This is a quote from your post that I responded to. For those of us who know Monty Python's famous skit "No one expects the Spanish Inquisition!" I assumed it was your reference which is why I talked about the "comfy chair." No matter, I guess you're not familiar with this piece of Python television history. But, when I read it I thought, "Ah, an anti-Catholic with a sense of humor." That's what I thought I was responding to.
The web sites you are referring to are indeed a source of pain for many of us Catholics but then we are used to being attacked from without and from within. The Church (meaning the Roman Catholic Church), is attacked just as our Lord was attacked when He was with us on Earth. He was attacked by those who could not accept Him from without and from within His circle of disciples, by those who could not accept what He taught once they did know Him. (This is a referrence to John Chapter 6 and of course...to Judas.)
We demand.... a shrubbery!
So when he responded with "I didn't expect the spanish inquisition" I found it cryptic and assumed he had left out a word or two.
I'm not particularly anti-catholic if we were to say that I would have to be labled anti-prtestant and anti reformation anti- pentecostal and anti-charismatic etc.
Where the prophets in the OT Testament anti-jewish? they charged Israel with their sins and in some cases executed the judgements of God. No they were seeking repentance and a change of heart.
Yet according to the words of Christ they were salain and brutalized when their words were rejected.
So likewise John the baptist comes preaching sin righteousness and the Judgement and he is rejected and slain.
Christ them comes and begins with the same words of John condemning the preisthood and religious system of his day for having altered the law of mosses to suit themselves
There is a case that can be made that there is no difference between what the pharissees the high priests and the levites did was any different that say protestant churches that claim to believe Sola Scriptura but in fact they do not instead each denomination has carved out its own turf of verses in the bible they beleive while ignoring or denying the rest. See the Israelites had a high priest that was set in by Moses and was in an unbroken lineage until the destruction of the temple in 70 AD. But the question is where in the law is he given the power to alter the law? Instead we find in the Law as well as the book of revelation curses to them than alter the law. So when Protestant Popes like Luther John Calvin and Menno Simons come and alter things to suit themselves exalt themselves and build a church around themselves how is that different. Altering the word of God is altering word of God.
It is listed as a sin unto death in the Law and in Revelation.
If I decry the sins of the charismatic movement (Which I do)like the prosperity gospel in while people give money to churches and ministers in order to become financially rich -- becasue the Christ clearly teaches love not the world or the riches thereof etc. Does that make me anti-charimatic?
When I correct my child do I hate that child, some parents may, but many love their children and want to see them do well. My children have at times thought I was doing bad things to them by correcting them or laying tdown the law as to what they can or can't do. And at those times I would talk with them so that they would better understand my motives -- and then they more readily accepted the correction and rules.
All that is not to say that there are not people that Hate Catholics because I know that to absolutely be true Just like people hate Jews etc.
I'll give you one more example and let this go. In the bible school I went to in the late 1970's it was taught that the gift of prophecy was only to be used for edification exortation and comfort -- rebuke or correction was banned in this school and actually in a whole segment of charistmatic churches. This actually stemmed from something that happned in the 1950's with a group of sin laden evagelists that had no affiliation with this school of the denomiations they were affiliated with -- these men were so corrupt and sinful in every way and their sins became known and poeple staterted not foing to their tent revivals so they invented out whole cloth a doctrine called "Touch not Gods annointed" based on a scripture in the OT in the OT it mean don't physically touch harm or slaw my prophets or messengers. They rewrote it to do not talk bad about my preachers and do not mention their sins whether they be true or false.
What this did was create an atmoshphere for sin to breed and error to breed because we can't talk about this.
In the 70's it jumped a fire break and came under the idea "we can't judge each other" yet in the NT in the greek the word jusge is used and synanyms over 100 times as things we are charged to do.
Whether we care to admit it of not the church at large protestant and catholic suffers from much of the same things cathoic priest have been casue in sin protestant preachers are caught in the same sins the casue is the same corrupt people are coming up through a system that at one time judged and rooted out corrupt people but no more instead they have become preachers and leaders in the church and the corruption increases
In church history this is noted by the apostillic fathers and peoplke that are deemed as saints -- so how is it that if these things happened in the OT at christ life in the days of the apostolic fathers the early saints between the 2nd and forth century that we can boldly claim my church is perfect and upright and has no sin? Every protestant denominaton does this eyeing one another as heretics or "Somewhat deceived." Catholics virw all protestants the same and truthfully all protestants view catholics the same way.
And each views themselves as lilly white and having all truth. As did the Jews in the days of the prophets and in the days of Christ.
We are clearly told again and again that there is a deciever in the world -- and I would put forth that this is the evidence of his work.
In the Old Testament in the prophets Isreal is repeatedly called a whore -- not because Isreal invented prostitution of set up an internation set of whore houses but because they had atlered God commantments and had brought in other Gods and customs (traditions) that had not been given to them in the begining.
So we look in revelation 17 and see the great whore catholics say the anti-christ and great whore is martin Luther and the protduct of the reformation proestants say the pope is the antichrist and the great whore is the catholic church.
It is important to note that both agree the great whore is the church and also both agree that the anti-christ is someone out from the church.
Revelation 17 1 Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters: 2With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.
3So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. 4And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:
5And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. 6And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration.
