Posted on 06/17/2021 3:39:12 PM PDT by MurphsLaw
If Catholicism, in the end, managed to elude the political hatred it engenders, I have almost no doubt that this same spirit of the age which seems so opposed to it would become supportive and that it would suddenly achieve extensive conquests. —Alexis de Tocqueville
Almost two centuries ago, Alexis de Tocqueville predicted that Americans would either totally abandon Christianity or convert to Catholicism, writing, “our descendants will tend increasingly to divide into only two parts, some leaving Christianity entirely and the others embracing the Church of Rome.”
He predicted a smaller Church—of which Pope Benedict XVI agrees—saying, “Nowadays, more than in previous times, we see Catholics losing their faith and Protestants converting to Catholicism.” He went on to write that in a post-Christian liberal democracy, Catholicism would be the only viable remaining option:
America is the most democratic country on earth while, at the same time, the country, where, according to reputable reports, the Catholic religion makes the most progress…Men who live in democratic times are, therefore, predisposed to slide away from all religious authority. But, if they agree to obey such an authority, they insist at least that it is unique and of one character for their intelligence has a natural abhorrence of religious powers which do not emanate from the same center and they find it almost as easy to imagine that there is no religion as several…
I think de Tocqueville’s prediction is coming to fruition. The Left has entirely abandoned Christianity and fully embraced secular liberalism. I believe the Right, though still deeply influenced by liberalism—especially classical liberalism—will more and more find its way toward the Tiber. This is at least what I have observed in the last three years since my own conversion to Catholicism and in the witness of conversion among my peers. My friends, including fellow graduates of Liberty University (the epicenter of American evangelicalism) and other Washington, D.C., conservatives, have either returned to the Catholic Church after going through a Protestant phase or are seriously flirting with the idea of converting to Catholicism themselves.
Even among conservative intellectuals, there is a growing trend toward Catholicism. Consider clinical psychologist and post-modern critic Jordan Peterson, who said, “Catholicism is as sane as people can get.” Though he’s not yet Catholic, some would argue he’s well on his way. Or consider the Catholic conversion of likely U.S. Senate candidate J.D. Vance, or even the extremely interesting theological evolution of U.S. Senator Marco Rubio.
But perhaps the most interesting prospect to Catholicism among those in conservative circles is Charlie Kirk, who in an interview with Church Militant admitted, “The world is a better place because of the Catholic Church, and that needs to be said more.” He went on to express that he has “so much respect for the Catholic Tradition and Church.”
When asked if he’s considered converting to Catholicism, he reveals “my friends try to convince me to become Catholic all the time.”
“Some of my greatest friends in the world are Catholic…I go to Catholic Mass every once in a while. I don’t take the Eucharist, don’t worry you don’t have to report me…The joke is that serious evangelicals become Catholic. And I’ve seen that happen. I’m open-minded, but I’m not there yet.”
There were two things that struck me in the Kirk interview. The first was my gut telling me that Kirk is well on his way to becoming Catholic (which is the True, the good, and the beautiful that he alludes to). The second was that by the nature of his answers, social conservatism needs Catholicism just as much as Christianity does.
Which brings me to my own prediction: conservatism, in its quest for identity post-Trump, will eventually convert to Catholicism and be deeply influenced by Catholic integralists. A political philosophy and ideology needs an intrinsic telos. It was Cardinal Manning who once said that “all human conflict is ultimately theological.” What then is conservatism but a commitment to conserving tradition? And what is Western tradition? Christianity, The Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.
In the midst of his responses, Kirk reveals the weaknesses of Protestantism and conservatism. Protestants and conservatives share the same dilemma: They have competing traditions and interpretations, and are thus fractured and splintered in a way that harms their cause. They have no unified authority, and with a lack of consensus and ultimate source of Truth, debate inevitably devolves into personal interpretation and preference. The Catholic Church is the solution for both groups theologically and philosophically.
In a religious context, without an infallible Church (that gave us the infallible word of God) there is no final authority on its interpretation. Kirk makes this case, ironically, by his answer in regard to progressive Christianity, saying, “They’re misrepresenting the Gospel, they’re misrepresenting biblical truth and the biblical text—I guess they have a right to do that. I’m not going to disallow them from doing that obviously in a pluralistic society in that sense. However, I will say that a true interpretation of the Scriptures cannot possibly lead to the public policy decisions they’re coming to.”
But who decides which interpretation is correct? And why should they, or anyone, have a right to misrepresent the Truth? Error has no rights.
