I will build My church

A few excerpts from my thing this morning on Catholics:

There is an extremely good chance that you know someone or lots of people who claim to be Catholic. So of all of the churches that teach bad theology, it is important you understand what the Catholic Church teaches and why it is wrong because there are so many Catholics around. There are over 6 billion people in the world, of which there are an estimated 1 billion people who practice Roman Catholicism. So 1 in 6 people in the entire world believe some of the things you and I are going to be discussing. You need to know what’s right and what’s wrong and why it’s wrong.

I spent the first ten years of my faith attending Catholic Churches. I’m going to be saying some critical things about Catholics; but don’t get me wrong; I also love that part of my faith.

Going to a Catholic Church anywhere in the country is like going to a McDonald’s anywhere in the country – you know what you’re going to get; it’s all the same.

Now the intent of the catechism is appropriate. The very first words of the catechism are a direct quote from John 17:3 “Father . . . this is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.” So the purpose is instruction; but unfortunately, it’s not carried out successfully.

Are Catholics Christian, and are they saved? And unfortunately, there is no easy answer. But first, the title “Christian” is sort of meaningless. A Christian is someone who believes in Christ. It is far more important to be a follower of Jesus, someone who is actively pursuing what it means to live a life Jesus wants you to live, than to simply say “Yeah, I believe in Jesus.” So saying Catholics are or are not Christians is an irrelevant question.

The larger question is "Are Catholics saved?" That simply is an impossible question to answer. The truth is, the way Catholicism is set up with all of these rituals and belief statements and good works, it is hard to determine whether someone believes they are doing the right things so they can go to Heaven, or whether they have entrusted their salvation through faith in Christ. Ultimately, the only way to get to Heaven is by having a personal relationship with Jesus Christ; believing that He died for your sins, and by His free gift that you accept, you become a child of God. Anything on top of that, is unnecessary false doctrine. So can a Catholic believe in the truth of Christ and accept the gospel message? Yes. Lutherans believe a number of things very similar to Catholics, and we don’t question whether or not Lutherans go to Heaven. But at the end of the day, only God knows the heart of a believer and it’s really a time-wasting exercise to try to guess at whether or not your Catholic friend is actually saved.

ourselves in the same spirit

Tomorrow morning, I get to be in front of the young ones to discuss the bad theology of the Catholic Church. Been an interesting few days studying the Catechism, reminding me of those days two decades before trying to wade through language to get to God. I can't tell if it's nostalgia or truth that is awakening all of the reasons I became a Catholic in the first place. I mean, you read something like the excerpt from the Catechism below and how are you not drawn closer to the faith?

“The desire for God is written in the human heart, because man is created by God and for God; and God never ceases to draw man to Himself. Only in God will he find the truth and happiness he never stops searching for.”

There are other great lines throughout the Catechism, but I'm more than fully convinced that Prots who demonize Catholics will have such a rude awakening in the hereafter. Might want to swallow that pride, brother, when you see that Cath in his mansion next door to you. Fortunate for you, there's no spite in eternity.

of their error

Listen, I love Catholics, I really do. In fact, the perfect Christian ideology in my mind blends Cath ideology with Prot ideology. But other times I want to distance myself from Caths as much as possible. Exhibit #231.

There are so many things wrong with the view of sin expressed in this article. The fact that some sins are forgivable and some are not (leave out Mark3/Matt12 for the moment). The fact that sins these days have more "social resonance" because of globalization. The fact that pollution is a sin (don't get me started on CreationCare).

I've written about different perspectives on sin before. My issue with this article is the continued linking of sin to an action; that sin is a noun with very clear definitions (a list that apparently needs to be updated by official councils shudder). No wonder so many think they can go to arbitration before the throne. Vatican councils are keeping checklists of sins, and it would be so easy to point to Exhibit A before God and say "This list is 117 items long, and I've only really broken 2 of them."

I've got a sin to add to that list. How about confusing flocks? Where does that rank?

beforehand marked off for this

My reading today is Ps31, and today being Ash Wednesday, a particular verse stood out: "Be gracious to me, O LORD, for I am in distress; My eye is wasted away from grief, my soul and my body also." {Ps31:9}

The marking of foreheads is one of my favorite Catholic rites that I still practice. Too many churches today (COUGH COUGH Godless health & wealth churches COUGH COUGH) refrain from preaching about sin and repentance. On Ash Wednesday, not only are you focused and reflecting on sin and repentance, but you also mark yourself publicly proclaiming so.