Now I want to point out something here that has escaped most people that teach on escatology (The end times) That in verse 5 The Great Whore is a "mother" and she has daughters. And if you back up toverse 4 she has a cup filled with fornication and abominstions and if you back up to verse two you see that all have been made to drink and have been made drunk on her abominations
What I see is mother and daughters shared sins shared fornications and shared abominations and in verse 6 shared blood of saints they killed
So the fate of her is the same as her daughters. Both catholics and protests call the great whore the church but who can admit their sin and unrightousness -- neither both have altered the Gospel both have tortured explantions as to how they are allowed to do what the bible says you can't do both have traditions adopted form greek philosphy and other religions.
An I with out sin no. Have I partaken of the cup yes I was brought up with doctrines and teachings that are not form the word of God -- It is a tough path to try to remove centuries of doctrines -- and no its not sola sciptura though that is a pillar, but it is Sola Dictum Dei. Of as Christ said it the word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the Father. Christ lived by and was dependant upon Sola Dictum Dei, the prophets lived by and were dependant upon Sola Dictum Dei and Moses himself was also so dependant -- the protestants except for pentecostals and chrarismatics have reverted to the phariseeism of man ordering about Sola Scriptura to suit themselves denying any spiritual quality or divine light or personal revelation is necessary to understand the things of God so they have in factcreated teachings and doctrines out of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
But this behavior is not exclussive to protestants carnal men assumed seat of power in the early church and what they taught was carried on into to the churches doctrinal gene pool out of which future generations drew. Forinstance in the catholic encyclopedia it says terullian is the Father of the Latin Church having read his writings I have a good idea why that has been said and would agree. But the term 'The Father of' holds great meaning because tertullian is not in the Papel lineage. It mwans that Tertullain geve birth to what became the latin or Roamn catholic Church so that before him there were not the things that he created and institutionalized and without him these things well not may have ever come into being.
Specifically Tertullian in His commentary of the Gospel of John book 1 tells us that prior to his day an order of professional "Levites" had been brought into the church to step the tide of followers that no longer read scripture and prayed and that these men that had been brought in were to pray read time bible and teach and make sacrifices and offerings for the people (Note that the meaning of this is that this was not done at the time of Peter and the Apostles for they are not mentioned nor are their immediate predicessors) But Tertullian continues that the "Levites" were also failing becasue they themselves were corrupted -- so he proposes establishing a high priesthood over the "Levites" to keep them in line and within a generation that was done. That order today are known as the cardinals.
Now in tertullian's words I can see even more meaning Levites in the OT had the service of not the temple alone but the altar so by Tertullian using the word Levites he signified that the church at that time had brought in a replica of the horned altar in the Jewish temple -- Peter and the apostles knew of no such altar in the church in their days. And Tertullian tells us that they began making sacrifices and offerings at that time -- those sacrifices were in relation to that altar just as teh tradition has been carred on for the last 1800 years I would respectfully suggest to you that is the origin of the mass and that Peter and the Apostles knew nothing of that either.
Now if we go to protestant chruches we see that same altar and we see vestiges of the Levites
If we go to the old testement when Moses went up to the mount of God we see the isrealites having no leadership in arron or guidance ask that visual representations of God be brought to them that they might worship -- and we know when Moses returned (as when Christ returns)all those idoltrous things were destroyed
In another place the corrupt king Solomon kingdom is split into two (East and west catholic church protestand and catholic) both are taken by corrupt kinds but one says my people will go to jerusalem and do their offering and will not return and I will have nothing -- so he errects two golden calms one in dan and one in beresheba and tell the people these are your gods worship and do your service here.
And the people that were raised knowing God in David and Solomon submitted having logic that ran something like this: our annointed king of God his words must be annointed and true -- he has greater wisdom so his words must be true.
But infact we know his words were false and this is underscored by the fact that he had been prophesied to -- Sola Dictum Dei, that he would receive the 10 tribes and he began in chast obediance of God but then he turned and damned all generations of Israel after him for the idolitry and traditions that he introduced. 300 years later Another king arose Josiah who also receive the sola dictum dei and he destroyed the altars the groves and all the other stuff.
And yet we deny protestant and catholic alike that anything like that has or could happen to us.
The ultimate question them comes why then what we read in the Gospels and the epistles is so vastly different from us and our experiance?
Why do we have priests and levites altars and stone buildings that are palatial palaces when Peter and the Apostles knew nothing of these things? If a pperson is truely christ's dsciple they will follow and heed hisw words. If a person were truely peters disciple they would follow and heed there words so in like manner protestants and catholics alike -- myself included have shown that they are not christs disciples peters or pauls but disciples of their own churches and denominations teaching following and obeys their respective denominatons wisdom.
The problem is my pastor did not die for my sins my church did not shed its blood for me. And my denominattion can not grant me a place in heaven
And further the sacrifices and offerings my pastor chruch and denomination make to absolve my sins in place of the death of Christ are an abomination unto God.
Nothing can be set up by men to replace Christ's death on the Cross.
Now I understand that if I give you this sola scriptura that you will say that's my interpretation or my words but if God speaks to you this as sola dictum dei you need to bow before God and say yes Lord
Christ said the kingdome cometh not by observation but by revelation.
The kingdom comes by one enlightened person at a time, not by the outward observation of scripture alone. In revelation