Replies

Cal Thomas, if I recall correctly is a Baptist of some stripe. Therefore, his rant against the Catholic Church is based on that theological view point. Baptists have long rejected the Catholic Church, and the Catholic Church has returned the favor.

CAL THOMAS COMMENTARY MARCH 12, 2013
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH THIS WEEKS BEGINS THE PROCESS OF SELECTING ANOTHER POPE. THE MEDIA SEEM FOCUSED ON THE POLITICS AND THE SEX SCANDALS. WHAT THEY ARE NOT FOCUSING ON IS CHURCH DOCTRINE.
THE IDEA OF A POPE IS BASED ON A FALSE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE, THAT JESUS WANTED TO BUILD HIS CHURCH ON PETER, INSTEAD OF HIMSELF. WHY WOULD JESUS BUILD HIS CHURCH ON A SINFUL MAN? HE BUILDS IT UPON THE ROCK, ALL RIGHT, BUT THAT ROCK IS HIMSELF. THEN THERE’S THE ISSUE OF CONFESSION TO A PRIEST, NOT TO MENTION PURGATORY WHICH IS NOT MENTIONED IN SCRIPTURE AND SUGGESTS THAT THE BLOOD OF JESUS CHRIST IS INSUFFICIENT TO CLEANSE FROM ALL SIN, AGAIN, A VIOLATION OF BIBLICAL TRUTH.
WHAT ABOUT PRAYING TO MARY AND INDIVIDUAL SAINTS? AGAIN, THERE IS ONLY ONE MEDIATOR BETWEEN GOD AND MAN: THE LORD JESUS CHRIST. TRADITION IN THE CATHLIC CHURCH IS EQUAL TO SCRIPTURE. THAT, TOO, IS UNBIBLICAL.
JOURNALISTS WON’T QUESTIONS THESE THINGS. THEY TAKE ALL ASSERTIONS BY CATHOLICS AS GOSPEL. IT’S TOO BAD BECAUSE FOR THE UNINFORMED THIS COULD BE, AS THEY SAY, A TEACHABLE MOMENT. I’M CAL THOMAS IN WASHINGTON.

Thomas goes through the litany of standard complaints: Petrine succession, confession, purgatory, the Mass, Mary, and Saints.

Incorrect versus False.

He uses the word "false". It may just be me, but "false" implies "intentionally wrong" or "intentionally deceitful". Incorrect suggests a theological disagreement in which you think one party has come to a wrong answer.

Dr Scott Hahn has shown that there is a biblical argument for Petrine succession, confession, purgatory, the real presence, and the cloud of witnesses including Mary and other prominent Christians from the past.

To the extent that there is a biblical argument, one can't level a charge of deceit. One can only conclude that the other is wrong.

I prefer to see Roman Catholics as being on the same team as I am, struggling in their way to promote Jesus Christ. As to their tracing their lineage back to Peter, I'm fairly convinced that it isn't as clean a spiritual genealogy as they would like, but that they do accomplish the task of tracing themselves to Peter. I do believe that Jesus said He would found (get started) His church on Peter. The early part of the book of Acts tells that story in detail. I don't think that places Peter in charge because in Acts 15 James is seen in charge. However, it's a cool thing to have a genealogy back to one of the apostles, and an important one from the inner circle.

We could go into the other doctrinal discussions, and the one I'd focus on, if I were to argue with Dr Hahn on the biblical origin of Catholic beliefs, is the Immaculate Conception, and I'm not satisfied with his argument that Revelation 12 depicts Mary after her assumption. It depicts God's people (Israel?) as the context indicates.

I totally disagree with Thomas on his timing and his word choice. It's like speaking ill of someone in the presence of his family at the funeral, and that just being an opinion.