Hating Catholics–America’s ONLY Accepted Prejudice

http://shoebat.com/2014/04/12/hating-catholics-americas-accepted-prejudice/ ^ | April 12, 2014 | Walid Shoebat

[NKP_Vet]

I recall when I got scorned for attacking homosexuality on my blog with a comment that said, “You are a homophobe, do you not know that God loves everyone including homosexuals,” in which I answered with, “do you not know that God loves everyone including the homophobe?”

Indeed, we say “God loves everyone,” including, but not limited to; heretics, pedophiles, hemophiliacs, sodomites, lesbians, murderers, rapists, child molesters, drug pushers and every mutant from the pit of hell, except, of course, the legalist and the Pharisee, that is, the good old Catholic Church.

y now, objectors who read so far what I wrote here will only pull out a Tommy machinegun and begin to spray all the high-caliber bullets at the comment section of my blog to write: “Catholics are legalists,” “the Pope kissed the Quran,” “they worship Mary,” “they pray to saints” …

May I say that a bigot is recognized when he avoids the question at hand by always changing the subject.

The God of love, does He not love the legalist, the Pharisee and even the bigot? Does He then not also love the Catholic?

The issue is not an issue of “Love”, but that “Love” is always used to obstruct correction and reproof. Such “Love” is nothing more than hate. I always keep my eyes out for a mind that reverses everything.

The issue is an issue of SLANDER.

Slandering Catholics is the ONLY accepted prejudice in America.

Exposing Sodomite behavior in America is prejudice, but slandering the Vatican is not?

The Vatican has been slandered for centuries without a shred of biblical evidence. They call it the Harlot of Babylon, the killers of the saints, the woman drunk with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus Christ. And for historic evidence they say that the Catholic Church eliminated the Manichaeans, Arians, Cathars, Priscillianists, Paulicians, Bogomiles and Albigensians. But can anyone quote a single historian who confirms or proves that these groups were Bible believing Christians? Yet thousands of books were written slandering Catholics for eliminating these while elevating such heretics as the true Bible believing Christians.(For more on this read my article Drinking the Blood of Saints)

But instead of answering such a simple question, I get machine-gunned every time by changing the subject; but what about all these pedophilia cases? It is true that there is a major mess to clean in any Christian circle, but may I say: let the denomination that has no such sin cast the first stone. Sexual sins and deviancies are equally spread in all denominations.

But does such issues entitle us to only focus on what is wrong with the Catholic while ignoring what is wrong with Protestants? Even Jesus, while he reprimanded the institution of His time for its corruption, He never eliminated its authority over the flock.

And what about the Pharisee? Did the New Testament hate Pharisees? And how could we say that Judaism is legalistic just because individual Pharisees were challenging Jesus by using the Law to trap, discredit and accuse Him of heresy? Can this be applied to all the Pharisees in general or the Jews collectively?

Why then do we use the term “Pharisee” as a dreaded label of scorn and insult?

In the Bible, we can find verses where God condemns Israel. But is that a blanket statement to condemn them for eternity? If so, what then do we do with verses in which God honors Israel? Condemning the Jews for eternity is a sign of bigotry and prejudice. I see many Catholics who hate Israel. Evangelicals by large have done a much better job than Catholics in recognizing and supporting Israel.

When it comes to the Pharisee, Jesus spoke of the “righteousness of the Pharisees”. Was Jesus degrading the righteousness of the Pharisees, or was He simply setting up the standard, that unless we are perfect, we couldn’t enter the Kingdom, for even if we kept the law as good as the Pharisee, these do not equip a man for the beatific vision of God’s essence? This of course, can never be attained until the end when God accomplishes in us His plan after we are purged from all sin.

