I think one of the main issues that many people have with the RCC is not that they are not perfect, but that they appear so hypocritical. They claim that they are the only true church, the representative of Christ on earth via the pope guy, yet they don't follow the very clear and very basic teachings of God's Word on what to do when someone in their midst blantantly sins (and a most disgusting and vile sin) much less one who is supposed to be a shepherd of the sheep. And it wasn't just one instance, but occured mulitples of multiples of times over many years. The fact that they have never repented nor confessed that how they handled this evil person must be addressed before they can be taken as ones who can be trusted to speak for God.
And you shall know them by there fruits.
Sts. Peter and Paul preached a faith that was winsome, though with their particular charisms, they had the power, i don't believe they spoke of their power to keep anyone out of heaven who believed that Jesus was the Son of God, who was born of the Blessed Virgin and Mother, who died for our iniquities and who rose from the dead and now sits at the right Hand of the Father.
Following is a piece by Catholic apologist, Art Sippo
So while we wish to be respectful of people from the Protestant religions, we cannot condone their religions since they are in both doctrinal and ecclesiastical error. Frankly, those professing any non-Catholic religion are endangering their souls. No amount of personal piety or private biblical interpretation can excuse this.Make no mistake about it. Antipathy to the Catholic Church is a sign of non-Election. Hatred of the Body of Christ is hatred of Christ himself (Matt 25:31ff). Ignoring the ordained ministers of Christ is ignoring Christ and thereby ignoring God as well (John 13:20).
When Protestants come to argue their petty little theories by which they seek to make void the word of God and follow the teachings of mere men, they are not on a level playing field with the Catholic Magisterium. Protestants can only give their own private opinions. The Catholic Magisterium speaks under the superintendence of the Holy Spirit (Matt 10:20).
In summary, the 16th Century Protestants apostatized and left the Catholic Church and have invented thousands of separate cults which not only contradict the Catholic Church but each other on serious points of doctrine. The Catholic Church has not changed any of her teachings since before there were Protestants. Consequently it is the Protestants who must now admit that we who have remained in the Catholic Church are true Christians and that we are entitled to our own interpretation of Scripture.[me: the language used here, 'entitled' is indicative, oddly sloppy and revealing.]
Conversely, it is not possible for Catholics to recognize any Protestant group as being on par with the Catholic Church. There will always be something deficient in them. Whatever partial goods they may have, the total package of true Christianity only subsists in Catholicism.
This is sound Catholic teaching, I believe. But, I don't believe there are many Catholics whose goal it is to attract converts who would then put this face of Catholicism forward. It isn't very winsome, is it? Do you hear the voice of Christ or that of Sts. Peter and Paul in that? I do not.
My 1952 Catechism teaches that it is a mortal sin to participate in Protestant worship. I'm not sure if that teaching has changed or not, but if it has, that presents a whole other can of worms. I can't imagine that Jesus would approve of that kind of ecclesial capriciousness, and the damage it does to His name and to the state of the souls of His sheep whom He leaves in the care of pastors who have the responsibility of seeking, heeding and leading them. See Peter and the responsibilities of the elders (bishops) and the youngers.
What is a mortal sin? In a nutshell, I think it can best be described as a grave offense, murder, rape, sodomy, missing Mass and/or a holy day of obligation, and perhaps still, participating in a Protestant liturgy by no means an exhaustive list, and what makes these sins mortal is having full knowledge that they are wrong and proceeding with the act anyway. If I remember correctly, a venial sin can be mortal, if I believe it to be mortal and proceed with the act anyway, and a mortal sin can be venial if I believe it is venial and commit the venial act in accordance with that confused understanding. If I die in a state of mortal sin, hell is my destiny.
I don't think Jesus was tyrannically bent. In all of the ways in which he was accused of departing from the Law, he makes clear that the Pharisees version of the law which they use to imply he's a heretic is not a legitimate part of the Law. It is an accretion and, in fact, an impediment to gaining understanding of what the Law of God proclaims and demands. Jesus was all about the Law too, but it was only He who knew or could know what the Law of God truly demands, and only He who could keep it fully and faithfully. I believe He knew we were not really capable of keeping it. That doesn't mean we should despise or abandon the law, though, just the opposite.