One practical example of division in the realm of social issue policy is birth control. Kirk admires the Church for its commitment to life and marriage, saying, “I love the uncompromising Catholic social teaching when it comes to abortion and marriage. I absolutely love it.” But, assuming he’s like most modern evangelicals, he will totally miss the boat on contraception as the obvious legal precursor to the “right to privacy” that gave way for abortion. Kirk has said he’s against the public funding of contraception because of rights to religious conscience, though he is most likely fine with the legalization of it and the use of it within marriage (even though Protestants were against contraception too, until very recently).
While integralism will certainly not be the Republican Party platform for 2024, it will be the new libertarianism of the present-day Right, the thorn in the side of non-purists. But rather than champion a hyper-individualism, their focus will be on facilitating the common good and establishing a society ordered toward objective Truth that aids in human flourishing. The closest example modern conservatism has to anything “integral” is Catholic Senator Marco Rubio’s “Common Good Capitalism,” an address he gave at The Catholic University of America where he quoted Pope Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum, which ironically also speaks to the present-day dilemma of conservativism:
When a society is perishing, the wholesome advice to give to those who would restore it is to call it to the principles from which it sprang; for the purpose and perfection of an association is to aim at and to attain that for which it is formed, and its efforts should be put in motion and inspired by the end and object which originally gave it being. Hence, to fall away from its primal constitution implies disease; to go back to it, recovery. —Pope Leo XIII, Rerum Novarum
Conservatism needs to heed de Tocqueville’s prophecy and take advantage of our post-Trump moment in an effort to redirect the Party toward its true end. Perhaps what is next needed is an institute for integralism—much like libertarianism’s Cato Institute—to further flesh out these ideas and reorient what we’re trying to conserve.
[Image Credit: J.D. Vance, Charlie Kirk, and Marco Rubio (Public Domain)]
The Church proclaims Saints from sinners. The Church forgives sin, for the proper penance. The Pope and the entire Church proclaims he is Christ on Earth.
The Church is a whore riding a rough Beast, its time not yet come around once more. The Church is an edifice to greed, of monetary worth, and of knowledge that they still hide within the walls. Buried in tombs, where it is claimed that certain holy men do not even crumble to dust. God in Heaven alone knows who the Saints are. God in Heaven alone forgives sin and judges the entirety of mankind.
The whore or harlot city was Jerusalem of 70 AD. It rode the beast from the sea, the gentile power of the Romaia empire. This whore city was destroyed, burned and devoured by the beast in 70 AD
"And What HAS the Church become? You mean like universally cherished and accepted? Like in the 1850's- Like now? C'mon man- the catholic Church was even more despised in the 1850s than today- Catholic immigrants in America of that time were second-class.. and mostly despised- for Tocqueville to make THIS claim of UNITY - BACK THEN would have been MORE absurd then what you are trying to spin today."
You mean like unlike Catholic France,
Upon my arrival in the United States, the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention; and the longer I stayed there, the more did I perceive the great political consequences resulting from this state of things, to which I was unaccustomed. In France I had almost always seen the spirit of religion and the spirit of freedom pursuing courses diametrically opposed to each other; but in America I found that they were intimately united, and that they reigned in common over the same country.
The sects that exist in the United States are innumerable. They all differ in respect to the worship which is due to the Creator; but they all agree in respect to the duties which are due from man to man. Each sect adores the Deity in its own peculiar manner, but all sects preach the same moral law in the name of God...Moreover, all the sects of the United States are comprised within the great unity of Christianity, and Christian morality is everywhere the same...
In the United States the sovereign authority is religious, and consequently hypocrisy must be common; but there is no country in the whole world in which the Christian religion retains a greater influence over the souls of men than in America, and there can be no greater proof of its utility, and of its conformity to human nature, than that its influence is most powerfully felt over the most enlightened and free nation of the earth...