Nicodemus was a righteous Pharisee and so was Gamaliel, Paul’s teacher, the grandson of Hillel and the founder of a dominant school of the Pharisees, a major branch of Judaism. It was Gamaliel (a Pharisee) whom God chose to save the apostles from death and opposed the apostles’ execution. Josephus and some Talmudic works also mention Gamaliel, the Pharisee, describing him as a benevolent and brilliant man. William Barclay states:

“He was a kindly man with a far wider tolerance than his fellows. He was, for instance, one of the very few Pharisees who did not regard Greek culture as sinful. He was one of the very few to whom the title ‘Rabban’ had been given. Men called him ‘The Beauty of the Law.’ When he died it was said, ‘Since Rabban Gamaliel died there has been no more reverence for the Law; and purity and abstinence died out at the same time.'” (The Daily Study Bible Commentary, Bible Explorer software.)

In fact, Christianity, and by extension, Catholicism was derived from the Pharisaical tradition of Judaism. In reality, when we compare Catholics and Protestants today in light of ancient times, it was the sola-scriptura Sadducees who rejected all authoritative oral teaching and were considered the theological liberals of that time. Even the New Testament records the first Christians were Pharisees (Acts 15:5, Philippians 3:5), but never once mentions Christian Sadducees.

Having few children by using birth control is the practice of liberals. Why would many Evangelicals support birth control is beyond me. Yet both religious Jews and Catholics see such practice as going against God’s plan. I agree 100%. God after all said to be, “fruitful and multiply”. My wife Maria put up with me for over two decades because she was brought up Catholic and to her marriage was a holy sacrament.

I have always believed that there are anti-Semites regardless of denomination. However, it is not true that Catholicism is anti-Semitic. Catholic Jim Blackburn from Catholic Answers in his article “Do You Know Jesus” explains that Christianity stems from Judaism, which is the official stand of the Catholic Church. Jim explains Paul:

“Paul said: “My manner of life from my youth, spent from the beginning among my own nation and at Jerusalem, is known by all the Jews. They have known for a long time, if they are willing to testify, that according to the strictest party of our religion I have lived as a Pharisee. And now I stand here on trial for hope in the promise made by God to our fathers. (Acts 26:4-6)”

Paul does not denounce the religion of Judaism here. He clearly recognizes that it is from this religion, which Christianity sprang. And he does not view Christianity as a new religion but, rather, as the fulfillment of the promise of Judaism. It is a continuation of—not a break from—Judaism. And in this continuation it does not throw off its religious aspect. (Ibid)

We always attribute to Catholics as the prime example of a legalist; they after all believe that they can earn or merit God’s approval by performing the requirements of the law, they neglect mercy, are ignorant of the grace of God and are so focused on the obedience to the law; the Catholic preeminent principle of redemption is not “by faith alone in God’s grace”.

Was the Catholic unsaved just because he believed in sola gratia (by grace alone) as Trent decreed, the justified “increase in that justice which they have received through the grace of Christ” by means of “faith co-operating with good works,” which uses the phrase of the Council and that of Saint James?

Fact is, the Catholic Church condemns anyone who attempts to justify himself “by his own works”:

“Canon I. If any one says that man may be justified before God by his own works, whether done through the teaching of human nature, or that of the law, without the grace of God through Jesus Christ—let him be anathema.”

The Council of Trent even elaborates:

“We are therefore said to be justified freely, because that none of those things which precede justification—whether faith or works—merit the grace itself of justification. For, if it be a grace, it is not now by works, otherwise, as the same Apostle says, grace is no more grace.”

Is this teaching an anathema? For how long must we continue slandering? Even the Jewish faith, King David broke the law and was not saved by keeping it, yet he was nevertheless saved. David was a repentant servant of God. Calling Catholics legalists came from Martin Luther who drew this view from reading the correspondence between the Judaizers of Paul’s days and applied it to the Roman Catholics of his.

George Foote Moore and Claude Montefiore protested that Judaism was not legalistic, and that such a view of Judaism was a distortion of Jewish documentary sources.

Indeed, if biblical Judaism was legalistic, how could God then provide salvation to the Jews of the Old Testament? How could God be arbitrary selecting Israel as His plan for salvation if they were legalists? (See Claude G. Montefiore, “Judaism and St. Paul (London: Max Goschen, 1914).