Yesterday, on another thread, discussion of murdering heretics was being discussed. The nobody should kill heretics line was followed by but this or but that, and that is emblematic of existing in a state of denial as it relates to the teachings of our Prince of Peace. When Peter cut off the ear of the soldier who was part of the mob ready to arrest Jesus, Jesus healed that soldier's ear. That soldier was in fact an 'enemy of God', but the Love of The Savior is incomparable.
Surmising who might be elect and who might not be is very dangerous business. Ethos, epochs, politics, struggles with enemies do not diminish that danger one iota. In fact to admit of their importance is to tacitly advance the idea that the gates of hell could prevail against the church, and that it is only man who can make sure that doesn't occur.
I think one of the reasons that the face put forward by present day Catholicism is capable of drawing converts to it is because it offers an avenue to sanctification that Evangelicalism struggles mightily to provide. When a solid doctrine of sanctification does not follow immediately upon the heels of justification, a hunger ensues and then a sense of displacement.
Most people who regularly attend church long to learn of sanctification and to become steadily more sanctified. Sin exists alongside the hunger to extirpate it. It has to, if we do not despise the law. That brings to life Jesus words when He tells us that His Yoke is light.
Thanks for listening, lupie. I want to leave you with a letter I wrote to the pastor of the church I've been attending for the last few weeks that shows my struggles and hopes. And with a quote from C.S. Lewis that shows why he was so loved, and shows just how well he understood the incomparable Love of Jesus and the humility that understanding that produces.
Dear Pastor ___,I've been thinking of all of you quite a bit since my visit with you last Sunday. My visit to your church and worship experience was sweet and so very warm.
I'm a bit worried, though Pastor, and if you don't mind I want to tell you why.
I'm not sure about all of the Tulip. I do think total depravity is accurate in that even among the best of us, evil lurks in the mind and heart. I'm constantly running back to the Cross. At Mass ran the refrain: "forgive me Lord, in what I have done and in what I have failed to do." But, the limited atonement I view in a way that is passive on the part of God and active on our part because St. John tells us that "God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life."
Why God hated Esau, I don't know, but I can't infer from that that he hates another who is created in His image who sits to the right or left of me on the bus, or on a bench or in a pew. In other words, "I have not been His counsellor!"
In addition to all of this, I wear a crucifix, I have a very old and very beautiful picture of Jesus in my apartment. Underneath this picture is small collection of palms that my Mother gave me from Palm Sunday, this year.
I don't think of myself as an idolater, Pastor, but it seems to me that all of these things might truly make me an accidental dissenter, and, as such, unfit to faithfully be part of the Reformed faith.
And so, Pastor, I felt compelled to make all of this known to you, as this old heart of mine can't take another realization that there isn't any place in Christendom to which I might belong.
I so enjoyed my visit with you and ______ and your lovely kids. Thank you for that, and please give your wife and kids a kiss for me.
Blessings,
C. S. Lewis, “Answers to Questions on Christianity” from GOD IN THE DOCK:When I first became a Christian, about fourteen years ago, I thought that I could do it on my own, by retiring to my rooms and reading theology, and wouldn’t go to the churches and Gospel Halls; . . . . I disliked very much their hymns which I considered to be fifth-rate poems set to sixth-rate music. But as I went on I saw the merit of it. I came up against different people of quite different outlooks and different education, and then gradually my conceit just began peeling off. I realized that the hymns (which were just sixth-rate music) were, nevertheless, being sung with devotion and benefit by an old saint in elastic-side boots in the opposite pew, and then you realize that you aren’t fit to clean those boots. It gets you out of your solitary conceit.
Amen. There just aren't many Bible verses more clear and truthful and instructive than that one.
Therefore as the fire devoureth the stubble, and the flame consumeth the chaff, so their root shall be as rottenness, and their blossom shall go up as dust: because they have cast away the law of the LORD of hosts, and despised the word of the Holy One of Israel." -- Isaiah 5:20,24"Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!...