Catholicism has thousands of rules and rituals that hide the simple Good News! of salvation by God’s grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone. Forsake institutional religion and accept Jesus as your Savior by faith alone! Then ask the Lord to lead you to an evangelical church in your area that teaches God’s Word without compromise.

      Liked by 4 people

  4. Tom, to quote you:”When you give authority to men, you will always be led into error and disappointment. The only sure standard is the unchanging Word of God.” On this premise of yours, were the apostles and other inspired writers of the Bible super humans or angelic beings??? Were they not human beings like us? And if you believe that in spite of their humanity, God vested in them that infallible authority to author the sacred writings, what makes you think the same God cannot continue to inspire other humans to teach with his infallible authority? Did the Jesus or any of his apostles preach Sola Scriptura??? Where from this notion that the Bible alone is solely God’s word against St Paul’s clear injunction that ” stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter”. (2 Th 2;15). Am sorry, Protestantism is at best a man-made doctrine.

    Faith alone even without baptism??? How would you explain Peter’s response in Acts 2:38: “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.”

    Please, give us a break!!! Protestantism just hinges on pick-and-choose exegesis without recourse to any established teaching authority, something which the early Christians so readily believed in and upheld. You claim that people are being led from Catholicism into “born again” Christianity. I hope you are also aware that many protestants and anti-Catholics have also come to disillusionment and are embracing the truth of Catholicism.

    You say that: “Man’s salvation isn’t in an institution, it’s in a Person” and that is very true, but then why create a dichotomy between the person of Jesus and what he says or commands??? In fact, Protestantism is a religion of needless and unwarranted dichotomies creating them when they don’t in reality exist. Protestantism sees:

    (i) a dichotomy between faith and good works instead of viewing them as one unit working hand-in-hand,

    (ii) a dichotomy between the person of Christ and His Church instead viewing the latter as His body and therefore allegorically or even organically linked to Him, (The Church represents His head, hands, feet, etc as St. Paul says)

    (iii) a dichotomy between Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition instead of viewing them as one single deposit of the Word of God entrusted to the apostles to be passed on till the end of the world,

    (iv) a dichotomy between Christ’s redemptive work and the Sacraments instead of seeing the latter as channels through which His graces flow unto us,

    (v) a dichotomy between justification and sanctification instead of seeing them as one process in a Christian’s life. They would say for example that God FIRST of all declares the sinner just and THEN LATER He makes them just instead of seeing that the declaration occurs concomitantly with the actual cleansing of the soul. Have you forgotten Acts 10:15: “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”??? God cleansing us of our sins is the basis upon which we are accounted as truly righteous and not on any forensic impartation of righteousness as evangelical “Christianity” preaches.

    The list of endless dichotomies goes on ………………………………. The early Christians had no such dichotomy theories in mind.

    Like

    • AYAW, I’m curious to know your thoughts on the current controversy surrounding pope Francis’ lifting of the ban on communion for remarried divorcees. Conservative Catholics view this new teaching in which Francis has invoked “authentic magisterium” as heresy. Catholics have always claimed the Holy Spirit would never allow a pope to lead the church into error, but according to conservative Catholics, Francis is doing exactly that. Do you place your faith in the church apart from a heretical pope? But how is that possible when the pope is the prime member of the magisterium? Do the conservatives ignore the pope and appoint themselves as de facto magisterium? By what right do they do this? You present Catholicism as a united monolith subservient to Peter’s successor but this is clearly not the case. We also know that many liberal priests already allow communion to remarried divorcees. Who has the right view in this controversy since there are many on both sides of the issue? What/who is your ultimate authoritative source?

      Liked by 3 people

      • Tom, have you taken pains to listen to the pope or read his post-synod Amoris Laetitia document or you are just generalizing??? It is not true he has lifted ban on communion for the civilly married or remarried divorcee. His Amoris Laetitia document contains no doctrinally definitive statement that changes the Church’s historic or traditional view on this. Please take time and read the document carefully yourself. What pope Francis is advocating is that the Church adopts a more sensitive and accommodating attitude towards those in such marriages so as not to destroy their sense of belongingness to the Christian community but rather gradually lead them to Christ.
        To quote him for example in his document No 243: “It is important that the divorced who have entered a new union should be made to feel part of the Church. “They are not excommunicated” and they should not be treated as such, since they remain part of the ecclesial community”. So please, stop accusing the pope of heresy for he has made no heretical statements. Neither has “he invoked the magisterium” (these are your own words, Tom) to issue out any dogmatic or definitive statements bearing on the aforementioned issue.