The Americans combine the notions of Christianity and of liberty so intimately in their minds, that it is impossible to make them conceive the one without the other; and with them this conviction does not spring from that barren traditionary faith which seems to vegetate in the soul rather than to live... Thus religious zeal is perpetually warmed in the United States by the fires of patriotism. These men do not act exclusively from a consideration of a future life; eternity is only one motive of their devotion to the cause. If you converse with these missionaries of Christian civilization, you will be surprised to hear them speak so often of the goods of this world, and to meet a politician where you expected to find a priest. (Democracy in America, [New York: A. S. Barnes & Co., 1851), pp. 331, 332, 335, 336-7, 337; http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER/DETOC/religion/ch1_17.htm)
..serious religion, under its various denominations, is not only tolerated, but respected and practiced. Atheism is unknown there; Infidelity rare and secret; so that persons may live to a great age in that country without having their piety shocked by meeting with either an Atheist or an Infidel. And the Divine Being seems to have manifested His approbation of the mutual forbearance and kindness by which the different sects treat each other, and by the remarkable prosperity with which He has been please to favor the whole country. (Benjamin Franklin, "Information to those who would Remove to America" In Franklin, Benjamin. The Bagatelles from Passy. Ed. Lopez, Claude A. New York: Eakins Press. 1967; http://mith.umd.edu//eada/html/display.php?docs=franklin_bagatelle4.xml.
"The Eucharist has remained the source and Summit of The Church for 2000 years…The Eucharist IS CHRIST "
DEAD WRONG. As abundantly evidenced, the Catholic Eucharist, with its priests offering it as sacrifice for sin and dispensing it as spiritual food, is simply not what NT church manifestly believed based upon the only wholly inspired-of-God and substantive record of what the NT church believed.
"You discount the saints and martyrs who lived and died for the faith- for Christ. "
Rather you discount the saints and martyrs of the Bible who lived and died for the faith for Christ as pertains to what they believed versus Catholic distinctives I discount so-called saints and martyrs insomuch as they were in error.
" Thats what Tocqueville saw"
What he saw included saints becoming martyrs under orders from popes (something early Prots had to unlearn from Rome), and also saw a contrast with Catholicism in combating evil influences:
The Inquisition has never been able to prevent a vast number of anti-religious books from circulating in Spain. The empire of the majority succeeds much better in the United States, since it actually removes any wish to publish them. Unbelievers are to be met with in America, but there is no public organ of infidelity. Attempts have been made by some governments to protect morality by prohibiting licentious books. In the United States no one is punished for this sort of books, but no one is induced to write them; not because all the citizens are immaculate in conduct, but because the majority of the community is decent and orderly. - https://xroads.virginia.edu/~Hyper/DETOC/1_ch15.htm
"what Newman saw."
Actually among the realities that Newman had to face was that the Vincentian maxim, "Now in the Catholic Church itself we take the greatest care to hold that which has been believed everywhere, always and by all," required the art of development of doctrine:
It does not seem possible, then, to avoid the conclusion that, whatever be the proper key for harmonizing the records and documents of the early and later Church, and true as the dictum of Vincentius must be considered in the abstract, and possible as its application might be in his own age, when he might almost ask the primitive centuries for their testimony, it is hardly available now, or effective of any satisfactory result. The solution it offers is as difficult as the original problem. — John Henry Newman, An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine (New York: Longmans, Green and Co., reprinted 1927), p. 27.
"No- the Church is an ugly, stinky, messy lumbering Ark moving along water to its destination. "
Actually, the overall reality is that which was said of an earlier age of Rome's ugly, stinky, messy lumbering Ark, that as Cardinal Ratzinger said,
"For nearly half a century, the Church was split into two or three obediences that excommunicated one another, so that every Catholic lived under excommunication by one pope or another, and, in the last analysis, no one could say with certainty which of the contenders had right on his side. The Church no longer offered certainty of salvation; she had become questionable in her whole objective form--the true Church, the true pledge of salvation, had to be sought outside the institution.“
"It is against this background of a profoundly shaken ecclesial consciousness that we are to understand that Luther, in the conflict between his search for salvation and the tradition of the Church, ultimately came to experience the Church, not as the guarantor, but as the adversary of salvation. (Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, head of the Sacred Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith for the Church of Rome, “Principles of Catholic Theology,”
"Those who have jumped shipped lost their Faith to pursue another faith..and another..and another… it does not end."
Actually as said and ignored, while Catholicism is an unholy amalgamation of liberals and conservatives, and of conflicting interpretations of what valid church teaching is and means,those who most strongly esteem Scripture as the accurate and wholly inspired word of God - which Catholics attack as a basis for unity - have long testified to being far more unified in polled core beliefs and values than overall those whom Rome counts as members in life and in death.
"Its more than neo-Marxist Popes who don’t twist scripture and sexually deviant men posing as Priests. A lot more."