And here comes my biggest dilemma: during my two-decade walk in many American churches, it was as if all the battles, struggles and martyrdoms, which the Catholic Church endured from the Muslims for over millennia was simply written off by my evangelical friends. These sold such wealth of Catholic history as Judas sold Jesus for thirty pieces of silver.

It’s heart breaking.

In two decades, I have never heard a mention of the contribution of Catholics fighting Islam in the battles of Poitiers, Lepanto and Vienna.

My struggle with so many anti-Catholics began when I pointed to the rich history of the Catholic struggles with Islam. To these, it didn’t matter that millions of Catholics and Eastern Orthodox were martyred under Islam’s scimitar; Islam to them was simply the ‘cleansing agent’ of Catholic heretics. I could not understand how could such a movement that is pro-Jew, yet be so anti-Catholic?

I slowly began to realize that in America being anti-Catholic is America’s ONLY Acceptable Prejudice.

Even historians agree, slandering Catholics, as John Highham described it is:

“the most luxuriant, tenacious tradition of paranoiac agitation in American history,” (Jenkins, Philip (1 April 2003). The New Anti-Catholicism: The Last Acceptable Prejudice. Oxford University Press. p. 23)

Historian Arthur Schlesinger Sr. has called Anti-Catholicism “the deepest-held bias in the history of the American people”. (“The Coming Catholic Church”. By David Gibson. HarperCollins: Published 2004.)

Indeed. America is a nation that isolates racism and addresses skin-color and gender as the only definition for racism, so much so, even though they exercise the least of this type of racism than any other nation on earth, yet they discuss racism more than any other nation on earth.

We even have come a long way in combating anti-Semitism to soon forget quickly the horrors of Nazism. We still openly denounce skinheads and neo-Nazis, yet when it comes to the slander of Catholicism and Catholics, America is not only silent, but also is still a major participant.

Bible believing Christians who are Anti-Catholics need to answer one question: why only Catholicism unites all haters? Why when it comes to Catholicism, they are all united; liberals, atheists, Mormons, feminists, Satanists, Scientologists, Jehova’s Witnesses, Seventh Day Advantists, Uniterians, Moslems and so many Bible believing Christians officially and doctrinally are all anti-Catholic? It is time that Evangelical Bible believing Christians be removed from this equation.

But perhaps I need to exercise an American tradition; I should have prequalified my statement and say that: I am not saying that protestants and evangelicals are all anti-Catholic, by God no, yet every time I praised Catholics, I found so many pin-pointing the leaven of the Pharisees without looking into the piles of heretical books written by so-called evangelicals who do much worse than the Pope kissing the Quran or that Nostra Aetate praised Islam. Yet even Pope Benedict criticized Nostra Aetate. I too hate some of what I see in Nostra Aetate and Second Vatican and find so many devils within the Catholic Church.

But is the Catholic rich history such an evil subject that warrants ignoring Catholic wars with Islam and that during Nazism, there were many more of these precious Catholics that chose to die in Hitler’s ovens than there were wonderful Protestants? It is a fact of history that Catholics lead any other religion in rescuing the highest numbers of Jews during Nazi Germany. Are all these Catholics damned to hell despite making a choice to enter Hitler’s furnace and save Jews? Which of the two is more pleasing to God, the evangelical health and wealth televangelist or the Jew loving Catholic who died in the infernos of Hitler’s crematoria?

From top preachers in America, we can see the terrible trend. John MacArthur, who is esteemed as a formidable and excellent Calvinist theologian, made a sermon in which he agreed with Charles Spurgeon when he declared that he would rather be called a devil than a priest, and that the Catholic Church is worse than Satan himself. MacArthur, in agreement with the statement, proclaimed the quote in his presentation:

“Call yourself a priest, sir! I wonder men are not ashamed to take the title: when I recollect what priests have done in all ages–what priests connected with the church of Rome have done, I repeat what I have often said: I would rather sooner a man pointed at me in the street and called me a devil, than called me a priest; for bad as the devil has been, he has hardly been able to match the crimes, cruelties, and villainies which have been transacted under the cover of a special priesthood.” (Macarthur on Youtube, http://youtu.be/7WbF-BZxu6s)