AW also marks the beginning of the Lenten season, and the OPPORTUNITY to sacrifice for 40 days as a sign of commitment to the One who sacrificed Himself for us. Lent is a far better way to show your commitment to Christ than a WWJD bracelet, I'll tell you that.

to bring back to this place

I'm secretly hoping members of my home church either read this post or read the original post I'm linking to. You need to read this post and check out the list of "innovations" for the American church. What's striking here is not its ironic let's-be-innovative-by-being-old-school sensibility. What's striking to me as an evangelical who very much treasures his Catholic roots are the high church traditions being advocated. How many on that list bring to mind the vaulted ceilings and incense-laden atmosphere of being in a cathedral?

Sing hymns? Check. More frequent Communion? Check. Scripture reading? Check. Apostles' and Nicene creed? Check and check. A focus on sin? Absolutely.

Throw in reverent kneeling during the service and robed pastors, and I'm ready to bring along my Pope-blessed rosary. Said the Protestant elder.

Lord, behold he whom you love

Yeah, I can understand how this is how the anti-Christ will spend his last hours on earth. Thanking those around him. Asking someone to read him the Bible. Listening to a final Mass. Hearing the wondrous verses from the Book of John. I can understand how when the anti-Christ passes on, those around him will be praying for him. Will be actually joyous rather than mournful because they know he's going to see the Lord. Makes perfect sense. I'm sold.

Jenkins, send me one copy of each of your books, will you? Twixt you and JPII, one being anti, well, you can guess which one I think has the higher skin temperature threshold, scrub.

in this way in former times

You can find its defenders or its detractors. I don't care which side you're on. You pick and choose your faith just as I do mine, I'm sure. What was nice about observing today is the comfort familiarity brings. One hopes that one goes through more than just motions, that the individual parts be something more than a warm blanket. There is danger in the familiarity and warmth becoming the whole. But sometimes there's nothing wrong with that comfort. It fits and makes you remember the feeling of the initial fitting, the day when you realized that all of it, everything made such clear sense.

has done nothing wrong

Let's be clear that the conflict between Prots and Caths is completely the fault of Prots. Caths have long since accepted the Prot faith and no longer considers them bound for eternities of darkness. Yet, the Prot mentality continues to go against Caths every chance it gets. If it's not a policy against regular communion, it's a book series of hate.

Maybe I should remind you that your beloved movie that's saved many the world over was made by a Cath. Or that there are more Cath missionaries around the world than your small efforts to save.

You set a real good example to everyone watching, Wheaton. Society must love conflict between the brethren. I hope your students, however, turn a deaf ear to your ridiculousness.

then they remembered that these things

I think people write articles like this simply to drive me insane with rage. Before my brain and heart burst with anger, let me comment on two things:

(1) Lutherans currently have joint communion with Presbyterians and are now adding Methodists. Sweet. If they can sign an agreement with New England Episcopalians, the evil trinity can be complete. I imagine once that happens, they'll make communion using whiskey and tobacco and incorporate ritual animal sacrifices, but who knows.

(2) Note to Lutherans and Methodists and others: We already shared in the Holy Communion the minute we became believers. The body and blood of Christ aren't proprietary. It's the same remembrance, same cross, same salvation.

You want to thumb your noses at Catholics, go ahead. Your act hides nothing.

when Jesus made the clay

I expect something like this from a Presbyterian or a Methodist, but from a Catholic? Your first problem is that you're comparing beliefs and articles to the catechism and not the sacred word of God. Your second problem is that you attack this from an issue of consistency of thought rather than consistency of faith.

You skip over this point: to relegate a single word or belief to metaphor and your corrupt all others. No Creation in seven days? Then maybe no resurrection after three. You either accept it all, or take the easy path and reject it all. Believing some is not much better than believing none. Either way, you're the liar's pupil.

tolerance and patience, not knowing

This makes perfect sense. Why not squabble amongst ourselves? Why not be poor witnesses to an audience that already mistrusts us? Why not denigrate the name of the Prince of Peace?

Taking a stand for righteousness is one thing. Taking a stand for stupidity is quite another. See you in the kingdom. I'll be one of the many carrying rosaries.

up to his mouth

(sigh)

Who do I criticize here? Do I chastize the press for the way this article reads, making him sound ridiculous? Or do I chastize him for stupid comments?

Ernie: Let's play two.

Press: Don't pretend like you respect the humility in his statement. The continued mention of his countrymen intimate that he's only beloved by Germans. And the Hitler youth comments? How does that relate to his comment again? You're not just rehashing his past -- you're invoking images. And what of the sex abuse reminders? Just want to kill the church, obviously. Lastly, how often do you want to tell me he's old? The only care you have of his age is that in a few years maybe you'll get to cover another pope funeral for a week and save yourself work, sloth.