Under your RC model for unity and assurance of Truth which Tocqueville though would be the reason for souls migrating to Rome, it is simply not up to you to decide and decree who is a faithful pope or prelate, and when your leadership manifestly considers someone a member then so are you. At least according to so much past papal teaching, such as,
'the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors," "to suffer themselves to be guided and led in all things that touch upon faith or morals by the Holy Church of God through its Supreme Pastor the Roman Pontiff," "of submitting with docility to their judgment," with "no discussions regarding what he orders or demands, or up to what point obedience must go, and in what things he is to be obeyed... not only in person, but with letters and other public documents ;" and 'not limit the field in which he might and must exercise his authority, " for "obedience must not limit itself to matters which touch the faith: its sphere is much more vast: it extends to all matters which the episcopal power embraces," and not set up "some kind of opposition between one Pontiff and another. Those who, faced with two differing directives, reject the present one to hold to the past, are not giving proof of obedience to the authority which has the right and duty to guide them," "Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent." (Sources http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3578348/posts?page=14#14)
"Are your Christian congregations then defined by men of the likes of the Osteen's. Warren's, Zacharias’, Duggar’s, Lentz’s or Falwell’s? "
Rather, the scandal and notoriety of testify to a core unity by which these are manifest as aberrant. And unlike you, we can leave a church that has gone South for one that is still marching to Zion, since we defend a faith, not a particular church.
"C’mon man, you’re too smart to play the cultural equivalency game. Human’s sin… water is wet… why are we continually surprised? God is not. God knows what we are incapable of."
The issue is that you are the one constantly promoting a church, so you must own all that Rome manifestly considers members as well as her false doctrines. But stop seeking to persuade us conservative evangelicals to join her. It is repulsive and sinful!
To the contrary, as seen in communist countries, it is far harder to reduce believers that share a basic common faith but have no central leadership than those that do.
"Non-sequitur- Besides… tell that to the Uighurs being massacred that they should have had central leadership and their ordeal would have gone much quicker. And as far as leadership goes.. you don't win battles without it.. we are talking about winning here...not just surviving... "
Evangelical churches have leadership, but not a central head, and while an Acts 15-type leadership of such men should be the ideal, that is not the model of Rome nor do her members (based upon her manifest acceptance) testify to a greater basic unity than "Bible Christians" overall. Meanwhile, it is true that if the Uighurs had central leadership then their ordeal would have gone much quicker, while since evangelicals do not have such in China then they have greatly increased:
Chinese Protestants worship in unregistered “underground” churches, according to a new study by researchers at the University of Notre Dame. As China also has 10m-12m Catholics, there are more Christians in China today than in France (38m) or Germany (43m). - https://www.economist.com/img/b/1000/590/90/sites/default/files/20200919_WOC577.png
Whatever one is to make of the uninformed view that the Chinese authorities have, Protestant Christianity is growing far more quickly and extensively than Catholicism. Why?..
The Catholic Church in China, divided as it remains, is caught: its strength is its weakness. Everywhere in the world and with local variations in China, its universality (with an accepted pattern of worldwide relationships), its institutions (parishes, seminaries, welfare services, publishing houses), its statuses (clergy and religious) and its ceremonies (the sacraments) are visible and remain the continuous and coherent identifications that draw or repel membership and participation.
In a Communist country, they are an easy target for a Leninist administration intent on detailed control. And then, when some comply with government structures while other Catholics see those acting in such a way as cowardly and cooperating with the enemy, many form the view that rather than complicate their lives, they leave the established and regulated Church well alone.
The same applied to Protestant denominations and was institutionalized through the three self- movements (self–government, self–financing and self-propagation; or no foreign missioners)
But the recent explosion in Protestant Christian numbers has happened outside this rubric. Most of the buildings, churches and Christian gathering points have been built on local initiative without government authorization. And most of the communities around the often triumphalist buildings that have been damaged or demolished in recent times in China began life as small communities of little more than a dozen people – gathering in friend’s homes outside the net of government supervision.
Protestant Christianity, in contrast to the institution-based approach to community building familiar to Catholics, has thrived on its nimble, light-footed and adaptable response to local opportunities. - https://www.ucanews.com/news/why-protestants-are-more-popular-than-catholics-in-china/70850#
"In your analogy of the Communist religion their central leadership is what reigns supreme- hence their total effectiveness"
That you may want to aspire to the degree of Communist leadership is not surprising, but in the context of such then central leadership as per Rome is a liability.
"Again your thinking as man thinks- you're living in 2021. Next year is different and so on until were done.. every age has a different form of evil...but it's still evil."
And while religion in general is in declension, Catholics still lead in such vs. evangelicals.