Christian author and conspiracy theorist Mark Dice stated:

“The Catholic Church, the popes, and bishops are basically the same as the Pharisees that Jesus denounced over 2000 years ago for their hypocrisy and their pride and arrogance due to their spiritual knowledge.” (The Vatican, Modern Day Pharisees, MarkDice.com)

Another evangelical author, S. Mason describes the Catholic Church as:

“The Pope declares the Catholic hierarchy to be the only ones allowed to interpret scriptures. Therefore, they elevate themselves as the Scribes and Pharisees of the Temple. Think on how Jesus described them HYPOCRITES! He described them as painted white sepulchers, looking god on the outside but smelling with the stench of death on the inside and filled with dead men’s bones.” (Mason S. Religion the Great Harlot in the Devil’s Playground, P.p. 81)

For more information refuting such accusations see [here] and [here]

Anti-Catholics simply transferred the term “Pharisee” from the Jew to the Catholic. Indeed, hating Catholics and Pharisees is America’s ONLY Accepted Prejudice.

[daniel1212]

When I first came to FR I thought it was a Catholic Site because so much ‘copy and past information’ was constantly posted by Salvation....so it's rather comical any catholic would comment about somebody posting ‘they're own’ hard work rather then copying and pasting somebody's works rather than their own.

Perhaps they believe because they support FR they can claim it as their own. Meanwhile, zero was copied from my blog or web site, though there are some links to substantiating material. But that is irrelevant, as the RM has already said one did not need to give attribution to one's own work, the lack of the party has been attempting to find a violation of since being called on herself.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

-— Which one of these CATHOLIC churches should I listen to?? -—

How many churches did Jesus found?

What does Jesus say in the Bible?

See Matthew 16:19

[vladimir998]

What I said is true. You can’t change the truth no matter how much you rail against it.

[ealgeone]

I understand metmom to be writing against getting drunk. The very few catholic weddings I’ve attended saw most of the wedding party getting drunk. I’ve also seen this at non-cathokic weddings also to be fair.

[ealgeone]

Meant to ping you.

[HossB86]

Okay. Let's go back to your post 128, YOUR post to kinsman redeemer, to which I replied. So, to avoid any "reading comprehension problems", let's look at it:

The title is not a lie and there are plenty of people who acknowledge it - including some Protestants. It doesn’t surprise me that you do not to see the truth.

So no one mistakes this, or has any comprehension issues, YOU wrote this to kinsman. I asked YOU to show some proof of YOUR statement that there are "plenty of people"

So... now we have that cleared up for you.

So... proof for YOUR statement?

Hoss

[vladimir998]

“I asked YOU to show some proof of YOUR statement that there are “plenty of people”

Did you not read the thread? Do you see the people agreeing with premise of the article’s title?

How about this thread? http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/602502/posts

How about this one? http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2679594/posts

How about comments like this: “...Rev.
Robert Hilkiker of St. Joseph’s Roman Catholic Church in New Windsor. “Being anti-Catholic is the last acceptable prejudice,” he said.” http://alt.anarchism.narkive.com/hYLlNbDE/obscene-anti-catholic-halloween-costumes-infuriate-mom

How about this: http://wdtprs.com/blog/category/the-last-acceptable-prejudice/

http://americamagazine.org/issue/281/article/last-acceptable-prejudice

http://www.catholicleague.org/anti-catholicism-in-america-the-last-acceptable-prejudice/

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/connelly/article/Anti-Catholicism-The-last-acceptable-prejuduce-4355912.php

http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/how-to-respond-to-the-last-acceptable-prejudice/

http://www.wordonfire.org/resources/video/anti-catholicism-the-last-acceptable-prejudice/298/

http://clashdaily.com/2015/06/anti-catholicism-the-last-acceptable-prejudice/

https://jkhtse.wordpress.com/2014/03/10/the-last-acceptable-prejudice-and-the-last-civil-rights-struggle-anti-catholicism-same-sex-marriage-and-racial-solidarity-catholic-newman-center-at-uw/

http://www.firstthings.com/article/2002/10/the-last-respectable-prejudice

[xone]

I knew about Noah and Lot; but good ol' Mose?

