THE
TRUTH IN PRINT, Vol. 8, Issue 2, March 2002
A
Publication of the
(928)
539-7089
=======================================================
Dear reader there is a world of difference
between the
This is purely and simply artful Catholic
control over their people. What
Catholicism amounts to is nothing more than a man made system of control. They
have built a system where their hierarchy controls what takes place within
their man made structure.
What then is the conclusion drawn by the men
who sustain this framework known as Catholicism? Is this not simply that at any
point in the history of their church that 1. scripture (the Bible) +
2. their "sacred tradition" + 3. their claim to
their "teaching office of the Catholic church" = (equals) the
directives God gives to man? Can you see what they have ADDED to the Bible that
enables them to make such a preposterous claim? And how their additions enable
them to control their masses?
Here are some simple points about this man
made system which looks like this with regard to how "they" claim God
gives His word to man today: God gave the word TO Christ. Christ gave the word
TO the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit inspired the Apostles. We have the written
word from the apostles and prophets of the first century, and THEN:
1. Bishops (They claim the apostles left
Bishops as their successors, handing over to them the authority to teach in
their own place.)
2. Preachers (They claim both tradition and
the written word is preserved by an unending succession of preachers till the
end of time.)
3. Their Traditional Development in the
church! You see, this goes on. They say that the tradition is
"developed" in the church with the help of the Holy Spirit. This is
sometimes referred to as the "living tradition." (Those words mean
nothing my friend in the way of how God revealed His word through the Apostles
and prophets in the first century and enabled them to write that word in the
Scriptures for all time. See 2 Tim. 3:16-17; 2 Peter 3:1-2; Jude 3.)
Now just as you would expect they claim that
it is through this so called living and developing "tradition" that
they are enabled to more profoundly understand the written word. So now they
claim that they have God conversing with the church, and leading the church, by
"tradition" which is a developing tradition in the church. And then
with words of magic they claim the church hands on to all generations all that
she is and she believes, and that she does this with the authority of Jesus
Christ and help of the Holy Spirit. The church as the church, Catholics are
assured, is handing on herself to each generation. The
hierarchy will make the calls and you best believe that "she" hands on
herself!
They claim there is a close connection
between their so called sacred tradition and sacred Scripture. Their claim is
that Scripture (the Bible) "is the word of God in so much as it is
consigned to writing under the inspiration of the divine Spirit," while
their sacred tradition takes the word of God entrusted by Christ (and the Holy
Spirit) to the apostles, "and hands it on to their successors in its full
purity, so that led by the light of the Spirit of truth, they may in proclaiming
it preserve this word of God faithfully, explain it, and make it more widely
known." Consequently, they admit it is not from the Bible alone that the
Catholic church gets her certainty about everything
that has been revealed. And it appears the reason is based on their claim that
both their "sacred tradition" and the Bible are to be accepted and
venerated with the same sense of loyalty and reverence. Is it any wonder that
Catholics think differently under such a "convenient" framework as
this?
"Their" order begins to go astray
with the teaching that the apostles left Bishops (The inference I believe is
Bishops such as you find in the Catholic church.) as their successors
"handing over" to them "the authority to teach in their own
place," so that the Gospel could be kept forever whole and alive within
the church. From this they build a belief that there is an on going development
of "tradition"
in the church with the help of the Holy Spirit. Thus by this contortion through
the use of "tradition" they
come to claim that by the presence of this living tradition the sacred writings
are better understood, and the "tradition" is to be accepted and
venerated with the same sense of loyalty and reverence as the Bible. How
convenient! And the "tradition" and "teaching office of the
church" they say is equal in authority with the Bible! Yes, how convenient
for them when they, the hierarchy, desire to do away with "old
things" the people no longer want, or bring in or allow new things. What
ever happened to those "old" Catholic traditions? Now you know or you
should know. This contrived system appears to me to be the kind of thing where
changes can be made from the top. If something gets too old for societies'
structure, or becomes too unpopular among the majority of members, etc., then
their "convenient" system (A system they say that equals in authority
the inspired written Word, the Bible) will take care of that problem. Also it
appears this kind of "system" would allow the hierarchy to declare as
acceptable things people have already begun to do, according as the need might
be. (Summarized from my notes on the Vatican II Constitution, Handing On Divine Revelation. You may find this in the preface to
the New American Bible, Saint Joseph Edition.)
For a brief comparison consider a Bishop in
Catholicism with a bishop or elder in Christ's church. A Bishop or elder had
these qualifications in Christ's church in the first century: Titus 1:5-9,
"For this cause left I thee in
Look at verse 6. A bishop or elder in
Christ's church is to be the husband of one wife, having faithful children not
accused or riot or unruly. When you read the same qualifications for bishops or
elders in I Tim. 3:5-9 it says, "For if a man does not know how to rule
his own house, how will he take care of the
Compare now the Bible's qualification above
with this footnote in the Catholic Bible (The New Am. Bible) on Titus 1:5-9. It
says, "1, 5-9: ...As they did not exercise the functions reserved to the
apostle Paul and his legates, such as Timothy and Titus, they were not bishops
in the later sense familiar to us." Again, the Catholic Bible has this
footnote on I Tim. 3:2, "3:2: Married but once: priestly celibacy as a law
is of later ecclesiastical institution" Confraternity Version). And so it
goes, dear reader, with Catholicism. Where did the authority that qualified
Bishops without them being married and having children come from? Dear reader
it came from man, not God! And now where do "you" suppose the
authority for having Arch-Bishops and then Cardinals came from? Now, I'll bet
you can add in the next man of Catholicism that came from man, not God:
______________.
If
you are interested in reading about a free Bible Correspondence Course then
please go to free Bible
Correspondence Course .