Ratzinger: Evidently He didn't listen to you this time? No, He listened. You mean He didn't answer. Know the difference. Secondly, after the first vote when it was clear you were a frontrunner, if you really wanted to spend your time fishing, why not say something? A cardinal could pass you a note about the blind leading the blind -- what, you want to pull an Oedipus?

It's tough being a Catholic/non-Catholic.

and in the garden a new

I feel like a child feels upon meeting his mom's new husband.

You don't look like my dad.
You don't talk like my dad.
My dad does that differently.

Don't recall how I felt upon meeting my first. But that was when all was new, new creation and all, so accepted it with all the rest. Not sure when it became more. Not sure when/if this will ever.

Not calling you dad. Ever.

who laugh now, for you shall mourn

You have this and this and this and even this. All of this after this. The world focused on servanthood to God and a life lived in faith for a week, and then quickly reverts back to its state of sin.

You know what?

"But Thou, O Lord, dost laugh at them; Thou dost scoff at all the nations....God will let me look triumphantly upon my foes." {Ps59:8,10}

a kingdom for himself, and then return

She of the baby teeth posed a riddle she didn't know the answer to. "What did one pope say to the other pope?" Put into her head by blinking images or angels, I don't know, but the answer escaped her. It occurred to me this morning as I drew closer that I knew the answer.

Cephas, the first, to the last. "Welcome home, Karol." 

beloved of God in Rome

They say that denial is the first stage of dealing with any traumatic event. That may be the reason I have failed to comment on him. It's not because I'm afraid to offend the base over my reverence of just a man -- either base. It's not because I think the whole thing is being overdone, because I don't think it is. It might simply be because I have no other feeling than sadness, and don't want to dwell on it.

You can say that he's unduly worshipped. You can say that he has a hand in the undue worshipping. You can say like the evil ones that he's failed to do things he should have done, or done things too right. But you cannot say he was not a beloved servant of God, or that he's not there with Him being smiled upon, because you'd be wrong.

You pray for someone for almost 19 years, and I promise you, intense devotion will appear. Whether that makes me or it wrong or right I don't care.

Sleep well, holy father. See you where it counts.

and said, Father I

About time I comment on it seeing as how I'm straddling the Cath-Prot line closer than two rosary beads hanging on an empty cross. He needs to buck history and step down is my thought. (1) He can't do his primary job; (2) he gets more attention for his frailty than his leading; and (3) as the symbolic head of a church, why represent frailty and illness?

I actually feel this way about every elderly person over 60 doing any job, so this is nothing extraordinary, pointed hat or not.

by this time there

Only in NY could you find Fast Food Religion. At St. Patrick's Cathedral every year, you can stand in long lines to receive ashes on Ash Wednesday (TODAY, you lapsers, you) without having to sit through mass. Men and women in business clothes patiently making their way through the drive-thru line for the mark of repentance.

On one hand, it is the clear symbol of our culture -- too busy, too harried to take more than ten minutes to commemorate the Lord, too concerned with the hustle to do more than receive a cursory thumbsmear. Really, there are too few minutes in the day for work, sleep, meals, AND God? You're cutting the minutes out of the wrong grouping, hardheart.

On the other hand, in a city of ten million, with several million Catholics to process in the course of a few hours in a locale where there isn't a church on every corner, this is perhaps the only way to manage helping everyone find a means by which to publicly identify with God and proclaim a repentant heart. In which case, the cynics are the hardhearters.

Hear that, me? Didn't learn about prejudging enough from the whole Tesh thing,?

according to the pattern you have

Speaking with my wife yesterday, I made a connection which completely changed the way I think about my search for true religion, religion in general, and God. The revelation was this: for sufferers of OCD, Catholicism is the perfect religion.

Think about it: Is saying the rosary and its patterned Our Fathers and Salve Reginas any less different than checking the front door lock three times? Is crossing repeatedly in the name of the Father, Son, & Holy Spirit any different than not walking on cracks on the floor? Is the whole liturgy and recitation and chanting any different than whispering under your breath whenever you pass by a street whose number is even?

The greater questions: do we seek religions that conform to us, or do we conform to religion? Is religion merely a reflection of us and not of God? Is God's image in us meant for us to fit Him, or our image of us defining Him to fit us?

And really, all these numbers in the Bible that I'm understanding and not understanding -- is it the numbers or me?

but the water that I will give him

Last time I harp on this (maybe not). Heb9 discusses the new convenant made with Him -- different but parallel to the original covenant with priests before God in the OT. And how did the priests initialize their covenant with God, their first cleansing? The sprinkles of course. I'm trying hard not to puff here, but really, it's hard.