        Now I agree with your point that the pope’s document has elicited diverse and conflicting views among the Faithful but the Church’s oneness and indefectibility rests not on varied opinions of its members per say, be they theologians or even bishops, on any given subject as you seem to indicate. Its oneness rests rather on the doctrinal homogeneity across the globe as well as the immutability in time of its magisterial, authoritative teachings that it has always presented to the Faithful in official documents and catechisms. So you see, this Liberalist/Conservative dichotomy wouldn’t apply here in determining oneness.

        Also note that there will always be dissenting views against one or more church doctrines. For example, one can get so-called Catholics who may even be priests or theologians denying Christian truths such as the Divinity of Christ or Christ’s Real Presence in the Eucharist. This is sad but the intrinsic unity and purity of the church’s doctrines will always remain because it rests not on people per say but on Christ.

        In concluding my answer to your question, my ultimate source of authority lies in the Church’s official teachings and catechisms such as the Catechism of the Catholic Church or Council of Trent decrees, etc. This is what characterizes a true Catholic and a Christian.

        Like

  5. For me as a former person that practiced catholicism this verse is what won my heart over FULLY to the True Jesus *John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
    (*Jesus said so. No religious practice-no good works-just our Lord and Saviour-Jesus)
    May you seek Him alone AYAW ❤ ❤ ❤

    Liked by 4 people

    • Sure Beth, I seek Him alone, and to do that means I seek Him on His own terms alone, not mine. I do that by heeding what He Himself said to His apostles: “He that hears you hears me and he that rejects you rejects me ………………..” Lk 10:16.
      I also heed what He communicated to us through His apostle Paul: “Hold fast to the teachings you receive from us, either by our word of mouth or our epistles”, 2Thes 2:15.
      I do all these by acknowledging that obeying the voice of the Church is synonymous with obeying His voice because He Himself gave finality to the voice and authority to His Church and not to individuals even as He said: “If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen EVEN TO THE CHURCH, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector”, Mat 18:17.
      He finally sealed everything with His unfailing promise “And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age”, Mat 28:20.

      Like

          • Dear AYAW~
            With all due respect and for the love of God’s truth through Jesus Christ alone~I am out on this conversation. I KNOW God is not a liar and I KNOW that HE moved me out of the PRACTICE (because that is what it is). I will not debate God’s Word or His truth. I was very lost when HE saved me from suicide when I didn’t even think HE knew me or cared about me.
            One of The Lord’s next moves on my life was to release me from the bondage of catholicism. That began when the nagging question (Holy Spirit did that by the way) came on my heart. When I asked our “priest (Jesus is the only priest by the way ❤ )" why do we pray through Mary (as she is dead) and he could not answer me and became angered by my question. That led me to cry with tears to the Lord to PLEASE help me understand why we do this when it all of the sudden felt so wrong. I waited for a couple of months for this answer. Then one day I was given the answer
            John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
            AYAW, I say this with deep love and concern for you there is no other way to God but through Jesus. All my prayers I had been saying to the catholic Mary were not getting to God… they were not even hitting the ceiling. So, please the next time you say a rosary-or kneel at a stone statue-remember what The Good Lord said in His commandments to us in Exodus about graven images~We are NOT to make God in ANY image and we are certainly not to make any one else a statue and worship it
            Exodus 20King James Version (KJV)
            20 And God spake all these words, saying,

            2 I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

            3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

            4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

            5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;

            6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

            7 Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

            8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.

            9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:

            10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:

            11 For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

            12 Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.

            13 Thou shalt not kill.

            14 Thou shalt not commit adultery.

            15 Thou shalt not steal.

            16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

            17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.

            18 And all the people saw the thunderings, and the lightnings, and the noise of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking: and when the people saw it, they removed, and stood afar off.