Moses..Noah.. what's the difference? Just showing off because you have read the Bible more then once I guess? Reminds me of the Elisha/Elijah comment a couple of days ago.

[HossB86]

I see lots of RCC stuff...didn't you say Some Protestants agreed?

Are they in there too?? If so, where and who?

Hoss

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

y now, objectors who read so far what I wrote here will only pull out a Tommy machinegun and begin to spray all the high-caliber bullets at the comment section of my blog to write: “Catholics are legalists,” “the Pope kissed the Quran,” “they worship Mary,” “they pray to saints” …

All true:

“One day the King fell seriously ill and when he was given up for dead he found himself, in a vision, before the judgement seat of Our Lord. Many devils were there accusing him of all the sins he had committed and Our Lord as Sovereign Judge was just about to condemn him to hell when Our Lady appeared to intercede for him. She called for a pair of scales and had his sins placed in one of the balances whereas she put the rosary that he had always worn on the other scale, together with all the Rosaries that had been said because of his example. It was found that the Rosaries weighed more than his sins.

Looking at him with great kindness Our Lady said: “As a reward for this little honor that you paid me in wearing my Rosary, I have obtained a great grace for you from my Son. Your life will be spared for a few more years. See that you spend these years wisely, and do penance.”

When the King regained consciousness he cried out: “Blessed be the Rosary of the Most Holy Virgin Mary, by which I have been delivered from eternal damnation!”

After he had recovered his health he spent the rest of his life in spreading devotion to the Holy Rosary and said it faithfully every day.

People who love the Blessed Virgin out to follow the example of King Alphonsus and that of the saints whom I have mentioned so that they too may win other souls for the Confraternity of the Holy Rosary. They will then receive great graces on earth and eternal life later on. “They that explain me shall have life everlasting life.” [1] Ecclus. 24:31”

Another story on how saying rosaries can earn you salvation:

“Later on, when she was at prayer she fell into ecstasy and had a vision of her soul appearing before the Supreme Judge. Saint Michael put all her penances and to her prayers on one side of the scale and all her sins and imperfections on the other. The tray of her good works were greatly outweighed by that of her sins and imperfections.

Filled with alarm, she cried out for mercy, imploring the help of the Blessed Virgin, her gracious advocate, who took the one and only Rosary she had said for her penance and dropped it on the tray of her good works. This one Rosary was so heavy that it weighed more than all her sins as well as her good works. Our Lady then reproved her for having refused to follow the counsel of her servant Dominic and for not saying the Rosary every day.

As soon as she came to herself she rushed and threw herself at the feet of Saint Dominic and told him all that had happened, begged his forgiveness and promised to say the Rosary faithfully every day. By this means she rose to Christian perfection and finally to the glory of everlasting life.”

http://www.rosary-center.org/secret.htm

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

or sure. I well remember all the baptismal parties, the communion parties, and especially weddings. Break out the booze and LOOK OUT!!!

I've never met a "pious" Catholic who didn't have some serious problems. My aunt being one of them, goes to communion all the time, confession, etc. Behaves like a psycopath outside of the church.

My neighbor is a Catholic school teacher. Urges me to communion, confession, etc. Find out later she has a weakness for married men. Goes to hotels to meet them. Complains later that they don't stick with her.

[vladimir998]

“I see lots of RCC stuff...didn’t you say Some Protestants agreed?”

Yep, and apparently you have a reading comprehension problem. Look at the name of the author of the article. He’s Protestant. Also, I, way back early in the thread, posted a link to the book by Philip Jenkins. He’s Protestant. Get it now?

“Are they in there too??”

Check.

“If so, where and who?”

I just mentioned two. Again, can you read?

You were wrong. I was right all along. That won’t change.

[vladimir998]

“Find out later she has a weakness for married men. Goes to hotels to meet them.”