"America is in its last decades… but the Church will navigate through it- like a big lumbering Ark. Hang onto coattails if you must- but the smarter play is Unity against the Divider. And Tocqueville saw this so long ago. "
Actually the latter days of the latter day are marked by increasing delusion and apostasy, and those who join Rome are part of such, and are on a sinking ship lumbering towards Hell. To such applies the exhortation to the relative few in it who are truly regenerate:
Forsake the foolish, and live; and go in the way of understanding. (Proverbs 9:6)
A ignorant or insolent answer in the light of refutation after refutation of your parroted polemics which show why no one should be a Catholic, given a choice btwn that and Biblical faith. And which argument you have only strengthened, once again, with your recourse to such pathetic bombast.
If it weren't pathetic; I'd have no bombast at all!
A Harlot in the Bible is always a Church or people who worship idols. The Beast is the power of say Babylon, Italy, Medes and Persians. A Harlot riding a Beast is a religion astride a world power.
A harlot in the Bible is a city. Jerusalem is called a harlot quite often in the old testament.
Because Israel was supposed to be in a covenant relationship with God, its unfaithfulness was often painted in terms of an adulterous wife. In the first chapter of Isaiah, we read concerning Jerusalem, “How the faithful city has become a harlot, she that was full of justice! Righteousness lodged in her, but now murderers” (Is. 1:21). Her participation in the idolatrous ways of the nations was also understood in terms of harlotry. Ezekiel explains that, when the city engaged in the idolatrous practices of the pagans, she was “playing the harlot” (Ezek. 16:15ff). This is also a major theme of Hosea’s message (cf. Hos. 1:2; 4:16–19; 5:3–5; 6:10). The image of Jerusalem being “drunk” evokes Isaiah’s prophecy: “Stupefy yourselves and be in a stupor . . . Be drunk but not with drink!” (Is. 29:9).
it is clear that the harlot in chapter 17 is an image of the “city” (17:18). Secondly, the harlot is not the beast, but symbolizes something separate from it. This is clear from the fact that the “beast” devours the “harlot” (17:16). Furthermore, the harlot “sits” upon the beast (17:3). Now we can consider the “seven hills” (17:9). John tells us that the seven hills are the seven heads of the beast (17:8). Thus, the harlot-city sits on the seven hills, just as the woman sits upon the beast with seven heads. As mentioned above, Rome was the city of seven hills. In Revelation 17, we have an image of Jerusalem (= the harlot) “propped” up on Roman authority (= the beast with seven heads). In other words, Jerusalem had become an instrument, a puppet, controlled by the beast. This is also evident in the words of the chief priests at Christ’s trial: “We have no king but Caesar” (Jn. 19:15).
Well SOMEONE here is triggered. My goodness, get a freaking life instead of cutting and pasting such a ridiculously long diatribe.
"Well SOMEONE here is triggered. My goodness, get a freaking life instead of cutting and pasting such a ridiculously long diatribe."
You mean the absurd nonscriptural assertion that "If the Catholic Church did not exist, no one would have ever heard the Name of Jesus Christ by the year 500, if not sooner" should just go unreproved in the light of the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed? Sorry, but these are not the days of the Inquisition in which you can demand all such be censored.