            19 And they said unto Moses, Speak thou with us, and we will hear: but let not God speak with us, lest we die.

            20 And Moses said unto the people, Fear not: for God is come to prove you, and that his fear may be before your faces, that ye sin not.

            21 And the people stood afar off, and Moses drew near unto the thick darkness where God was.

            22 And the Lord said unto Moses, Thus thou shalt say unto the children of Israel, Ye have seen that I have talked with you from heaven.

            23 Ye shall not make with me gods of silver, neither shall ye make unto you gods of gold.

            24 An altar of earth thou shalt make unto me, and shalt sacrifice thereon thy burnt offerings, and thy peace offerings, thy sheep, and thine oxen: in all places where I record my name I will come unto thee, and I will bless thee.

            25 And if thou wilt make me an altar of stone, thou shalt not build it of hewn stone: for if thou lift up thy tool upon it, thou hast polluted it.

            26 Neither shalt thou go up by steps unto mine altar, that thy nakedness be not discovered thereon.

            Shared with you ONLY because I felt moved by the LOVE of The Lord to do so ❤ ❤ ❤

            Liked by 1 person

  6. Those of us that have been led away from this “practice” need to stay strong in our Lord ❤ He has been gracious enough to lead us a way for a reason. Some will fight you tooth and nail instead of embracing the simplicity found In Jesus The Christ alone 😥 ❤ Pray for them ❤

    Romans 16:17-18
    17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

    18 For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.

    Liked by 5 people

  7. I posted 3 comments today: 1st one in response to Tom, 2nd in response to Maria and last one in response to Beth.
    All were put on hold pending moderation, but as of now, only the response to Beth has been published. Why is this so??? Where are my other 2 comments???

    Liked by 1 person

  8. This was a very interesting comment line. It was difficult for me to follow along with AYAW’s comments. You really have to be RCC smart to keep up with what was being said! Ever ready with an answer for the pope by stating one must read this “post-synod Amoris Laetitia document” in order to understand fully about his stance on lifting the communion ban. Yet, there would be no problem at all if one obeyed God’s Word on it, found in His Word and not from some pope. Maria, Tom and Elizabeth spoke as those who do know what they are talking about, having both the experiences and scriptures rightly interpreted for answer to AYAW.

    I do want to say that AYAW was not at all Christ-like with his/her accusations that ex-Catholics are liars. That is scary because that is saying that God did no such thing as deliver them from the RCC! But the true God and Father of Jesus Christ certainly did call them out from the RCC institution. I, too, will pray that AYAW’s eyes of understanding be opened and that our Beloved Lord will reveal all of the lies that he/she is believing as truth so that there is repentance and true saving faith given to him/her. To God be all the glory! \o/

    Liked by 3 people

    • Let me take off from your second point Sherry. On the premise of your argument, how would you also respond to the question that attacking and demonizing the Catholic Church is scary because that would be to insinuate that God does no such thing as leading ex-Protestants or non-Catholics into it????? So you see, one’s view on whether or not it is God’s Spirit converting people from Catholicism to Protestantism or vice versa depends on which side of the doctrinal divide one is in this case. It is purely a matter of subjectivity based on one’s faith, hence your statement that : “But the true God and Father of Jesus Christ certainly did call them out from the RCC institution”. That is your subjective opinion, respectfully.

      You accuse me of not being Christ-like for tagging ex-Catholics as liars; something I never said. I only expressed my opinion on the lies and distortions that have long been peddled about the Catholic Church. People renounce Catholicism because they may not have a firm grip on their faith for which reason they get persuaded out of it. They are not necessarily liars, so please, quote me correctly, at least.

      On your first point, you argued that one could refer to God’s Word on such matters, rather than listen to the pope. Notwithstanding that, wouldn’t it be fair to the pope to read that portion of his document that has sparked controversy and uproar so as to at least, ascertain whether the claims and reportage being made are true???? We must learn to give people benefit of the doubt, Sherry, rather than always yield to prejudiced thinking as Tom did when he stated the pope has lifted ban on communion for the divorced / civilly married, an overgeneralisation.

      Like

Please share your thoughts!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.