Oh, my gosh! You mean she’s a . . . (gulp) s-i-n-n-e-r? Can’t be! We know that Christians never sin!

GPH, I expect more from you than that. We are all sinners. Sometimes those who outwardly appear to have - and encourage - the greatest virtues also struggle with the worst vices. Haven’t we all heard enough cases like that among Protestant ministers? I just saw an article about this guy yesterday:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/06/21/billy-grahams-grandson-steps-down-from-florida-megachurch-after-admitting-an-affair/

Your nutty aunt and your neighbor - no matter what brokenness and sinful problems they have - might still have more of Christ’s charity in their hearts than you do.

[HossB86]

Yep, and apparently you have a reading comprehension problem. Look at the name of the author of the article. He’s Protestant. Also, I, way back early in the thread, posted a link to the book by Philip Jenkins. He’s Protestant. Get it now?

Not quite. You didn't reference those folks in your statement. Two people who are Protestants do NOT make "some" -- they make "two."

Apparently I don't have a comprehension problem as much as there is a severe lack of precision in descriptions given.... or maybe it's just....

hyperbole.

You were wrong. I was right all along. That won’t change.

THAT is comedy gold. Seriously. That was laugh out loud funny. Thanks.

Hoss

[vladimir998]

"Not quite." Yes, quite. "You didn't reference those folks in your statement." I didn't have to. "Two people who are Protestants do NOT make "some" -- they make "two."" (sigh) Once again we see how poorly served so many have been by the education system of this country. Check a Merriam Webster dictionary: "some" - "2a : being one, a part, or an unspecified number of something (as a class or group) named or implied b : being of an unspecified amount or number 4: being at least one —used to indicate that a logical proposition is asserted only of a subclass or certain members of the class denoted by the term which it modifies." I said "some" Protestants. Two shows there are "some". These are just two who published an article or book. They are not alone in the Protestant world. They just happen to be authors of an article or book. You were wrong. I was right all along. That won’t change.

[vladimir998]

“Not quite.”

Yes, quite.

“You didn’t reference those folks in your statement.”

I didn’t have to.

“Two people who are Protestants do NOT make “some” — they make “two.””

(sigh) Once again we see how poorly served so many have been by the education system of this country.

Check a Merriam Webster dictionary:

“some” - “2a : being one, a part, or an unspecified number of something (as a class or group) named or implied

b : being of an unspecified amount or number

4: being at least one —used to indicate that a logical proposition is asserted only of a subclass or certain members of the class denoted by the term which it modifies.”

I said “some” Protestants. Two shows there are “some”. These are just two who published an article or book. They are not alone in the Protestant world. They just happen to be authors of an article or book.

You were wrong. I was right all along. That won’t change.

[metmom]

them.” Oh, my gosh! You mean she’s a . . . (gulp) s-i-n-n-e-r? Can’t be! We know that Christians never sin! GPH, I expect more from you than that. We are all sinners.

It's the same excuse used for Catholic priests who molest boys.

Why am I not surprised?

And yet a non-Catholics would have to be pure as Jesus Himself to pass muster with a Catholic while when Catholics sin, it's blown off as not being particularly significant because *everyone is doing it*.

The hypocrisy is staggering.

[Syncro]

How much is from your blog?

Daniel1212 posts a very informative post backed up by almost 50 individual links to scripture and all you can post is a dig at his "blog?"

You would do well to edify yourself by reading his post and going to all the scriptures referenced.

Daniel1212 has exhibited by his various posts here on Free Republic that he is a very learned Biblical scholar.

Thank you Daniel.

[vladimir998]

“And yet a non-Catholics would have to be pure as Jesus Himself to pass muster with a Catholic while when Catholics sin, it’s blown off as not being particularly significant because *everyone is doing it*.”

You’re completely wrong. I said we are all sinners. I just mentioned that “Sometimes those who outwardly appear to have - and encourage - the greatest virtues also struggle with the worst vices. Haven’t we all heard enough cases like that among Protestant ministers?” I wasn’t picking on Protestants. I was just showing that they are sinners too - and broken people just like everybody else.