And contrary to the typical propaganda of RCs in response to our use of the title "Roman" in distinguishing her from others, contrary to the claim that, "The term Roman Catholic is not used by the Church herself; it is a relatively modern term, and one, moreover, that is confined largely to the English language,"..when the adjective Roman is applied to the Church herself, it refers to the Diocese of Rome!", the use of the term "Roman" as in the Roman church often occurs in her own encyclicals as well as some Bulls, usually in distinguishing her from others, and not counting those referring to the Roman pontiff or cardinals or other prelates, and beginning from before the needed Reformation, including in Latin (eph. mine):
Gregory VII: Dictatus Papae 1090: " the Roman church was founded by God alone... the Roman church has never erred; nor will it err to all eternity, the Scripture bearing witness...he who is not at peace with the Roman church shall not be considered catholic. - https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/source/g7-dictpap.asp
Fourth Lateran Council 1215: Council Fathers - 1215 A.D.: "the faith held by the Roman church, which is by God’s plan the mother and mistress of all the faithful." "Wishing therefore to remove such a great scandal from God’s church, we strictly order, on the advice of this sacred council, that henceforth they do not presume to do such things but rather conform themselves like obedient sons to the holy Roman church, their [the Greeks] mother, so that there may be one flock and one shepherd." " the Roman church, which through the Lord’s disposition has a primacy of ordinary power over all other churches inasmuch as it is the mother and mistress of all Christ’s faithful..." "In order that privileges which the Roman church has granted to certain religious may remain unimpaired..." - https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum12-2.htm
The Council of Florence (A.D. 1438-1445) From Cantate Domino — Papal Bull of Pope Eugene IV: "The sacrosanct Roman Church, founded by the voice of our Lord and Savior, firmly believes, professes, and preaches one true God omnipotent, unchangeable, and eternal, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; one in essence, three in persons;... the Holy Roman Church...believes firmly, professes, and proclaims that “every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be rejected that is received with thanksgiving.” - https://catholicism.org/cantate-domino.html
Exsurge Domine Condemning the Errors of Martin Luther Pope Leo X - 1520: "Give heed to the cause of the holy Roman Church, mother of all churches... Against the Roman Church, you warned, lying teachers are rising..." "opposed they are to all charity and reverence for the holy Roman Church who is the mother of all the faithful and teacher of the faith..." - https://www.papalencyclicals.net/leo10/l10exdom.htm
Quo Primum Pope Pius V - 1570: "Let all everywhere adopt and observe what has been handed down by the Holy Roman Church, the Mother and Teacher of the other churches...the penalty for nonobservance for printers, whether mediately or immediately subject to Our dominion, and that of the Holy Roman Church, will be the forfeiting of their books and a fine of one hundred gold ducats..." - https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius05/p5quopri.htm
Ineffabilis Deus The Immaculate Conception Pope BI. Pius IX - 1854: "Ordinary Teaching of the Roman Church These truths, so generally accepted and put into practice by the faithful, indicate how zealously the Roman Church, mother and teacher of all Churches...It is the Church in which alone religion has been inviolably preserved and from which all other Churches must receive the tradition of the Faith." - https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius09/p9ineff.htm
Ex Quo On the Euchologion Pope Benedict XIV - 1756: "the Decree for the Jacobites of the Council of Florence reads: “The holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes, and preaches that every creature of God is good and not to be rejected if it is taken with thanks." - https://www.papalencyclicals.net/ben14/b14exquo.htm
Singulari Quidem On the Church in Austria Pope BI. Pius IX - 1856: "There is only one true, holy, Catholic church, which is the Apostolic Roman Church." - https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius09/p9singul.htm
Grande Munus On Saints Cyril and Methodius Pope Leo XIII - 1880: "We decree that July 5 be set aside in the calendar of the universal Roman Church, as Pius IX ordained." - https://www.papalencyclicals.net/leo13/l13cym.htm
Fausto Appetente Die On St. Dominic Pope Benedict XV - 1921: "has ever been the stout defense of the Roman Church." -https://www.papalencyclicals.net/ben15/b15fadie.htm
Mystici Corporis Pope Pius XII - 1943: "If we would define and describe this true Church of Jesus Christ - which is the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church...nothing surely more honorable can be imagined than to belong to the One, Holy Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church, in which we become members of One Body" - https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius12/p12mysti.htm
Humani Generis Pope Pius XII - 1950: "the Mystical Body of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church are one and the same thing." - https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius12/p12human.htm
Sacramentum Ordinis On the Sacrament of Order Pope Pius XII - 1947: "every one knows that the Roman Church has always held as valid Ordinations conferred according to the Greek rite.." - https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius12/p12sacrao.htm
Also in error is the statement,
The English-speaking bishops at the First Vatican Council in 1870, in fact, conducted a vigorous and successful campaign to insure that the term Roman Catholic was nowhere included in any of the Council's official documents about the Church herself, and the term was not included.
Decrees of the First Vatican Council Council Fathers - 1868 A.D. SESSION 2 : 6 January 1870 Profession of faith "I, Pius, bishop of the catholic church, with firm faith believe and profess each and every article contained in the profession of faith which the holy Roman church uses, namely:" - https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum20.htm
And as for,
In the New Testament itself, the Church is simply called "the Church."
Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. (Acts 20:28)
Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours: (1 Corinthians 1:2)
What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. (1 Corinthians 11:22)
For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. (1 Corinthians 15:9)
Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timothy our brother, unto the church of God which is at Corinth, with all the saints which are in all Achaia: (2 Corinthians 1:1)
For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews’ religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it: (Galatians 1:13)
(For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) (1 Timothy 3:5)
But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. (1 Timothy 3:15)
Salute one another with an holy kiss. The churches of Christ salute you. (Romans 16:16)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.