“The hypocrisy is staggering.”

Well, the hypocrisy is all yours since I was not even condemning Protestants but showing they’re just as human as the rest of us.

“It’s the same excuse used for Catholic priests who molest boys. Why am I not surprised?”

Your comment is ignorant.

[mrobisr]

Don’t confuse people with your anti-Christ teachings. Only God through Jesus Christ can forgive sins and that has been the standard from Genesis to Revelation. If you were saved you would do a little research and with complete ease you would see that Matt 16:19 and John 20:23 have nothing to do with man’s ability to forgive sins.

Luke 7:49 New International Version (NIV)

49 The other guests began to say among themselves, “Who is this who even forgives sins?”

Mark 2:7 New International Version (NIV)

7 “Why does this fellow talk like that? He’s blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?”

Mark 2:6-7 New International Version (NIV)

6 Now some teachers of the law were sitting there, thinking to themselves, 7 “Why does this fellow talk like that? He’s blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?”
Isaiah 43:25 New International Version (NIV)

25 “I, even I, am he who blots out
your transgressions, for my own sake,
and remembers your sins no more.

Micah 7:18 New International Version (NIV)

18 Who is a God like you,
who pardons sin and forgives the transgression
of the remnant of his inheritance?
You do not stay angry forever
but delight to show mercy.

Hebrews 8:12 New International Version (NIV)

12 For I will forgive their wickedness
and will remember their sins no more.

Matthew Henry’s Concise Commentary
Christ directed the apostles to declare the only method by which sin would be forgiven. This power did not exist at all in the apostles as a power to give judgment, but only as a power to declare the character of those whom God would accept or reject in the day of judgment. They have clearly laid down the marks whereby a child of God may be discerned and be distinguished from a false professor; and according to what they have declared shall every case be decided in the day of judgment.

Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven,.... By the kingdom of heaven is meant the Gospel, which comes from heaven, declares the king Messiah to be come, speaks of things concerning his kingdom, is the means of setting it up, and enlarging it, displays the riches of his grace, and gives an account of the kingdom of heaven, and of persons’ right unto it, and meetness for it. “The keys” of it are abilities to open and explain the Gospel truths, and a mission and commission from Christ to make use of them; and being said to be given to Peter particularly, denotes his after qualifications, commission, work, and usefulness in opening the door of faith, or preaching the Gospel first to the Jews, Acts 2:1 and then to the Gentiles, Acts 10:1 and who was the first that made use of the keys of evangelical knowledge with respect to both, after he, with the rest of the apostles, had received an enlarged commission to preach the Gospel to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. Otherwise these keys belonged to them all alike; for to the same persons the keys, and the use of them, appertained, on whom the power of binding and loosing was bestowed; and this latter all the disciples had, as is manifest from Matthew 18:18 wherefore this does not serve to establish the primacy and power of Peter over the rest of the apostles; nor do keys design any lordly domination or authority; nor did Christ allow of any such among his apostles; nor is it his will that the ministers of his word should lord it over his heritage: he only is king of saints, and head of his church; he has the key of David, with which he opens, and no man shuts, and shuts, and no man opens; and this he keeps in his own hand, and gives it to none.

Pulpit Commentary
A more reasonable explanation of the phrase is derived from the use of the terms among the Jews themselves. In their Talmudic glosses we find equivalent expressions. “To bind” is to forbid, to pronounce unlawful; “to loose” is to allow, to declare lawful.

The act of the RCC to forgive sins is blasphemy no more no less. Don’t think for a minute that your suffering is because of your holiness, but the exact opposite is true. The RCC is being thrown on the bed of suffering as predicted nearly 2k ago.

Revelation 2:20-23 New International Version (NIV)

20 Nevertheless, I have this against you: You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophet. By her teaching she misleads my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols. 21 I have given her time to repent of her immorality, but she is unwilling. 22 So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. 23 I will strike her children dead. Then all the churches will know that I am he who searches hearts and minds, and I will repay each of you according to your deeds.